Temnothorax hippomenesi, Salata & Demetriou & Georgiadis & Borowiec, 2024
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5434.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7BB35AD7-6AE7-4361-B9EF-520F6C978B14 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10954947 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87DB-FFB8-8429-FF64-5CAEFCCC2244 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Temnothorax hippomenesi |
status |
sp. nov. |
Temnothorax hippomenesi n. sp. ( Figs 23–25 View FIGURES 23, 24 View FIGURE 25 , 63 View FIGURE 63 )
Etymology. Named after mythological Hippomenes [Greek Ιππομένης] who received from Aphrodite three golden apples (according to Ovid from her sacred apple-tree in Tamasus, Cyprus). With these golden apples he distracted Atalanti, won her in a race and married her. We chose the name because of the uniformly yellow color of specimens, without sculpture, resembling a golden, smooth object, like an apple.
Material examined. Holotype: worker (pin) “ CYPRUS, Paphos, 1067 m | Cedar Valley loc. 1 | 34.98837 / 32.67748 | 22 IV 2022, L. Borowiec ” ( MNHW) GoogleMaps . Paratypes (8 workers, pin): 1w, the same data as for holotype ( MNHW) GoogleMaps ; 1w “ CYPRUS, Paphos, 424 m | Agios Neofytou Mon. | 34.84602 / 32.44784 | 29 IV 2022, L. Borowiec ” ( MNHW) GoogleMaps ; 5w “ CYPRUS, Paphos, 171 m | Evretou Dam | 34.96168 / 32.47749 | 21 IV 2022, S. Salata ” ( MNHW) GoogleMaps ; 1w “ CYPRUS, Paphos, 361 m | rd. F612 ad Ag. Konstantinos | 34.73397 / 32.64312 | 28 IV 2022, S. Salata ” ( MNHW) GoogleMaps .
Comparative note. A very distinct species, well characterized by an almost uniformly yellow body except a yellowish-brown band in the posterior half of the first gastral tergite, very small, triangular propodeal spines, and predominantly smooth and shiny head with sculpture limited to gena, few striae along frontal carinae and semicircular striae around frontal cavities. Only Temnothorax satunini (Ruzsky, 1902) , a species known from Armenia, Georgia, and eastern Türkiye, has a similar set of characters, but it differs in shorter petiole (triangular in profile with angulate apex of petiolar node) and slightly stronger and sharper longitudinal rugae running along inner margin of eye. From Cypriot species, the most similar are T. aeolius and T. cypridis , but they differ in partly brown to black antennal club and infuscate gena. Temnothorax aeolius also differs in more rounded petiolar node and shorter erected setae on dorsal mesosoma with mean length 0.045, approximately 0.4 × as long as eye diameter (in T. hippomenesi mean length 0.067, approximately 0.7 × as long as eye diameter). Temnothorax cypridis differs also in larger size with mean HL 0.643 and WL 0.763 (in T. hippomenesi 0.580 and 0.644 respectively), longer antennae with mean SL/HW 0.897 (in T. hippomenesi 0.861) and stronger sculpture on lateral sides of mesosoma with sharp longitudinal rugae.
Description. Worker (n = 8): HL: 0.524 –0.603 (0.580); HW: 0.429 –0.508 (0.468); SL: 0.379 –0.428 (0.402); EL: 0.110 –0.129 (0.122); EW: 0.083 –0.098 (0.093); PNW: 0.304 –0.341 (0.322); WL: 0.605 –0.683 (0.644); PEL: 0.229 –0.283 (0.256); PEH: 0.175 –0.206 (0.190); PPL: 0.151 –0.183 (0.167); PPW: 0.190 –0.224 (0.205); PSL: 0.087 –0.109 (0.097); CI: 1.187 –1.267 (1.240); EI1: 1.202 –1.411 (1.314); EI2: 0.182 –0.242 (0.210); SI1: 0.795 – 0.937 (0.861); SI2: 0.669 –0.767 (0.694); MI: 1.958 –2.048 (1.999); PI: 1.279 –1.389 (1.349); PPI: 1.170 –1.321 (1.231); PSLI: 0.183 –0.226 (0.207).
Color. Almost whole body pale yellow, only posterior ⅓ length of first gastral tergite with yellowish-brown band of diffused borders ( Figs 23, 24 View FIGURES 23, 24 ). Head. Slightly elongate, 1.19–1.27 × as long as wide, sides almost parallel, occipital corners regularly rounded, occipital margin of head straight ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 ). Anterior margin of clypeus distinctly convex, subangulate centrally, with 4–8 short setae, medial notch absent. Eyes moderate, short, oval, approximately 1.3 × as long as wide, 0.2 × as long as head length. Antennal scape short, in lateral view slightly curved, 0.8–0.9 × as long as width of the head, in apex gradually widened with well-marked preapical constriction, its base with angulate dorsal and ventral angle. Funiculus distinctly longer than scape, first segment 1.96 × as long as wide at apex, 4.4 × longer than second segment, segments 2–7 very short, transverse, club large, 1.3 × as long as segments 1–8 combined, last segment of club very elongate, 1.8 × as long as segments 8 and 9 combined ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 ). Surface of scape with fine microreticulation, shiny, covered with thin, moderate dense, basally appressed, apically decumbent setae. Mandibles with thick, sparse, longitudinal striae, shiny, covered with short appressed hairs. Clypeus without keel anteriorly with short longitudinal rugae, posteriorly smooth and shiny. Frons narrow, approximately 0.37 × as wide as head width. Frontal carinae short, slightly extending beyond frontal lobes.Antennal fossa deep, margined with thin circular striae with smooth interspaces. Frontal lobes well-marked placed slightly upwards ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 ). Gena, frons laterally close to eyes, and postocular area with fine striation, stronger in gena, finer posteriorly, with interspaces smooth to diffusely microreticulate but shiny, rest of head surface smooth and shiny, frons centrally with sparse setose punctation. Surface of head without appressed pubescence, frons, vertex and occipital area with erect, pale, long and thick setae, the longest on occipitum 0.6 × as long as eye width ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 ). Mesosoma. Elongate, approximately twice as long as wide, slightly arched in profile, without metanotal groove or impression. Pronotum convex on sides. Dorsum of pronotum with fine longitudinal rugae and diffusely microreticulate interspaces, shiny. In some specimens central part of pronotal dorsum with almost reduced rugae and microreticulation, smooth and shiny. Sides of pronotum microgranulate, without or with rudiments of longitudinal rugae. Dorsum of mesonotum microreticulate with few fine longitudinal rugae or striae, sides of mesonotum only microgranulate. Dorsum of propodeum microreticulate, posterior face microreticulate with few transverse rugae, sides of propodeum predominantly microgranulate without or with few short rugae below spiracle and sharp rugae on metapleural lobe but surface appears shiny. Propodeal spines very short, mean PSL/HW 0.21, in form of triangular tubercle or tooth with subacute to acute apex ( Fig. 24 View FIGURES 23, 24 ). Entire mesosoma bearing erect, pale, long setae, the longest on pronotum almost as long as or slightly longer than eye width ( Fig. 24 View FIGURES 23, 24 ). Petiole. Moderately elongate, mean PEL/PEH 1.35, anterior face shallowly concave, ventral margin anteriorly with sharp spine, node in lateral view rounded with fine and sharp lateral carinae, without or with few short rugae on top, whole surface diffusely microreticulate, appears shiny. Postpetiole. In dorsal view transverse, approximately 1.4 × as wide as petiole, surface diffusely microreticulate without or with few short rugae, appears shiny. Dorsal surface of petiole and postpetiole with long erect setae, as long as setae on pronotum ( Fig. 24 View FIGURES 23, 24 ). Gaster. Smooth and shiny, bearing erect, thin, pale setae almost as long as setae on mesosoma ( Fig. 24 View FIGURES 23, 24 ). Legs. Moderately elongate, femora swollen in the middle, tibiae widened from base to ¾ length, surface of legs covered with extremely sparse, appressed hairs, appears smooth and shiny.
Biological note. A few specimens were shaken off to the entomological umbrella from Pistacia bush close to the shore of a dam, three specimens from Pistacia inside a pine forest, and a single specimen from a bush in a shadow valley close to the monastery. The lowest site was placed at an altitude 171 m, and the highest one was at an altitude of 1067 m.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |