Ctenopyga, Ashmead

Brown, W. L., 1975, Contributions toward a reclassification of the Formicidae. V. Ponerinae, tribes Platythyreini, Cerapachyini, Cylindromyrmecini, Acanthostichini, and Aenictogitini., Search: Agriculture; Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station 15, pp. 1-115 : 42-43

publication ID

6751

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6284642

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6D3D2EEF-C27A-936D-4021-2296D9A1EE77

treatment provided by

Christiana

scientific name

Ctenopyga
status

 

Ctenopyga   HNS

(provisionally restored to generic status)

= Ctenopyga   HNS Ashmead, 1906: 29 - 30, dealate [[ queen ]] and [[ male ]]. Type: Ctenopyga townsendi Ashmead   HNS = Acanthostichus texanus Forel   HNS , by original designation, monobasic.

< Acanthostichus   HNS : Forel, 1904: 168, dealate [[ queen ]]. ----- Brown, 1973: 179. = Acanthostichus   HNS subgenus Ctenopyga   HNS : Emery, 1911: 13. ----- M. R. Smith,

1947, Amer. Midl. Natur. 37: 526, pl. 1, fig. 4, 529, [[ queen ]]. ----- M. R. Smith, 1955: 49 - 50, synonymy and distribution summarized.

I considered this genus to be a straight synonym of Acanthostichus   HNS until a very late stage of the preparation of this part of the Reclassification — so late, in fact, that for very compelling reasons, publication can no longer be delayed while I make the studies of type specimens necessary to fully define Ctenopyga   HNS . Under the circumstances, it might seem better for me to have left things as they stand, with Ctenopyga   HNS , as considered by most workers, either a subgenus or a synonym of Acanthostichus   HNS . Such a solution, after all, would only recall the situation in Sphinctomyrmex   HNS , in which subdichthadiiform queens and winged queens are found in different species of the same genus. In Acanthostichus   HNS , however, we do not know of any intermediate kinds of queens such as we have in Sphinctomyrmex   HNS ; the queens known for 2 of the 6 - 8 valid South American Acanthostichus   HNS species are both subdichthadiiform, while that of the single valid Ctenopyga   HNS species is large-eyed and winged. The geographical distribution of these forms may also be significant; Acanthostichus   HNS is South American, with no known representation west of the Andes, in northern Venezuela, or in Central America. Only 1 species, A. skwarrae   HNS , is known from outside continental South America, and this somewhat aberrant form, from Veracruz, is represented by a single (now headless) worker; it could well belong to Ctenopyga   HNS , and it must at least be considered as doubtfully belonging to Acanthostichus   HNS . For what the negative evidence may be worth, no winged or dealate female " Acanthostichus   HNS " have yet been reported from South or Central America, at light or otherwise.

Evidence from the males is also noteworthy. The Acanthostichus   HNS s. str. males so far reported, all from South America, have distinctive 12 - merous antennae with the funiculus gradually but distinctly broadened from base toward apex; the pedicel is short, and the following segment (funiculus II) is even shorter. The genitalia of these males (at least 3 species examined, none associated with workers or queens) varies among species, but all specimens have a distinctive aedeagus (figs. 140, 141) in which the valves are broad, each coarsely serrate on the convex ventral margin, with the apex differentiated as a last and largest, beaklike, downcurved point, separated from the serrations by a curved emargination. Such males have been taken on numerous occasions at light at widely separated points in South America, but they are unreported from Central or North America.

The 2 males originally described as Ctenopyga townsendi   HNS were collected at La Puerta, presumably in Chihuahua, by C. H. T. Townsend. They came on separate pins, and the dealate queen described with them, from the same locality, was on another pin. So far as I am aware, no males and queens of this species under any name have ever been taken in the nest, in copulo, or in any circumstances that would make it reasonably certain that they belonged to the same species. Apart from locality data, all we have to go on are Ashmead's original assumption that male and queen were conspecific and certain habitus indications that both sexes are " cerapachyine. " With these considerations in mind, I belatedly dissected the terminalia of a syntype male of C. townsendi   HNS , which M. R. Smith (1947, loc. cit. supra) has shown to be a junior synonym of C. texanus   HNS .

To begin with, the C. townsendi   HNS male has a furciform subgenital plate, but the 2 teeth are much broader and more triangular than in the South American Acanthostichus   HNS . The parameres and laciniae are also quite different, but these parts can differ considerably between species in Acanthostichus   HNS . In the valves of the aedeagus comes the big difference; the townsendi   HNS male type has slender aedeagal valves broadened into thick, angularly capitate apices; the stem-like basal parts are smooth, without any sign of serration along their concave ventral edges. The other fact about the C. townsendi   HNS male — a character that seems long to have been lost sight of — is that the antennae have 13 segments, with the funiculus not so distinctly incrassate as in most South American Acanthostichus   HNS . In genitalic and other characters, in fact, the C. townsendi   HNS type looks more like the numerous light-caught males attributed to Cerapachys augustae   HNS by M. R. Smith (1942) and others than like the South American Acanthostichus   HNS . Thus it seems to me that we should face up to the possibility that the assumed male of Ctenopyga texana   HNS (= townsendi   HNS ) is instead the male of some Cerapachys   HNS species. If the assumed male does in fact prove to be the real male of C texana   HNS , then the differences between Acanthostichus   HNS and Ctenopyga   HNS are widened, and generic distinction is made surer than when it is based upon the queen alone.

Much depends on determining what kind of male and queen go with A. skwarrae   HNS , and what kind of worker goes with male and queen C. texanus   HNS . Smith (1955: 48 - 49) mentions an Arizona worker specimen that he did not feel confident in associating with texanus   HNS . This problem may be solved by other material already in collections, since samples from Sonoran North America have been accumulating rapidly in recent years, but if such samples exist, I have not seen them.

Meanwhile, taxonomic logic seems best served by considering Ctenopyga   HNS , with the sole known species texanus   HNS , to be a genus apart from Acanthostichus   HNS . The species skwarrae   HNS could well belong to Ctenopyga   HNS , but in the lack of hard evidence, it remains formally in Acanthostichus   HNS . Thus, Ctenopyga   HNS is left with the single species texanus   HNS (= townsendi   HNS ), for which M. R. Smith (1955) is the appropriate summary reference. Ctenopyga   HNS seems to be centered in the Sonoran zone of Mexico, with extensions into southern Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and eventually, perhaps, southern California. The best assumption is that, like Acanthostichus   HNS , it feeds on termites, but this remains to be checked.

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Hymenoptera

Family

Formicidae

SubFamily

Ponerinae

Tribe

Acanthostichini

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF