Psithyre barbu
Bombus barbutellus(Kirby, 1802)
1 photo · Licences CC (Wikimedia Commons / iNaturalist)Click pour agrandir
Pays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome
Chargement du graphe…
Indicateurs du réseau écologique
Comment lire ce graphe
Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Bombus barbutellus et d'autres espèces, à partir de la base GloBI (Global Biotic Interactions, agrégation mondiale de la littérature scientifique) — source principale, complétée par d'autres jeux de données d'interactions agrégés par Ontologia. Il faut le comprendre comme une carte du savoir documenté, pas une carte de la réalité écologique exhaustive.
Limites principales
- Incomplet. La majorité des interactions écologiques en milieu naturel n'ont jamais été publiées. Une espèce sans liens visibles n'est pas isolée — elle est probablement mal étudiée.
- Biais publication pharmaco-agronomique. La littérature des interactions est polarisée par les enjeux économiques et sanitaires : parasitism / pathogen sur-pondéré sur les mammifères (recherche zoonoses, vecteurs), herbivory sur-pondéré sur les insectes phytophages (entomologie agronomique). À l'inverse, mutualisms, commensalisms et interactions sol/microbiote sont sous-cités. Conseil de lecture : sur les hubs mammifères ou les insectes ravageurs de culture, lire les arêtes parasitism / herbivory dominantes relativement au contexte de littérature, pas comme une mesure d'intensité écologique brute. Détails §10.1.
- Biaisé vers les espèces étudiées. Quelques espèces (oiseaux communs, abeille mellifère, espèces modèles) concentrent disproportionnellement plus d'interactions documentées. Notre score composite ajoute un malus aux hubs de littérature pour atténuer cette dominance visuelle.
- Interactions documentées globalement. Toutes les espèces affichées sont observées en France métropolitaine (les observations sont filtrées sur le territoire métropolitain), mais les interactions entre elles proviennent de la littérature scientifique mondiale. Une interaction documentée à l'étranger peut ne pas se réaliser à l'identique sur votre territoire. Le filtre « restreindre à ma commune » tient compte de la co-occurrence spatiale locale mais ne garantit pas l'interaction effective.
- Sans dimension temporelle. Les variations saisonnières (migration, floraison, cycle de vie) ne sont pas modélisées.
- Force d'interaction approximative. L'épaisseur des liens reflète le nombre de fois où l'interaction a été rapportée dans la littérature, pas son importance écologique réelle.
Comment nous sélectionnons les espèces affichées
Le graphe affiche au plus 31 nœuds par fiche (1 centre + 15 bulles depth=1 + 15 partenaires depth=2). Le serveur sélectionne intelligemment :
- Bulles famille créées si une cascade taxonomique existe ou si ≥3 espèces directement documentées partagent une même famille — les espèces sont absorbées dans la bulle (pas de doublon visuel)
- Espèces individuelles uniquement quand <3 dans une famille (sans cascade) — relations directes documentées
- Pas d'espèces inférées affichées en doublon — les cascades sont représentées via les bulles famille uniquement
- Partenaires depth=2 sélectionnés via algo priorité : candidat partagé par ≥2 docs de la famille (food web central) → reliant entre bulles → top sum_obs en dernier recours
- Sous-types GloBI traduits en français au survol de la flèche (chasse, parasite, parasitoïde, mycorhize…)
Le toggle Profondeur 1 ↔ 2 client-side cache ou affiche les partenaires depth=2 sans refetch. Filtres règne, type d'interaction, ordres/familles, patrimoniales et commune recalculent côté serveur (slow path live ~1-2 s).
Indicateurs avancés (mode expert) : Modularité Q (Newman 2006, PNAS), communautés (Louvain, Blondel et al. 2008, J. Stat. Mech.), nestedness NODF (Almeida-Neto et al. 2008, Oikos).
Source : GloBI · TAXREF v18 (INPN/MNHN) · BDC-Statuts · Wikidata
96 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
96
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
6
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.080
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
97 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
LC · Préoccupation mineure↘Décroissante- Évaluation
- 2025 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – m
- Profondeur
- – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
As a socially parasitic species, Bombus barbutellus is naturally less abundant than its host(s). It remains, however, a relatively uncommon species and data from the last decades in Europe show a non-ambiguous regression of its populations from multiple parts of its range (Rasmont et al. 2021).
The subspecies barbutellus is in significant decline in many countries (Rasmont et al. 2021). In Belgium, Ball (1914) considered it to be one of the most common Psithyrus at the beginning of the 20th century. The species is now considered as Critically Endangered in Belgium (Drossart et al. 2019, see also Folschweiller et al. 2020). Despite high and repeated sampling efforts in the country, the species has become increasingly uncommon and has been observed very rarely in the last decades.
The subspecies barbutellus is in significant decline in many countries (Rasmont et al. 2021). In Belgium, Ball (1914) considered it to be one of the most common Psithyrus at the beginning of the 20th century. The species is now considered as Critically Endangered in Belgium (Drossart et al. 2019, see also Folschweiller et al. 2020). Despite high and repeated sampling efforts in the country, the species has become increasingly uncommon and has been observed very rarely in the last decades.
Menaces identifiées(5 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
12_1Other threatCausing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Unknown11_1Habitat shifting & alterationUnknownUnknownFuture1_3Tourism & recreation areasUnknownUnknownFuture8_1_1Unspecified speciesUnknownUnknownFuture9_3_3Herbicides and pesticidesUnknownUnknownFuture
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
In their synthetic book “Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions”, Rasmont et al. (2021) expressed local concern about the conservation of B. barbutellus. Data collected in the last decades in regions like Belgium and the north of France suggest unambiguous local declines of the populations of this species.
Results from climate and land use change modelling also suggest that B. barbutellus is expected to lose a significant part of its climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario modelled by Rasmont et al. (2015) (GRAS), the species could lose up to 87% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal scenario, and up to 67% under a full dispersal scenario). The latter authors placed the species into the category “Very high climate change risk”, reflecting the potential risk of climate change on this species. Projections of ecological niche models by Ghisbain et al. (2023), considering both land use change and climate change, also predict substantial reductions in ecologically suitable areas for B. barbutellus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 70% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. barbutellus to successfully disperse in the areas that will remain climatically and/or ecologically suitable is probably limited by the fact that it is a parasite of other bumblebee species. It also remains unpredictable whether the areas that are projected to appear “suitable” for the species in the future will remain clear of additional anthropogenic stressors not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). These additional (and likely synergistic) pressures include infrastructure development (for tourism and transport), pesticide use, pollution (by nitrogen and its subsequent impact on nitrophobic flowering plants, or by heavy metals), the spread of exotic invasive plants, the invasion of managed species and subsequent pathogen spillover, among other potential stressors known to substantially impact bumblebee populations.
It is also unclear whether climatic events not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023), such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. barbutellus to acute heat stress is unknown. Previous works on another bumblebee model have demonstrated impaired cognition of these bees at elevated temperature (Gérard et al. 2022), as well as reduced fertility (Martinet et al. 2020), and research is needed as to whether B. barbutellus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. The decline of the species' main resources, especially those of the males, could negatively affect the populations of B. barbutellus in Europe.
Given the specialised parasitism of B. barbutellus on a limited number of host species, its observed tendency for regression and its potentially low ability to disperse, it is likely that B. barbutellus will continue to decline over a large part of its current area of distribution by the end of the 21st century. Whatever the dispersal ability of B. barbutellus, its inquiline lifestyle potentially specialised on a relatively small number of host taxa could make this species inherently vulnerable to global changes (Rasmont et al. 2021).
Results from climate and land use change modelling also suggest that B. barbutellus is expected to lose a significant part of its climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario modelled by Rasmont et al. (2015) (GRAS), the species could lose up to 87% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal scenario, and up to 67% under a full dispersal scenario). The latter authors placed the species into the category “Very high climate change risk”, reflecting the potential risk of climate change on this species. Projections of ecological niche models by Ghisbain et al. (2023), considering both land use change and climate change, also predict substantial reductions in ecologically suitable areas for B. barbutellus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 70% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. barbutellus to successfully disperse in the areas that will remain climatically and/or ecologically suitable is probably limited by the fact that it is a parasite of other bumblebee species. It also remains unpredictable whether the areas that are projected to appear “suitable” for the species in the future will remain clear of additional anthropogenic stressors not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). These additional (and likely synergistic) pressures include infrastructure development (for tourism and transport), pesticide use, pollution (by nitrogen and its subsequent impact on nitrophobic flowering plants, or by heavy metals), the spread of exotic invasive plants, the invasion of managed species and subsequent pathogen spillover, among other potential stressors known to substantially impact bumblebee populations.
It is also unclear whether climatic events not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023), such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. barbutellus to acute heat stress is unknown. Previous works on another bumblebee model have demonstrated impaired cognition of these bees at elevated temperature (Gérard et al. 2022), as well as reduced fertility (Martinet et al. 2020), and research is needed as to whether B. barbutellus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. The decline of the species' main resources, especially those of the males, could negatively affect the populations of B. barbutellus in Europe.
Given the specialised parasitism of B. barbutellus on a limited number of host species, its observed tendency for regression and its potentially low ability to disperse, it is likely that B. barbutellus will continue to decline over a large part of its current area of distribution by the end of the 21st century. Whatever the dispersal ability of B. barbutellus, its inquiline lifestyle potentially specialised on a relatively small number of host taxa could make this species inherently vulnerable to global changes (Rasmont et al. 2021).
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
14_2Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland★1_4Forest - Temperate★3_4Shrubland - Temperate★4_4Grassland - Temperate★14_4Artificial/Terrestrial - Rural Gardens14_1Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
This species is included in the National Red Lists or Red Data Books of the following European countries: Czechia (Near Threatened; Hejda et al. 2017), Germany (Not Threatened; Westrich et al. 2011), Denmark (Endangered; Wind and Pihl 2010), Finland (Critically Endangered; Punainen Kirja 2019), Estonia (Least Concern; Soon 2020), Ireland (Endangered; Fitzpatrick et al. 2006), Slovenia (Rare; Anonymous 2002) and the Netherlands (Regionally Extinct; Reemer 2018), and Belgium (Critically Endangered; Drossart et al. 2019). This species was listed in the previous National Red List of the Netherlands in a different category (Critically Endangered; Peeters and Reemer 2003). It occurs in protected areas.
The subspecies ssp. maxillosus (as Bombus maxillosus) is included in the National Red List of Czechia (Regionally Extinct; Hejda et al. 2017) and in a different category in the previous National Red List (Critically Endangered; Farkac et al. 2005).
Given the specialised parasitism of B. barbutellus on a limited number of host species, its observed tendency for regression and its potentially low ability to disperse, it is likely that B. barbutellus will continue to decline during the 21st century.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may contribute to maintain B. barbutellus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency), offering the host(s) of B. barbutellus an adequate vegetation structure for nesting, and offering this parasite species suitable areas for mating and overwintering. Suitable habitats should exhibit a very minimal to null exposure to land use stressors such as pesticides (insecticides, fungicides and herbicides), overgrazing, intensive plowing where the host(s) of the species builds its nest, and cutting plants before the peak of the flowering period (cf. the general works of Williams and Osborne 2007, Goulson et al. 2008, Cameron and Sadd, 2020, Rasmont et al. 2021, Williams 2023 about bumblebee conservation). These areas should be connected to other stepping-stone habitats by ecological corridors to allow gene flow between populations of B. barbutellus and its host species. At macroscale, suitable efforts include (i) strengthened regulations about greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the ongoing climate change and its subsequent impact on bumblebees and other insects, (ii) strengthened regulations regarding pesticide use to address the contamination of ecosystems, (iii) robust mitigation strategies for protecting and restoring habitats across anthropogenically transformed land, (iv) the creation of highly-connected flower rich areas (within and across nations) that would constitute ecologically suitable shelters for B. barbutellus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
The subspecies ssp. maxillosus (as Bombus maxillosus) is included in the National Red List of Czechia (Regionally Extinct; Hejda et al. 2017) and in a different category in the previous National Red List (Critically Endangered; Farkac et al. 2005).
Given the specialised parasitism of B. barbutellus on a limited number of host species, its observed tendency for regression and its potentially low ability to disperse, it is likely that B. barbutellus will continue to decline during the 21st century.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may contribute to maintain B. barbutellus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency), offering the host(s) of B. barbutellus an adequate vegetation structure for nesting, and offering this parasite species suitable areas for mating and overwintering. Suitable habitats should exhibit a very minimal to null exposure to land use stressors such as pesticides (insecticides, fungicides and herbicides), overgrazing, intensive plowing where the host(s) of the species builds its nest, and cutting plants before the peak of the flowering period (cf. the general works of Williams and Osborne 2007, Goulson et al. 2008, Cameron and Sadd, 2020, Rasmont et al. 2021, Williams 2023 about bumblebee conservation). These areas should be connected to other stepping-stone habitats by ecological corridors to allow gene flow between populations of B. barbutellus and its host species. At macroscale, suitable efforts include (i) strengthened regulations about greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the ongoing climate change and its subsequent impact on bumblebees and other insects, (ii) strengthened regulations regarding pesticide use to address the contamination of ecosystems, (iii) robust mitigation strategies for protecting and restoring habitats across anthropogenically transformed land, (iv) the creation of highly-connected flower rich areas (within and across nations) that would constitute ecologically suitable shelters for B. barbutellus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
Stress écologiques (17)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Ecosystem conversion1_1Ecosystem conversion1_1Ecosystem conversion1_1Ecosystem conversion1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_2Species disturbance2_2Species disturbance2_2Species disturbance2_2Species disturbance2_3_3Loss of mutualism
Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert
Royaumes biogéographiques
Palearctic
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
Terrestrial
Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert
- IUCN. 2025. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2025-2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 10 October 2025).
- Ghisbain, G., Thiery, W., Massonnet, F., Erazo, D., Rasmont, P., Michez, D. and Dellicour, S. 2023 (online). Projected decline in European bumblebee populations in the twenty-first century. <i>Nature</i> 628: 337-341.
- Williams, P.H. 2023. Can biogeography help bumblebee conservation? <i>European Journal of Taxonomy</i> 890(1): 165-183.
- Gérard, M., Amiri, A., Cariou, B. and Baird, E. 2022. Short-term exposure to heatwave-like temperatures affects learning and memory in bumblebees. <i>Global Change Biology</i> 28(14): 4251-4259. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16196
- Rasmont, P., Ghisbain, G. and Terzo, M. 2021. <i>Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions</i>. NAP Editions, Verrières-le-Buisson, France.
- Martinet, B., Zambra, E., Przybyla, K., Lecocq, T., Anselmo, A., Nonclercq, D., Rasmont, P., Michez, D. and Hennebert, E. 2020. Mating under climate change: Impact of simulated heatwaves on the reproduction of model pollinators. <i>Functional Ecology - British Ecological Society</i> 35(3): 739-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13738.
- Cameron, S.A. and Sadd, B.M. 2020. Global Trends in Bumble Bee Health. <i>Annual Review of Entomology</i> 65: 209-232.
- Soon, V. 2020. Eesti mesilaste (Hymenoptera: Colletidae, Andrenidae, Halictidae, Melittidae, Megachilidae, Apidae) ohustatuse hindamise tulemused 2020. SA KIK projekt nr. 14436 "Eesti mesilaste fauna baasuuring" lõpparuanne + Lisa 1. EELIS (Eesti looduse infosüsteemi). https://infoleht.keskkonnainfo.ee/GetFile.aspx?id=-1014893872
- Folschweiller, M., Hubert, B., Rey, G., Barbier, Y., D’Haeseleer, Y., Drossart, M., Lemoine, G., Proesmans, W., Rousseau-Piot, J.S., Vanappelghem, C., Vray, S. and Rasmont, P. 2020. <i>Atlas des bourdons de Belgique et du nord de la France</i>. Université de Mons (Belgique).
- Drossart, M., Rasmont, P., Vanormelingen, P., Dufrêne, M., Folschweiller, M., Pauly, A., Vereecken, N. J., Vray, S., Zambra, E., D'Haeseleer, J. and Michez, D. 2019. Belgian Red List of Bees. Belgian Science Policy 2018 (BRAIN-be - (Belgian Research Action through Interdisciplinary Networks). Presse universitaire de l’Université de Mons, Mons.
- Punainen Kirja (ed.). 2019. <i>The 2019 Red List of Finnish Species (Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus)</i>. pp. 708. Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki.
- Reemer, M. 2018. Basisrapport voor de Rode Lijst Bijen. <i>EIS Kenniscentrum Insectenen andere ongewervelden</i>.
- Hejda, R., Farkač, J. and Chobot, K. (eds.). 2017. <i>Červený seznam ohrožených druhů České republiky. Bezobratlí [Red List of threatened species of the Czech Republic. Invertebrates]</i>. Příroda, Praha.
- Rasmont, P., Franzén, M., Lecocq, T., Harpke, A., Roberts, S., Biesmeijer, J.C., Castro, L., Cederberg, B., Dvorak, L., Fitz-patrick, Ú., Gonseth, Y., Haubruge, E., Mahé, G., Manino, A., Neumayer, J., Ødegaard, F., Paukkunen, J., Pawlikowski, T., Potts, S.G., Reemer, M., Settele, J., Straka, J. and Schweiger, O. 2015. <i>Climatic Risk and Distribution Atlas of European Bumblebees</i>. Pensoft Publishers, Sofia, Bulgaria.
- Nieto, A., Roberts, S.P.M., Kemp, J., Rasmont, P., Kuhlmann, M., García Criado, M., Biesmeijer, J.C., Bogusch, P., Dathe, H.H., De la Rúa, P., De Meulemeester, T., Dehon, M., Dewulf, A., Ortiz-Sánchez, F.J., Lhomme, P., Pauly, A., Potts, S.G., Praz, C., Quaranta, M., Radchenko, V.G., Scheuchl, E., Smit, J., Straka, J., Terzo, M., Tomozii, B., Window, J. and Michez, D. 2014. <i>European Red List of bees</i>. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
- Lecocq, T., Lhomme, P., Michez, D., Dellicour, S., Valterová, I. and Rasmont, P. 2011. Molecular and chemical characters to evaluate species status of two cuckoo bumblebees: <i>Bombus barbutellus</i> and <i>Bombus maxillosus</i> (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombini). <i>Systematic Entomology</i> 36: 453-469.
- Westrich, P., Frommer, U., Mandery, K., Riemann, H., Ruhnke, H., Saure, C. and Voith, J. 2011. Rote Liste und Gesamtartenliste der Bienen (Hymenoptera, Apidae) Deutschlands - (5. Fassung, Dezember 2011) [Red List and complete species list of bees in Germany]. In: Bundesamt für Naturschutz (ed.), <i>Rote Liste der gefährdeter Tiere, Pflanzen und Pilze Deutschlands. Band 3: Wirbellose Tiere (Teil 1) [Red List of threatened animals, plants and fungi of Germany]</i>, pp. 371-416. Bonn.
- Wind, P. and Pihl, S. 2010. <i>The Danish Red List</i>. The National Environmental Research Institute.
- Goulson, D., Lye, G.C. and Darvil, B. 2008. Decline and conservation of bumble bees. <i>Annual Review of Entomology</i> 53: 11.1–11.18.
- Cameron, S. A., Hines, H. M. and Williams, P. H. 2007. A comprehensive phylogeny of the bumble bees (<i>Bombus</i>). . <i>Biological Journal of the Linnean Society</i> 91: 161-188.
- Williams, P.H. and Osborne, J.L. 2007. Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. <i>Apidologie</i> 40(3): 367-387.
- Fitzpatrick, U., Murray, T.E., Byrne, A., Paxton, R.J. and Brown, M.J.F. 2006. Regional red data list of Irish Bees. National Parks and Wildlife Service (Ireland) and Environment and Heritage Service (N. Ireland).
- Farkac, J., Král, D. and Škorpík, M. 2005. List of threatened species in Czech Republic. Invertebrates. Available at: <a href="http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx?&species=18217&pageid=116">http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx?&species=18217&pageid=116</a>.
- Peeters, T.M.J. and Reemer, M. 2003. Bedreigde en verdwenen bijen in Nederlands (Apidae s.l.). Basisrapport met voorstel voor Rode Lijst. Stichting European Invertebrate Survey, Leiden.
- Anonymous. 2002. Uradni list from Republik of Slovenia. <i>Official Gazette, Minister for the Environment and Spatial Planning</i> 56/99 and 31/00: Annex 14.
- Rasmont, P. and Adamski, A. 1996. Les bourdons de la Corse (Hymenoptera, Apoidea, Bombinae). <i>Notes fauniques de Gembloux</i> 31 (1995): 3-87.
- Rasmont, P. 1988. Monographie écologique et zoogéographique des Bourdons de France et de Belgique (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombinae). Faculté des Sciences agronomiques de Gembloux.
- Løken, A. 1984. Scandinavian species of the genus <i>Psithyrus</i> Lepeletier (Hymenoptera: Apidae). <i>Entomologica Scandinavica</i> 23: 1-45.
- Løken, A. 1973. Studies on Scandinavian Bumble Bees (Hymenoptera, Apidae). <i>Norsk entomologisk Tidsskrift</i> 20(1): 1-218.
- Pouvreau, A. 1973. Les ennemis des bourdons – Etude d’une zoocénose : le nid de bourdons. <i>Apidologie</i> 4(2): 103-148.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (4)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
assessor
Ghisbain, G., Praz, C., Rasmont, P., Williams, P., Cederberg, B., Devalez, J., Flaminio, S., Biella, P., Radchenko, V. & Dellicour, S.
contributor
Benrezkallah, J., Boustani, M., De Manincor, N., Michez, D. & Sentil, A.
evaluator
Tourbez, C.
facilitators
Bellotto, V., Put, S., Trottet, A. & Verëll, V.
Ghisbain, G., Praz, C., Rasmont, P., Williams, P., Cederberg, B., Devalez, J., Flaminio, S., Biella, P., Radchenko, V. & Dellicour, S. 2025. Bombus barbutellus (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T13357776A222005147. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Traits biologiques
4 valeurs · 1 source
Sources priorisées par qualité scientifique (peer-reviewed spécialisées → Wikidata fallback). Unités auto-converties, valeur max retenue en cas de mesures multiples. Méthodologie · Citations.
Indicateurs écologiquesTolérance thermique · radar EIVE · triangle CSR
Niche thermique
Logghe 2025Niche thermique observée par superposition de la distribution GBIF avec WorldClim (calcul Logghe et al. 2025 sur Europe NW). Représente la T° moyenne annuelle des mailles où l’espèce a été observée. Repères France à titre indicatif.
-10 °C50 °C
- Niche observée Europe NW -2.6 – 11.0 °C (moy. 8.2 °C)
- T° moy. France 1981-2010 11.0 °C
- Projection France 2050 ≈ 13.7 °C
Sources : Logghe et al. 2025 — overlay GBIF × WorldClim Europe NW. Repères France : T moy annuelle CHELSA 1981-2010 + projection DRIAS-2020 GWL20 (+2,7 °C). GlobTherm filtré aux groupes pour lesquels la comparaison à la T air a du sens (ectothermes terrestres + plantes) — exclut endothermes et aquatiques où la nature de la mesure (TNZ ou T eau) rend la comparaison non interprétable.
Répartition mondiale
Aucune observation géoréférencée avec précision suffisante (<10 km) dans GBIF pour cette espèce.
Consulter sur les bases externes
Observations & statuts
Cartographie
Note nomenclaturale & synonymesDétails taxonomiques + synonymes CoLExpert
Note nomenclaturale
TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHNSynonymes (59)— redirigent vers cette page
- Apis cinctaPreyssler, 1793
- Psithyrus vestalis leucoproctusLepeletier, 1832
- Apis barbutellaKirby, 1802
- Apis saltuumPanzer, 1801
- Bombus barbutellus italicus(Grütte, 1940)
- Bombus intermedius(Popov, 1931)
- Bombus maxillosusKlug, 1817
- Bombus variansSeidl, 1838
- Psithyrus barbutellus(Kirby, 1802)
- Psithyrus barbutellus alticolaQuilis, 1932
- Psithyrus barbutellus analogusPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus barbutellus anatolicusGrütte, 1940
- Psithyrus barbutellus aspersusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus bimaculatusPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus barbutellus flavoabdominalisMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus flavobasalisMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus flavothoracicaMüller, 1936
- Psithyrus barbutellus hofferiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus innaleucusQuilis, 1932
- Psithyrus barbutellus italicusGrütte, 1940
- Psithyrus barbutellus kirbyiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus kocourekiMay, 1942
- Psithyrus barbutellus kriechbaumeriMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus maculinotusPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus barbutellus mehelyiPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus barbutellus nigrescensMüller, 1936
- Psithyrus barbutellus nigrobasalisMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus periniiPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus barbutellus ponticusGrütte, 1940
- Psithyrus barbutellus richardsiPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus barbutellus schmiedeknechtiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus semibasalisMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus subbimaculatusPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus barbutellus taborskyiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus thoracicusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus barbutellus trifasciatusHoffer, 1889
- Psithyrus lugubrisKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus lugubris collarisKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus lugubris mixtaKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus lugubris nigricollisKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus lugubris scutellarisKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus lugubris unicolorKriechbaumer, 1870
- Psithyrus maxillosus(Klug, 1817)
- Psithyrus maxillosus alboscutellarisPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus maxillosus bureschiPittion, 1939
- Psithyrus maxillosus drenowskiiPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus maxillosus fallaciosusPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus maxillosus flavomixtusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus maxillosus gilvaMüller, 1936
- Psithyrus maxillosus intermediusPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus maxillosus pittioniiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus maxillosus popoviPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus maxillosus pseudobarbutellusQuilis, 1932
- Psithyrus maxillosus pseudoscutellarisMay, 1944
- Psithyrus maxillosus subleucoproctusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus maxillosus subscutellarisPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus maxillosus susteraiMay, 1944
- Psithyrus richardsi leucopygusReinig, 1936
- Psithyrus richardsi licentiMaa, 1948
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).