Bothriomyrmex corsicus

Bothriomyrmex corsicus worker

It's been a long time since I've posted anything (the effect of getting married and renovating a house). I thought that this was worth breaking a three year habit.

By all accounts, Bothriomyrmex species seem to be pretty uncommon, so I'm pleased that the first one I found is the second, not the first, most common in Europe. Bothriomyrmex taxonomy was in a very confusing state, so these specimens previously keyed out as B. menozzii, but thanks to Seifert (2012) the picture is clearer. I can now say with certainty that they are B. corsicus (Seifert could not find B. laticeps type material, but my specimens didn't fit Emery's (1925) description of laticeps anyway, based upon the length of the antennal segments).

The European species of Bothriomyrmex are temporary social parasites of Tapinoma species. It is likely that invading queens of all Bothriomyrmex species kill the host queen, decapitating them with specialised mandibles, after which they become very physogastric (i.e. they swell with eggs).

I didn't collect any B. corsicus queens, but did collect a male. Unfortunately, the male was a bit mangled when it came out of the tube and did not mount very well, so wouldn't make a good photomontage.

These ants were found under a stone in south-facing subalpine grassland near Venanson, in the Alpes-Maritimes, France, not very far from other locations listed by Seifert (2012). What was perhaps most interesting was that the stone also covered a very large colony of Solenopsis fugax. This suggests that the S. fugax may have been stealing brood from the B. corsicus. S. fugax is known to raid Formica (Serviformica) and Lasius nests, and I have found them alongside Camponotus ligniperda, but I wonder whether there are any records of them stealing brood from Bothriomyrmex or any other Dolichoderine ants.

Swiss ant list

I visited Switzerland in June 2009 and have started to work through the specimens collected. This list will grow over the next few months and I'll try to get some photographs of the more interesting species up.

Dolichoderinae
     Tapinoma
          erraticum
Formicinae
     Camponotus
          herculeanus
          ligniperda
          piceus
     Formica
          fusca
          lemani
          lugubris
          paralugubris
          pressilabris
          sanguinea
     Lasius
          brunneus
          emaginatus
          flavus
          fuliginosus
          platythorax
Myrmicinae
     Aphaenogaster
          subterranea
     Manica
          rubida
     Myrmecina
          graminicola
     Myrmica
          lobulicornis
          myrmicoxena
          rubra
          ruginodis
          schencki
          sulcinodis
     Solenopsis
          fugax
     Temnothorax
          nylanderi
          parvulus
          tuberum
     Tetramorium
          sp. A ¹

---

¹ See: Schlick-Steiner & al. (2006). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 40: 259-273.

New year, new home, new job, new species

Apologies for the lack of recent posts. I moved at the end of November to start a new job in Talgarth, Wales. Following my move it took my ISP a whole month to set up my connection here, with a lot of extended phone calls and a rather long and comprehensive written complaint from me to get them to sort it out as quick as they did. Needless to say I am not best pleased with the company.

One rather important event that took place over the last month was that my recent paper was published, describing a new species, Monomorium subcomae. It may not be much, but it is my first new species. (I don't have the time or resources to conduct large scale taxonomic reviews. At the time I did the M. subcomae work I was working off of a table in my kitchen - at least now I have a dedicated office/lab.)

The type material for M. subcomae was collected in Kuwait by David M. King, though Mostafa Sharaf has already informed me that he has the species from Egypt. The specimens gradually found their way to me through Brian Taylor, along with numerous other tubes from around the Mediterranean.

M. subcomae is one of many species in the Middle East and North Africa that are related to Monomorium areniphilum, all of which have a propodeum that it on a distinctly lower plane than the promesonotum, as well as large eyes and distinctive striate sculpture on the head. Not many of the areniphilum-complex are bicoloured, so this makes M. subcomae relatively easy to identify. The key in Collingwood & Agosti (1996) can be easily adapted to include M. subcomae as follows:

17	Eyes large, greater than 0.25 times HW		17a
	Eyes small, 0.25 times HW or less		18
17a	Ventral surface of head with numerous long setae		subcomae
	Ventral surface of head glabrous		venustum

As yet nothing is known about the ecology of M. subcomae. Perhaps over time people like Mostafa will be able to fill in some of the details.


Citation and abstract: Lush, M. J. 2008. A new species of Monomorium (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Kuwait. Zoology in the Middle East 45: 67-72.

Harpagoxenus sublaevis

My parents collected some ants from Austria in June. I was pleased to find that the first tube I looked in contained this little beast.

Harpagoxenus sublaevis is interesting in that, despite its relatively small size, it is a 'slave-maker'. In this instance it was apparently using Leptothorax acervorum as slaves, though it also enslaves L. muscorum and L. gredleri.

Describing ants as slave-makers is generally a misuse of the term, as it's only possible to enslave members of the same species. Instead, myrmecologists have given this form of social parasitism its own name: dulosis.

H. sublaevis conducts raids on Leptothorax colonies, carrying larvae and pupae away to rear as slaves. This can be quite drawn out process, as H. sublaevis recruits through tandem running, so it can take quite a while until there are enough H. sublaevis workers to conduct the raid. During the raid, H. sublaevis produces a propaganda pheromone, which causes the Leptothorax workers to attack one another, rather than the intruders. Nevertheless, H. sublaevis is heavily built, with antennal scrobes into which antennae can be drawn and straight edged mandibles that can be used for shearing through the appendages of attacking Leptothorax.

The evolutionary origins of dulosis in ants still has a lot of questions that need answering. There are three main hypotheses for the origin of slave-making:

• Predation: This was the only possible origin for slave-making suggested by Darwin in the Origin of Species. In essence, he suggested that slave-making emerged when one colony raids another colony and steals brood to be used as food. If any of the brood were allowed to survive then these would be adopted as slaves within the host colony. There is currently no evidence for this as the prime mover leading to slavery.

• Territoriality: This hypothesis suggests that territorial aggression between neighbouring colonies, and the stealing of rival brood for food, led to some captured brood to be allowed to survive to adulthood and be accepted as nestmates. There is some evidence in support of this hypothesis.

• Transport: This was originally suggested by Buschinger. He suggested that slave-making may originate from transporting brood between nests in polydomous (multi-nest) colonies. If this was extended to other colonies then it could lead to an early version of slave-raiding. Again, there is little evidence in support of this theory.

None of these hypotheses are fully convincing. For example, none of them explain the aggressive usurpation of host workers and queens. However, they are not mutually exclusive, so it may be a combination of these and other factors that led to the evolution of slave-making.

That's one important ant!

I don't normally just link to ant related news without having something to say myself. However, I think that Martialis heureka warrants making an exception.

Myrmecos does a good summary of the story, with some nice photos. Other good coverage is at ScienceDaily, Nature News and Discover. The paper is available from PNAS, at a cost, though the abstract is available for free.

Separating Lasius niger and Lasius platythorax workers

By popular request! Well, one person requested it anyway.

Lasius niger and Lasius platythorax are undoubtedly hard to separate. This becomes particularly difficult when you find specimens that seem to be somewhere in between. However, it is always possible to assign them to one species or another, with a bit of work.

First of all, L. niger and L. platythorax are small dark brown Lasius with outstanding hairs on their antennal scapes. In the UK there are no other species that have these characteristics, though in Europe it gets a little more complicated¹.

Some people seem to base identification of the workers of these species on one or two characteristics. However, experience has taught me that it is usually more reliable to use all of the following:

• Density of pubescence on the clypeus
• Shape of propodeum in profile
• Setae length on the mesosoma
• Shape of clypeus in profile

These are all shown in the photomontages. I have, on occasion, also felt the need to use the length of the setae on the underside of the head, but I can usually identify these species reliably without this and the setae are difficult to measure.

Probably the most useful character is the clypeal pubescence. Quite often this can be visually assessed, with practice, though on occasions an entire nest series will have moderate clypeal pubescence and have to be assessed morphometrically. To do this you use a measuring line, as shown below. Measure the length of this line in µm (l) and then count the number of hairs that intersect it (n). Seifert (2007) gives the average distance between the hairs (l/n) for L. niger as <16µm and for L. platythorax as >19µm.

Clypeal pubescence in Lasius niger. Measuring line shown in red.

Clypeal pubescence in Lasius platythorax. Measuring line shown in red.

Whilst you're looking at the clypeus it's worth noting its shape in profile. Typically, L. niger has a rather curved clypeus, whilst in L. platythorax it is comparatively straight. The idea that they differ has been floating around in BWARS for a couple years now, though I must admit I'm one of the last to accept that this is probably a good character. I feel like I've now seen enough and have not been able to dispute it - plus Barry Bolton is apparently using it, so it must be good!

Check the shape of the propodeum in profile. In L. niger the propodeum tends to be a smoothly rounded dome, whilst in L. platythorax it tends to be more conical in shape.

Finally, look at the relative length of the setae on the mesosoma, especially the pronotum. In L. platythorax these setae tend to be distinctly longer. Seifert (2007) gives figures for the length of the longest setae on the pronotum divided by the length of the head as 0.119±0.009 in L. niger and 0.159±0.010 in L. platythorax.

The two species have distinct ecological preferences. L. niger prefers drier habitats and has synanthropic tendencies - this is the species that sometimes invades houses. L. platythorax prefers wetter conditions, and is usually the species found in woodland and wet grasslands.

I've also started noticing that the larvae in L. platythorax seem to be more slender than in L. niger. Of course, this is based wholly on my subjective observations, but might be a good indicative field character.

NB: The photomontages are of British specimens² that show generally typical characteristics. However, both specimens show setae on the propodeum that curve forward, which is not typical. In the Scottish L. platythorax, which were collected in atypical habitat at their most northern known location in the UK, the entire series had curved forward propodeal setae.

---

¹ American L. niger are most likely a different species again, as the images I have seen do not have the dense clypeal pubescence of L. niger, but do not appear to be L. platythorax either.
² To be honest, I don't think that them being British matters - if anything I find the characteristics of these species to overlap more in the UK than in mainland Europe. However, I know some British myrmecologists who get funny about such things!

Mapping ant colonies

A colleague of mine forwarded this to me last week, but I went away and haven't had chance to deal with it properly until now.

Researchers at Texas A&M University used Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) to map a colony of Atta texana, producing a 3D model of the tunnels and chambers. It's all very clever and has the advantage of being non-invasive.

I've seen some of the models that Walter Tschinkel has produced and they are very attractive (and scientifically valuable). However, these models do result in the destruction of the colony and can be very time consuming to produce. By using GPR the colony is not destroyed.

Whilst I think that this is a great step forward, I doubt how well it can be implemented in the short term. The trouble is, whilst A. texana colonies are big, most ant colonies are small with narrow tunnels, and I doubt that the GPR would be sensitive to pick up all the finer details. Maybe in the future, if the sensitivity of the equipment improves, this technique will become more valuable. It's also much harder to visualise the colony without an actual physical model, though no doubt these could be created at additional cost if needed.

It will be interesting to see how this develops (and how the technology can be used in other fields - mapping European badger Meles meles setts for a start). More information is available on the project website.

I also followed a link from the BBC web page this was reported on and discovered that a friend of mine has made the news, again... (Show off.)

Witness to a birth... sort of

Seven weeks ago (to the day) I found a Lasius queen in a soil claustral cell beneath some moss in a woodland.

I don't make a habit of collecting Lasius queens to rear colonies from - they are two-a-penny in the UK (only slightly more expensive than a-dime-a-dozen at todays exchange rate) and the workers are marvellous escapologists, making them difficult to keep.

However, this queen looked like a Lasius flavus queen, so I thought she might be something more interesting since woodland is not the normal habitat for L. flavus. I collected the queen and the soil of the cell surrounding her and placed everything in a tube.

She had remained in that tube until yesterday, when I decided it was time to investigate why I hadn't seen any activity for about three weeks. Of course, this meant that when I discovered the queen and brood and two callow workers it was too late to get them back in the tube, so I had to find them some alternative accommodation in a plaster nest.

I left them to settle into the plaster nest, checking on them every couple of hours. Then in the early evening I counted not two but three workers, so I decided that I would take them into work today, so that I could keep an eye on them.

I'm glad I did. Not a lot happened until 16:00 when, as I was moving to get a drink, I spotted activity. The queen was licking what was obviously an emerging adult ant. The other workers were also showing an above normal level of excitement (i.e. they were moving, rather than just standing over the brood). The queen continued to lick this fourth worker for about 30 minutes, until she left it, twitching, presumably to harden its cuticle.

This was very exciting for me, as in ten years of studying ants it was something I had never before witnessed. To be fair, I've only been keeping ants for about a year and it's the sort of thing that you need to be in the right place at the right time to see.

Once I got them home, at around about 18:00, there was a fifth ant! They are yellow, so I'm becoming more convinced that they are just the common L. flavus, but they're entertaining me.

Temnothorax saxonicus

It's been too long since I last added anything to this blog, so it is a shame that I write this in the middle of fixing a(nother) mistake. I originally thought this specimen was Temnothorax nylanderi, collected well outside of its known range, and had started to pursue this, involving other people.

Instead it is Temnothorax saxonicus and I'm feeling quite sheepish. What's especially silly is that I collected T. saxonicus again just down the road from this specimen and had no problem with the identification.

I had taken these photographs and was sorting them out when I realised that the head was the wrong shape for T. nylanderi. On checking my measurements I discovered that I had originally incorrectly measured the head width. Thus, instead of the head length being less than 1.090 times the head width, the head was longer, which clearly made this T. saxonicus.

T. saxonicus is a rarity in Germany and is listed as 'highly endangered' (RLD2). The only place I collected it was just west of Poikham, Bavaria, though there is a slim chance that I may have other specimens unidentified. Seifert has told me that he expects this species in any comparable habitat along the river Donau (Danube).

I ♥ morphometrics

Put simply, morphometrics is 'measuring shapes'. In the normal, biological context this refers to the shape of study organisms. It is used by the taxonomist as a way of determining species boundaries.

Not long after I first encountered morphometrics I found myself working on tricky Lasius sp., which meant that I had to try to make sense of Seifert (1992). Seifert seems to be the Master of Morphometrics, in Europe at least, and the measurements and indices he uses are much more complicated than I had encountered up until that point. At first I really hated them. I couldn't understand why identification of Lasius needed to be so complicated - couldn't the species be better described and thus made easier to identify?

Over time morphometrics have grown on me and I've come to really appreciate them. I now even understand most of what Seifert does, though I will admit to being lost by some of the discriminants that he uses!

The most recent and one of the cleverest morphometric tools that I've encountered is from Seifert (2007), for separating the Formica picea/gagatoides/gagates group from the F. fusca/lemani group. I had already decided that the specimen that I was working on was F. fusca and knew that it definitely wasn't from the picea/gagatoides/gagates group, as these are all much shinier. However, in the couplet for separating the two groups I spotted an index that I had not encountered before: sqPDF.

Translating as best I can from the German, sqPDF is the square root of the distance between individual pubescence hairs within the triangle formed by the ocelli. PDF = l/n; where n = number of the pubescence hairs that intersect three transverse measuring lines of overall length l. The position of these measuring lines is shown in red in the picture below.


The thing that I found so intriguing about this is the pubescence hairs are extremely small, so I decided to see if I could make sqPDF work. I measured the length of the three lines combined to be 663µm and counted 68 hairs intersecting the three lines. This gave a PDF of 9.75µm, so the sqPDF was 3.12µm. This is within the range given for F. fusca/lemani (sqPDF 2.4-3.5µm) and outside of the range given for F. picea/gagatoides/gagates (spPDF 3.6-10.8µm), so the calculation worked!

This might seem like a lot of work, but it's not. Morphometrics are indisputable. I know from experience that you can get to the end of a key based on descriptions alone and be less than convinced that you've got the right answer. You then spend hours checking the other 'possibilities' had you taken different routes through the key. Morphometrics eliminate much of the doubt, give you a nice, neat, believable answer and ultimately save time.

If and when I finally write my first key, expect to see lots of numbers in the couplets!

German ant collections

Another place visited; another list of ants collected. This time the area covered is a small part of Bavaria, as a result of a visit to the University of Regensburg. This list will develop over the next few weeks, as I have numerous specimens to look at. Once I have identified everthing I will send a full list of the records to the university and to any other interested parties.

It is possible to accurately identify some of the species listed in the field, so not all were actually collected. Some of them were collected by Marion Füßl, who found many species before I did and thus proved to be a very useful person to have around! Others were collected with a group of researchers from the university, who very kindly spent their public holiday showing me around. Yet more were collected by Christiane Wanke over the past few years and passed to me to identify.

Though I was not aiming specifically to collect rare species, the letters in red relate to species the German Red Data List (from: Seifert, 2007).

Dolichoderinae
     Dolichoderus
          quadripuntatus ^RLD3
Formicinae
     Camponotus
          ligniperda
     Formica
          cunicularia
          fusca
          pratensis
          rufa
          rufibarbis
          sanguinea
     Lasius
          alienus
          brunneus ¹
          emarginatus
          flavus
          fuliginosus
          niger
          platythorax
     Plagiolepis
          vindobonensis ^RLD2
Myrmicinae
     Leptothorax
          acervorum
     Myrmecina
          graminicola
     Myrmica
          lobicornis ^RLD3
          rubra
          ruginodis
          rugulosa
          sabuleti
          scabrinodis
          schencki ^RLD3
          specioides ^RLD3
     Solenopsis
          fugax ^RLD3
     Stenamma
          debile
     Tapinoma
          erraticum ^RLD3
     Temnothorax
          affinis
          corticalis ^RLD2
          crassispinus
          interruptus ^RLD3
          parvulus ^RLD3
          saxonicus ^RLD2
          tuberum ^RLD2
          unifasciatus
     Tetramorium
          impurum

---

¹ Colony found containing the myrmecophilous woodlouse Platyarthrus hoffmannseggi.

Rickia wasmannii

Fairly regularly something comes along and completely stumps me, but it doesn't normally happen with European ants.

I thought I knew Myrmica well, especially M. scabrinodis, which is one of the species I most regularly encounter. This Bavarian specimen really has caused me to do a disproportionate amount of work to resolve it's identity.

First of all I wasn't even 100% certain that it was a Myrmica. It has unusually large mandibles and, particularly, it appears to be covered with rather strange clavate hairs. I had to get my BIG eyepieces out to check the tibial spurs on the middle and hind legs (which were dubiously pectinate) and then count the palp segments, which always takes a lot of effort to get the position and lighting good enough to see anything. The result was that it is definitely a Myrmica.

By this stage I had already decided that it had the antennal scape and overall shape of M. scabrinodis, but those hairs were peculiar. I worked my mounted specimen through Seifert (1988) and his new book (2007), both of which suggested clearly that the specimen is M. scabrinodis¹.

I then really started asking questions about those hairs and, once I had thought of fungi as a possibility, I quickly found was seems to be the most likely answer: Rickia wasmannii. This was described from Germany, though I've no idea how common recorded it is. It was only recently collected from Hungary and Romania (Tartally, et al, 2007), and does not appear to be known from the UK. All five specimens in this collection are covered in these little growths on almost every part of their bodies.

I haven't actually confirmed this, but I suspect that species of Rickia are host specific and that R. wasmannii is the only one that is known from Myrmica sp. However, if anyone has any additional information on Rickia sp. I'd be very grateful to hear about it. In the meantime I will spend a lot more time looking at British Myrmica in the hope that I can get the first UK record of R. wasmannii!

I sure know how to have fun on a Friday evening.

---

¹ For those who are interested in such things, the standard measurements and indices used to make the identification were as follows:
     Head length (HL) = 996 µm
     Head width (HW) = 952 µm
          HL/HW = 1.047
     Scape length (SL) = 763 µm
          SL/HL = 0.767
     Minimum distance between frontal carinae (FR) = 310 µm
          HW/FR = 3.071
     Maximum distance between frontal lobes (FL) = 443 µm
          FL/FR = 1.428
     Length of propodeal spines (SP) = 310 µm
          SP/HW = 0.311
     Petiole width (PE) = 266 µm
          PE/HW = 0.279
     Postpetiole width (PP) = 376 µm
          PP/HW = 0.395

Myopias tenuis

I've been pretty quiet recently as I've been very busy organising my first overseas anting trip of 2008. About a month ago, the University of Regensburg, Germany, invited me to visit them. Part of the trip will involve a seminar, so I've been trying to write the seminar, arrange travel, etc. and re-learn the little German I knew 15 years ago. This and my full-time job have left little time for very much else.

To make up for the lack of posting I decided to post something rather neat. The specimen in the picture is Myopias tenius. It wasn't collected by me; that honour goes to Catherine L. Parr, who also attended the Ant Course in 2007. Catherine found a number of interesting species during the two weeks and kindly let me have this specimen. I've only now got around to identifying it.

According the Shattuck (1999), Myopias are infrequently collected and are found from Sri Lanka to southeast Australia. Within Australia, M. tenuis is only known from north Queensland, but is also known from New Guinea, including the Indonesian part, and the Solomon Islands (Willey & Brown, 1983). This specimen was collected from Smithfield Conservation Park, an area of rainforest about 10 minutes walk from James Cook University, Cairns campus.

Miscellaneous ant collections

The last of the boring but possibly useful lists.

This covers those counties where I only have a few species recorded or in my collection. Those from Ireland and Senegal were collected by me. My parents have been good enough to collect ants for me, including from Mallorca and Austria. Specimens collected by David M. King were passed to me for identification; these came from Italy, Kuwait, Macedonia, Qatar, Turkey and the Canary Isles (not yet included). Claes-Göran Magnusson sent me a specimen from Sweden. Finally, Sabine Frohschammer passed on a few specimens from a live colony she had collected in Malasia.

Austria

Formicinae
     Camponotus
          herculeanus
     Formica
          aquilonia
          cinerea
          exsecta
          lemani
          lugubris
          paralugubris
          sanguinea
     Lasius
          fuliginosus
          niger
          platythorax
Myrmicinae
     Leptothorax
          acervorum
     Manica
          rubida
     Myrmica
          lobulicornis
          rubra
          ruginodis
          scabrinodis
          sulcinodis
     Harpagoxenus
          sublaevis

Ireland

Formicinae
     Formica
          lemani
     Lasius
          flavus
          grandis ¹
          niger
Myrmicinae
     Myrmica
          ruginodis
          sabuleti
          scabrinodis
          schencki
     Tetramorium
          caespitum

Italy

Myrmicinae
     Aphaenogaster
          ionia

Kuwait

Myrmicinae
     Messor
          ebeninus
          minor
     Monomorium
          subcomae
     Pheidole
          teneriffana ²

Macedonia

Formicinae
     Cataglyphis
          aenescens

Malasia: Sarawak

Myrmicinae
     Monomorium
          floricola

Mallorca, Spain

Myrmicinae
     Crematogaster
          scutellaris
Dolichoderinae
     Linepithema
          humile ³

Qatar

Myrmicinae
     Monomorium
          tumaire

Senegal

Formicinae
     Camponotus
          sericeus
Myrmicinae
     Crematogaster
          senegalensis
Ponerinae
     Pachycondyla
          sennaarensis

Sweden

Formicinae
     Lasius
          umbratus

Turkey

Formicinae
     Cataglyphis
          nodus
Myrmicinae
     Aphaenogaster
          ionia
     Messor
          caducus
          denticulatus
     Pheidole
          pallidula
Dolichoderinae
     Tapinoma
          festae

---

¹ I know this seems unlikely, but it's the best fit. I've had a paper half written for two years now. My problem is that I can't make my head measurements match those of Seifert's - on any Lasius. I've spoken to others and this is not a problem restricted to me! Oh, and Ireland also has L. psammophilus, with no evidence for L. alienus.
² Introduced.
³ Introduced and apparently one of the dominant species on Mallorca now: my parents only collected the two species above, despite searching hard.

Australian ant collections

This is the most incomplete of the lists I'm going to present. There are two main reasons for this: the taxonomy of the Australian ant fauna is incredibly difficult, making identification hard, and I was interrupted by my work on the Gambian fauna. Eventually I will get back to these collections.

They are the result of my attendance on the Ant Course 2006, plus an extra week that I stayed. This was held at James Cook University (JCU) Cairns Campus. If you are interested in ants then I can't recommend the Ant Course strongly enough.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the Australian ant fauna is quite special. Groups that are rare elsewhere, such as Iridomyrmex and Polyrhachis have diversified into many different forms. Others, such as Leptomyrmex, Turneria, Melophorus and the famous bulldog ants Myrmecia are limited to the Australasian region. I should also make mention of possibly the most famous Australian ant, Nothomyrmecia macrops.

There is a lot of work still to be done on these specimens. Iridomyrmex, Camponotus, Polyrhachis, Crematogaster and Pheidole are all common and diverse in Australia, so I collected a lot of different species. A key now exists for Camponotus, but I've only just started trying to sort through all the specimens I have. Iridomyrmex in particular is well-nigh impossible, as there are many species that differ very little. Many of the smaller groups also lack keys, so identification is not easy.

For further coverage check Australian Ants Online.

I should say that the specimens actually belong to JCU and that I have them as part of a loan to Cardiff Museum. Once I've finished with them they will go to Cardiff or back to JCU.

Aenictinae
     Aenictus
          aratus
Cerapachyinae
     Cerapachys
Dolichoderinae
     Anonychomyrma
     Iridomyrmex
     Leptomyrmex
          unicolor
          varians subsp. ruficeps
     Ochetellus
     Tapinoma
          melanocephalum ¹
          minutum
     Technomyrmex
          albipes
     Turneria
          bidentata ²
Ectatomminae
     Rhytidoponera
Formicinae
     Acropyga
     Calomyrmex
     Camponotus
          aeneopilosus
          dromas
          vitreus
     Echinopla
          australis
     Melophorus
     Oecophylla
          smaragdina
     Opisthopsis
          haddoni
          jocosus
          pictus subsp. bimaculatus
     Paratrechina
     Polyrhachis
Myrmeciinae
     Myrmecia
Myrmicinae
     Cardiocondyla
          nuda ³
     Crematogaster
     Mayriella
          overbecki ⁴
     Meranoplus
          ajax
          hirsutus
     Monomorium
          fieldi
          laeve
          pharaonis ⁵
     Pheidole
     Podomyrma
     Rhoptromyrmex
          wroughtoni sp. 1
          wroughtoni sp. 2⁶
     Tetramorium
          deceptum
          lanuginosum ³
          simillimum ³
     Wasmannia
          auropunctata ⁷
Ponerinae
     Hypoponera
     Leptogenys
     Myopias
          tenuis
     Odontomachus
     Pachycondyla
Pseudomyrmecinae
     Tetraponera
          punctulata

---

¹ Introduced and collected in many situations, from wash-blocks to rainforest.
² I only collected one specimen of this rarity, which is usually found in the canopy. I found it on my clothes in the room I was staying in at (JCU) Cairns Campus. I suspect that someone had shaken the tree it was on as I was beneath.
³ Introduced.
⁴ A bit of a rarity, especially in Queensland, where it is otherwise unknown (Shattuck & Barnett, 2007).
⁵ Introduced, found once crawling across the desk in the room I was staying in at JCU.
⁶ Considered to be rare, but I found it frequently enough in the rainforest that by the time I left I could recognise it on sight. Following a chat with Barry Bolton (who last reviewed the genus), I feel confident in saying that what I have belongs to two species.
⁷ Introduced around Cairns and apparently presenting quite a serious threat. Found abundantly in one place near JCU.

French ant collections

This list of ants in my collection was the result of a two week 'holiday' in the Dordogne and Massif Central areas of France. It was the first time I had ever collected ants outside of the UK and forecast the end of 'normal' holidays for me!

More information on the ants of France can be found at Fourmis, the French ant forum.

Dolichoderinae
     Dolichoderus
          quadripunctatus
     Tapinoma
          erraticum
Formicinae
     Camponotus
          aethiops
          cruentatus
          fallax
          gestroi ¹
          lateralis
          ligniperda
          piceus
          trunctatus
          vagus
     Cataglyphis
          cursor
     Formica
          fusca
          gagates
          pratensis
          rufa
          rufibarbis
     Lasius
          alienus
          brunneus
          emaginatus
          flavus
          fuliginosus
          grandis ²
          niger
          platythorax
          psammophilus
     Plagiolepis
          pygmaea
Myrmicinae
     Crematogaster
          scutellaris
     Messor
          structor
     Myrmica
          sabuleti
          scabrinodis
     Pheidole
          megacephala ³
          pallidula
     Temnothorax
          grouvellei
          nylanderi
          racovitzai
          unifasciatus
     Tetramorium
          caespitum

---

¹ Two alate queens, one found in the Salignac-Eyvigues, Dordogne, the other on Causse Noir in the Massif Central. The latter was found in association with C. lateralis. This species is not supposed to occur in mainland France, but after a lot of debate they were eventually confirmed by Cedric Collingwood.
² A rarely recorded species in France. This collection was from the edge of a woodland near Nant, Massif Central. This has also been confirmed by Cedric Collingwood and matches the morphometrics given in Seifert (1992).
³ An introduced species in France, found alongside P. pallidula on the château walls at Castelnaud, Dordogne.

UK ant collections

The other day I had a request from Professor James K. Wetterer at Florida Atlantic University. He had seen the invasive species listed as present in The Gambia and wanted further details of those and others that I had collected.

This lead to two surprises. The first was that someone was paying attention and cared what I get up to. The second was the large number of invasive ants I have collected, despite few collection forays outside of the UK. It has, however, made me wonder if it's worth highlighting the other species that I have in my collection or have records for, in case they are of use to anyone.

I've decided to kick this off with the shortest and simplest list: the paltry fauna of the UK (I'm going to upset some British myrmecologists with this description, but it doesn't make it any less true). A complete list of the 67 native and regularly recorded introduced ants can be found in the checklist available on the BWARS website. The few species that I have in my collection are listed below.

Formicidae
     Formica
          cunicularia
          fusca
          lemani
          lugubris
          picea ¹
          rufa
     Lasius
          brunneus
          flavus
          fuliginosus
          niger
          platythorax
          psammophilus
          umbratus
Myrmicinae
     Formicoxenus
          nitidulus ²
     Leptothorax
          acervorum
     Myrmecina
          graminicola
     Myrmica
          lobicornis
          rubra
          ruginodis
          sabuleti
          scabrinodis
          schencki
          sulcinodis
     Technomyrmex
          albipes ³
     Temnothorax
          nylanderi
     Tetramorium
          caespitum

---

¹ Alate queen collected in Yorkshire. Despite a lot of searching no colonies have been located in the area.
² Two males collected by David Baldock.
³ Present only as a rare introduction, these specimens from the Eden Project.

Tapinoma simrothi subsp. festae

It was two months ago that I posted this image claiming it to be Tapinoma ambiguum. I was wrong - but that is nothing new!

Shortly after posting it I took the specimen to Cedric Collingwood, who glanced at it under a microscope and said 'Ah, it's festae!' Since then I've been planning to update this blog with a proper correction, but I wanted to be sure that I know why it is this species.

Why did it take so long? Basically, there is almost no information available on Tapinoma simrothi subsp. festae. It was described by Emery (1925), which I haven't been able to get hold of. I can find nothing else relating to it, aside from a mention in unchecked taxa in Agosti & Collingwood (1987). This entry has a question mark next to it, says that it's expected for the Balkan peninsula and the species is not featured in the key that followed.

Since I haven't encountered anything that clarifies the situation in the last two months, and forgot to ask Collingwood about it last time we spoke, I'm basing my acceptance of this identification on the fact that it is much larger than T. erraticum. T. ambiguum should be the same size as T. erraticum.

As far as I can make out, the size distiguishes T. simrothi from T. ambiguum and T. erraticum. T. simrothi subsp. festae is then distinguished by the shallow anteromedian clypeal notch, which is deeper than wide in T. simrothi. This makes me wonder whether it is the Tapinoma sp. mentioned in Collingwood & Agosti (1996), even though the scape index of this specimen is shorter at 97.

I expect that at some point T. simrothi subsp. festae will be raised to species status, as it seems to differ from T. simrothi no less than T. ambiguum does from T. erraticum.

Monomorium dakarense

I previously thought I had collected Monomorium dictator in the Gambia, as that is what this specimen keyed out as. However, I've been doing a lot of work on the salomonis-group recently and I no longer think that I was correct. I now think it is Monomorium dakarense.

It all boils down to couplet 36 of Bolton's (1987) key. I think it would be possible to debate for hours over whether the sculpture on the head of this specimen is 'uniformly densely reticulate-punctate' or 'with a silky, smeared or roughened appearance'. Initially I opted for the former because, well, it is reticulate-punctate, just more finely than the likes of Monomorium bicolor! However, I've since come to realise that this is what Bolton means by the latter, which leads to M. dakarense.

The difference between M. dakarense and M. dictator, other than the ambiguities of cephalic sculpture, seems to be size, number of ommatidia in the longest row and, importantly, scape index (SI). M. dakarense is overall the smaller of the two, with fewer ommatidia and a SI of 95-100, whereas M. dictator has a SI of 107-109. For those not familiar with SI, it is as follows:

Scape length × 100

Head width

The SI in this specimen is 92, putting it closest to the range given for M. dakarense. Given that Bolton only had the three syntype workers to measure it is likely that the true range of the SI includes 92. However, this is not the only difference between this specimen and the holotype, as the other measurements are (quoting the measurements for MJL143, followed by the range given by Bolton, in mm):

     Head length = 0.61 (0.57-0.59)
     Head width = 0.51 (0.44-0.47)
     Cephalic index (ratio of head width to height) = 84 (77-80)
     Scape length = 0.47 (0.44-0.45)
     Pronotal width = 0.31 (0.30-0.31)
     Mesosoma length = 0.72 (0.66-0.70)

Despite the larger size, the specimen is not big enough to be M. dictator and differs in the other features mentioned, so it is most likely M. dakarense.

It still remains a bit of a rediscovery. M. dakarense had been collected once in Senegal in 1914, so it's more likely than M. dictator, which had only been collected in Angola. The only specimens that I collected were found on the ground at Madiyana Camp on Jinack Island, and only at night. Since we stayed at Madiyana Camp for a few days it would be surprising if M. dakarense had been active during the day and I had not collected it then, which indicates pretty strongly that it is entirely nocturnal. Perhaps a combination of its nocturnal habits and its small size have meant that it has not been found again until now?

Monomorium sp. A

When I first attempted to identify this ant I decided that it was Monomorium exiguum, though I wasn't exactly convinced. I was using Bolton (1987), though I find the key fairly vague at times, which isn't helped by the fact that the descriptions aren't exactly consistent and many species lack diagrams.

M. exiguum is the last species in the key - okay, so there aren't that many Afrotropical Monomorium with 11 antennal segments, but even so I feel that if you've got to the end of the key and your not convinced, then chances are you are wrong.

Then I discovered that I had collected specimens that were a perfect match for M. exiguum and very different from this species, so it was clear that I was wrong. I went back to the key and decided that the next best fit was Monomorium dolatu, though I was rather less than convinced - the petiole shape and Cephalic Index appeared to be correct, but there were slight differences in the structure of the clypeus.

My trip to the Natural History Museum, London has thrown the latest spanner in the works, as I've now been able to examine specimens that Bolton identified as M. dolatu closely. It's pretty clear that this isn't M. dolatu, as the petiole shape is not near as conical as on that species and it's generally wrong. I was also able to check and eliminate M. pulchrum, M. taedium, M. fastidium and M. vaguum. I have in my collection and was able to confirm M. rosae, M. exiguum and M. mictilis. The only other species that it could remotely be is M. bequaerti, which was not present in the museum collection, but this should have a postpetiole the same size as the petiole, as in M. pulchrum, which my specimen does not have.

Since I've eliminated all Afrotropical species of Monomorium with 11 antennal segments I'm having to call it 'species A' for the moment, at least until I've checked those species occurring elsewhere. This is the second potentially new species of Monomorium I've encountered in as many months - the first I've already established is definitely new.

M. sp. A was collected once, nesting within an Acacia pod, in Kololi. Because this was within our last few hours in Gambia and I had packed everything to leave, they were collected alive. I had to carry the pod, with the ants, back to the hotel in my hand. This involved dodging the bumsters (notorious in The Gambia) and trying to keep the pod safe whilst I had a chat with a charming young Gambian woman, who invited me to a 'club' and I suspected to be a prostitute. Once I made it back to my room I put the pod and the ants in a bag and in my case, where they remained until I got home.

I kept them alive for a few days before realising all I had were a few workers - not worth the effort of keeping long-term. They were also a pain; they proved to have an incredible ability to walk upside down on a smooth surface and vertically across fluon. This, combined with the fact that they tended to wedge themselves into the small gap between container and lid made them very difficult to contain. Given these recorded habits it seems that this species is well adapted to an arboreal lifestyle.

Incidentally, the droplets of liquid are grease. I will have to do something about this soon, whereupon I may upload some fresh photographs.