Talk:List of Apis mellifera subspecies

Origins and photograph
Using the phrase "...originating in..." is misleading, as all bees originated in Africa, and migrated out from there! I think that this phrase should be replaced with the word "...of..." so as to read "Subspecies of Europe". Also agree with the below poster, will try to get a better image. Bibby (talk) 13:46, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Why using a foto of a bee with a parasite (varroa destructor | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varroa_destructor) on it? This must be a joke... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.115.57.156 (talk) 09:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Agressiveness of hybrid
The sentence "The hybrid populations of A. m. mellifera x A. m. ligustica, found in North America and Western Europe, have the reputation of stinging people (and other creatures) for no good reason. The near-extinct "pure" A. m. mellifera is not considered randomly aggressive" Apart from the fact that there are no citations to support that this AMM x AML cross is any more aggressive than any other mixture of bee sub-species (except for Africanized bees), the statement goes on to say that a "near-extinct... etc." if it's near-extinct then there would be little evidence of it's characteristics, meaning no solid conclusions can be made! Finally animals, especially bees, are not "randomly aggressive" they are protecting their food, home, etc. from a percieved threat. This whole statement is so flawed it should be deleted.Is123Biblio (talk) 21:09, 20 October 2018 (UTC)


 * It's not entirely clear where the passage with the dubious and unsourced section on aggressiveness of hybrids of Apis mellifera subspecies is. It is also true that this list has nothing to do with hybrids, "it's" must be "its" and "percieved" must be "perceived". Finally, I think it's important to stay on topic and proofread before posting.


 * ICE77 (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Apis mellifera caucasia classification under Middle East and Asia
This has been placed in the wrong section "Apis mellifera caucasia - classified by Pollmann, 1889" it should be in the "Subspecies originating in Europe" as the Caucasian mountains in Georgia are in Europe!Bibby (talk) 13:42, 23 October 2018 (UTC)


 * "Caucasian" is a misnomer for the bee and for the mountains that should be called "Caucasia" and "Caucasus". The Apis mellifera caucasia appears with other European honey bees as of now.


 * ICE77 (talk) 06:28, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Discrepancies and inconsistencies
This list has a variety of issues.

1. It lists 31 subspecies. Western honey bee points here and it lists 29.

2. The "Africanized" bee is a hybrid and not a subspecies. It should not be listed here.

3. The Apis mellifera caucasia is originary of Georgia so it should be listed under the subspecies of Asia.

4. What happened to the Apis mellifera madaros? It was somewhere on Wikipedia and it seems to have disappeared.

5. According to a Ph.D. in entomology from the University of Florida who is an expert in honey bee subspecies there is no literature in the English language for the Apis mellifera taurica so it's not fully recognized as a subspecies.

6. If the Apis mellifera sinisxinyuan is is found in Urumqi and the Apis mellifera pomonella is found in the Tien Shan Mountains (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Xinjiang) then the Apis mellifera pomonella cannot be described as the bee which "has a range that is the farthest east known". It just doesn't make any sense.

ICE77 (talk) 07:22, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * (1) The list was outdated. There are 31 subspecies presently, the article has just been updated to reflect this. Thanks for spotting this.
 * (2) The "Africanized" bee is not listed. It lists A. m. scutellata, which is a valid subspecies.
 * (3) The range of A. m. caucasia includes both Europe and Asia; it is listed under Europe arbitrarily.
 * (4) There is no such taxon as "Apis mellifera madaros"; this has never been published, anywhere.
 * (5) The name Apis mellifera taurica was validly published by Alpatov in 1935. Just because it was not published in English does not invalidate the name. If there is someone who disagrees with the validity of the taxon, they will need to publish a paper to establish the credibility of their claim. Otherwise, Wikipedia cannot include someone's personal opinions, under WP:NOR rules.
 * (6) You are correct, the statement was outdated, as it was written before sinisxinyuan was described; I have also corrected this. :Dyanega (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

1. This article lists 31 subspecies but the Western honey bee article continues to list 29.

2. The "Africanized" honey bee is not listed with a bullet but it's mentioned under the Africa section. That bee is not a subspecies but a hybrid. It should not be listed or mentioned here. This page lists subspecies and not hybrids. If Africanized is listed then we might as well list Buckfast and all the other bees. It's out of scope and unnecessary.

3. The caucasia honey bee is located in Caucasus. Caucasus is located in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Russia. None of those countries are European countries. They are all in Asia. The caucasia honey bee should be listed under Asia.

4. I recall seeing a honey bee subspecies named "madaros" but it must have been unsourced because it disappeared. I cannot find it. I agree it is not a subspecies and it was probably sombebody's fabrication.

5. After reading Engel's article on taxonomy from 1999 (The taxonomy of recent and fossil honey bees) I must agree taurica is a subspecies (I must disagree with the Ph.D. in entomology from the University of Florida who told me the taurica is not fully recognized).

7. Yesterday I added a "citation needed" for each subspecies. I see most entries now have a source. Carnica, cypria, ligustica, mellifera, intermissa, sahariensis and anatoliaca still don't have citations.

ICE77 (talk) 05:09, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Merging of two References into a third one
References 7 and 10 need to be merged with Reference 3.Malcolmlucascollins (talk) 05:23, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Modern re-organization of heading
I'm planning on basically re-formatting and re-arranging the lists on this page, this source is the most up to date comprehensive attempt to make sense of the Apis mellifera subspecies muddle based on modern DNA analysis, the source is by far the best I've seen; Engels source should still be kept as it can give additional info. but the "A revision of subspecies structure of western honey bee Apis mellifera" should be what we're working with going forward.

I'll also get Wiki pages started for those subspecies that presently don't have one, bear with me over the next couple of weeks for me to do this. Bibby (talk) 23:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ I have made changes relating to this recently, but they keep getting rapidly reverted. For some reason, this modern DNA-based 2020 resource is being ignored Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 09:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, there's a discussion on my talk page under section "Formal status of names in genus Apis" were I communicate with Dyanega (a commissioner with the ICZN), I'll quote him, "The classification of Apis species in Wikipedia should comply with the most recent revision of the genus (Engel, 1999) and also comply with the ICZN Code" (there's other sections on both our Talk pages). To add or deviate from the ICZN list will take you a LOT of work (talking from experience!). I and Dyanega are satisfied with the present list on this wiki page, the paper that you reference on bees in Bulgaria in 2010 does not identify a new subspecies, and it certainly has not submitted such a claim (with evidence) to the ICZN. Bibby (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not an arm of the ICZN and we do not need to comply with their decisions, if there is a strongly compelling reason to deviate. Dyanega has been told this multiple times, but still pushes their singular view that Wikipedia should reflect ICZN's vision. That said, I don't know that they are wrong with regards to A. mellifera. I bring it up to keep in mind that we are an encyclopedia and not a scientific journal; our goals and the goals of the ICZN are not identical. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * In this case, it has nothing to do with the ICZN, and everything to do with the difference between a taxonomic revision versus a literature review. The work by Engel, 1999, is the most recent taxonomic revision. The paper cited specifically states that it is a literature review only, and presents no taxonomic data: "In the current review of all available literature, the existence of 33 subspecies of honey bee A. mellifera is stated." I will say that I have no problem with stating, in the articles for carnica and macedonica, that people have proposed that these subspecies can be further split using microsatellite DNA, but I see no sign that bee taxonomists are in agreement that rodopica and carpatica (note the spelling; it is not "carpathica") should be recognized as valid subspecies; redirects, certainly, but not stand-alone articles, is what I would advocate. Dyanega (talk) 18:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with you here, . - UtherSRG (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Map
There is a map in Commons, used on the Greek version of this page File:EU_Apis_Mellifera_L_Map.svg

Anyone want to add it? Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 21:37, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi thanks for the input, but that map is somewhat basic, and appears to be only really valid up until the winter of 1940/41, so it would be misleading, ie: Germany has the A. m. carnica bee now. Bibby (talk) 00:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Change Section for two subspecies?
Just noticed that the Apis mellifera ruttneri is placed in the Section "Subspecies of the Middle East and Asia", when Malta and it's islands are geographically Africa (African continental shelf, therefore technically part of Africa, not geographic Europe), therefore I propose moving it to the Section "Subspecies of Africa" (also I think it is of the 'A' African Lineage).

Also the Apis mellifera cypria is in the Section "Subspecies of Europe" whenever Cyprus is geographically part of Asia and the bee is genetically more closely related to the Apis mellifera of the Middle East, belonging to the 'O' (near) Orient Lineage, therefore I propose moving it to the Section "Subspecies of the Middle East and Asia".

I'll go ahead and change them, assuming there's no objections, yeh I'm being pedantic, but isn't that what makes Wiki so great! Bibby (talk) 22:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)