Psithyre bohémien
Bombus bohemicusSeidl, 1838
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 bohemicus 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
109 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
109
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
6
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.087
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
97 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
LC · Préoccupation mineure→Stable- Évaluation
- 2025 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – m
- Profondeur
- – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
Bombus bohemicus is common to abundant over most of its range. The populations of the species seem to be stable in Europe, but appear to be declining rapidly in North America (Williams et al. 2014). Whatever the dispersal ability of B. bohemicus, its inquiline lifestyle specialized on a small number of host taxa could make this species inherently vulnerable to global changes (Rasmont et al. 2021).
Menaces identifiées(1 menace classée CMP-IUCN)
12_1Other threatCausing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Unknown
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
Results from climate and land use change modeling suggest that B. bohemicus is expected to lose a significant part of climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario modeled by Rasmont et al. (2015) (GRAS), the species could lose up to 79% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal model, and up to 65% under a full dispersal model). 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. bohemicus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 55% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. bohemicus to successfully disperse in the areas that will remain climatically and/or ecologically suitable is probably limited given its parasitic lifestyle on a relatively limited number of host 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, along with the potential decline of its hosts.
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 work of Martinet et al. (2021) demonstrated that the resistance of B. bohemicus to acute heat stress (measured as the average time the species resists to a thermal stress of 40°C) is relatively low. 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. bohemicus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whatever the dispersal ability of B. bohemicus, its inquiline lifestyle could make this species inherently vulnerable to global changes (Rasmont et al. 2021).
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, along with the potential decline of its hosts.
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 work of Martinet et al. (2021) demonstrated that the resistance of B. bohemicus to acute heat stress (measured as the average time the species resists to a thermal stress of 40°C) is relatively low. 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. bohemicus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whatever the dispersal ability of B. bohemicus, its inquiline lifestyle could make this species inherently vulnerable to global changes (Rasmont et al. 2021).
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
3_4Shrubland - Temperate★4_4Grassland - Temperate★
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
This species is included in the National Red Lists or Data Books of Belgium (Near Threatened; Drossart et al. 2019), Finland (Least Concern; Hyvärinen et al. 2019), Germany (Not Threatened; Westrich et al. 2011), Estonia (Least Concern; Soon 2020), the Netherlands (Vulnerable; Reemer 2018), Norway (Least Concern; Artsdatabanken 2021) and Ireland (Near Threatened; Fitzpatrick et al. 2006). This species was listed in the previous National Red List of the Netherlands in a different category (Least Concern; Peeters and Reemer 2003). It occurs in protected areas.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may contribute to maintain B. bohemicus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering the hosts of B. bohemicus 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. bohemicus 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. bohemicus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may contribute to maintain B. bohemicus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering the hosts of B. bohemicus 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. bohemicus 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. bohemicus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
Stress écologiques (1)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
2_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., Dellicour, S., Ghisbain, G., Przybyla, K., Zambra, E., Lecocq, T., Boustani, M., Baghirov, R., Michez, D. and Rasmont, P. 2021. Global effects of extreme temperatures on wild bumblebees. <i>Conservation Biology</i> 35: 1507-1518.
- Artsdatabanken. 2021. Norsk rødliste for arter 2021. Available at: <a href="https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021">https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021</a>.
- 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.
- 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
- Martinet, B., Dellicour, S., Ghisbain, G., Przybyla, K., Zambra, E., Lecocq, T., Boustani, M., Baghirov, R., Michez, D. and Rasmont, P. 2020. Global effects of extreme temperatures on wild bumblebees. <i>Conservation Biology</i> 35: 1507-1518.
- 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.
- Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. and Liukko, U.M. 2019. <i>The 2019 Red List of Finnish Species</i>. Ympäristöministeriö and Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki.
- Reemer, M. 2018. Basisrapport voor de Rode Lijst Bijen. <i>EIS Kenniscentrum Insectenen andere ongewervelden</i>.
- Rasmont, P., Franzén, M., Lecocq, T., Harpke, A., Roberts, S.P.M., Biesmeijer, J.C., Castro, L., Cederberg, B., Dvorák, L., Fitzpatrick, Ú., Gonseth, Y., Haubruge, E., Mahé, G., Manino, A., Michez, D., Neumayer, J., Ødegaard, F., Paukkunen, J., Pawlikowski, T., Potts, S.G., Reemer, M., Settele, J., Straka, J. and Schweiger, O. 2015. Climatic Risk and Distribution Atlas of European Bumblebees. <i>Pensoft</i>.
- 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.
- Williams, P.H., Thorp, R.W., Richardson, L.L. and Colla, S.R. 2014. <i>The Bumble bees of North America: An Identification guide</i>. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
- Alford, D.V. 2011. <i>Bumblebees</i>. Northern Bee Books, Hebden Bridge.
- 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.
- Rasmont, P. and Iserbyt, I. 2010-2012. Atlas of the European Bees: genus <i>Bombus</i>. STEP Project. Atlas Hymenoptera. Mons Available at: <a href="http://www.zoologie.umh.ac.be//hymenoptera/page.asp?ID=169">http://www.zoologie.umh.ac.be//hymenoptera/page.asp?ID=169</a>.
- Goulson. 2008. Decline and Conservation of Bumble Bees. <i>Annual Review of Entomology 53</i>: 191-208.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- Pekkarinen, A., Teräs, I., Viramo, J. and Paatela, J. 1981. Distribution of bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae: <i>Bombus</i> and <i>Psithyrus</i>) in eastern Fennoscandia. <i>Notulae Entomologicae</i> 61: 71-89.
- Alford, D.V. 1975. <i>Bumblebees</i>. Davis-Poynter Limited Company, London.
- Pouvreau, A. 1973. Les ennemis des bourdons – Etude d’une zoocénose : le nid de bourdons. <i>Apidologie</i> 4(2): 103-148.
- Cumber, R.A. 1949. Humble-bee parasites and commensals found within a thirty mile radius of London. <i>Proceedings of the Royal Entomological Society of London (A)</i> 24: 119-127.
- Pittioni, B. and Schmidt, R. 1942. Die Bienen des südöstlichen Niederdonau. I: Apidae, Podaliriidae, Xylocopidae und Ceratinidae. <i>Niederdonau, Natur und Kultur</i> 19: 1-69.
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 bohemicus (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T13152926A222005475. 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. 7.9 °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 (40)— redirigent vers cette page
- Apis nemorumFabricius, 1775
- Psithyrus vestalis coraxHoffer, 1889
- Psithyrus vestalis eximiusHoffer, 1889
- Psithyrus vestalis obscurusHoffer, 1889
- Bombus chinganicus(Reinig, 1936)
- Bombus distinctus(Pérez, 1884)
- Bombus naiptchianusMatsumura, 1911
- Bombus naiptchianus candidusUchida, 1926
- Psithyrus bohemicus(Seidl, 1838)
- Psithyrus bohemicus amoenotenebricansMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus arrhenoidesBlüthgen, 1918
- Psithyrus bohemicus bellusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavidobellusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavidobluethgeniMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavidoobsoletusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavidotenebricansMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavidusBlüthgen, 1918
- Psithyrus bohemicus flavoarrhenoidesPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus bohemicus nigerBlüthgen, 1918
- Psithyrus bohemicus obsoletusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus sordidoarrhenoidesMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus sordidoobsoletusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus sordidopallidulusMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus sordidotenebricansMay, 1944
- Psithyrus bohemicus sordidusBlüthgen, 1918
- Psithyrus bohemicus subsordidusPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus chinganicusReinig, 1936
- Psithyrus disinctus pallidomixtusPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus distinctusPérez, 1884
- Psithyrus distinctus barovskyiPopov, 1931
- Psithyrus distinctus bluethgeniPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus distinctus candescensPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus distinctus flavoarrhenoidesPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus distinctus hediniBischoff, 1936
- Psithyrus distinctus pallidulusPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus distinctus propenigerPittioni, 1939
- Psithyrus distinctus skorikoviellusPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus distinctus subrufipesPerkins, 1921
- Psithyrus distinctus tenebricansPopov, 1927
- Psithyrus vestalis amoenusSchmiedeknecht, 1883
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).