Megachile fultoni — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Hymenoptera/Megachilidae/Megachile

At a glance

Occurrence records106

Data sources7

Biological traits0

DNA specimens4

eDNA detections2

Sources7 archives

Databases and archives Megachile fultoni's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation3 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility106 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI2 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics4 specimens↗

Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗

GLoBIGlobal Biotic Interactionsbiotic interactions↗

On this page4 sections

Every layer below draws on the sources above — open one to explore it, or use ← → to move between tabs.

NarrativeWikipediaarticle

Occurrence & distributionGBIF106 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 1 countries2 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD4 specimens

01Narrative

Megachile fultoni is a species of bee in the family Megachilidae. It was described by Theodore Dru Alison Cockerell in 1913.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

No structured trait data for this taxon yet.

05DNA & barcoding4 specimens

A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Megachile fultoni has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens4

BINs1

Marker genes1

eDNA detections2

Countries1

Marker genes sequenced

★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.

COI-5P

animal barcode

08Occurrence & distribution

Record type106 records

Museum / vouchered46

Other60

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO112 km²

Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence

Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.

Coordinate accuracy0% within 1 km

>10 km 1

1 georeferenced · 45 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence46

10Collections & institutions

Holding institutions2 of 5 geolocated

Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.

Institution	Specimens
Western Australian Museumlocation not on record	31
Museums Victorialocation not on record	11
Research Collection of Kit S. Prendergastlocation not on record	2
Cambridge, US	1
Washington, US	1

5 institutions · 46 of 46 vouchered records shown

09Environmental DNA2 detections

Where the DNA of Megachile fultoni was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.

Signal

Detections DNA found2

Studies independent surveys1

Countries1

Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections

Where its DNA was found

0 of 2 detections have coordinates

Open the map1 country0

Urban bushland remnant

How strong is each trace?

DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.

Modelled climatemodelled

−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C

Temperature median23.4 °C 22.5–24.2

Seasonal swing summer↔winter11.6 °C

Max temp (day)29.6 °C 28.5–30.7

Min temp (night)17.6 °C 16.9–18.3

Precipitation10.3 mm/mo 8.80–11.8

Air humidity50.4 % 49.9–51.0

Moisture balance-180 mm/mo -182–-178

Vapour deficit1,432 Pa 1,342–1,521

Wind speed2.80 m/s

Cloud cover11.0 % 9.90–12.2

CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 2 detection points · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche

How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.