Anochetus gladiator

Brown, WL Jr.,, 1978, Contributions toward a reclassification of the Formicidae. Part VI. Ponerinae, tribe Ponerini, subtribe Odontomachiti. Section B. Genus Anochetus and bibliography., Studia Entomologica 20, pp. 549-638 : 574-575

[1] Anochetus gladiator

The nomenclature of A. gladiator has caused trouble since Frederick Smith confused it with his Odontomachus tyrannicus in 1862 (not 1859). He apparently noticed the mistake early, and labeled certain of his specimens as O. gladiator , including some later sent to other collections. Mayr and Roger evidently had such specimens, and Mayr (1862: 712) listed " S. gladiator Smith " as one of the two included species in his then new genus Stenomyrmex , remarking of it, "Von Herrn Smith in meiner Sammlung aus Mysol in Australasien".

In 1863, Roger listed in his catalog (p. 21) an Odontomachus smithii as a replacement name for the O. tyrannicus of Smith 1862, not 1859, and in the same year, Mayr (1863: 454) published a brief but formal description of Stenomyrmex gladiator "Sm. in litt." from Mysol. I have expended much effort trying to find out which of the two 1863 papers, both synonymic lists of the ants described up to that time, was published first during that year, Roger’s or Mayr’s. Dr. Max Fischer of the Naturhistorisches Museum in Vienna has also gone to some trouble on my accqunt to try to determine the exact dates of these papers. The results of our researches, without going into the tiresome details (mostly evidence internal to the articles themselves and the volumes in which they were published) were not conclusive, although it seems most likely that Roger’s paper appeared first. If this were true, we would have Odontomachus smithii as the prior name for the species, which would be unfortunate, because the name gladiator has much more frequently been applied to it.

Happily, a rereading of the 1862 reference of Mayr now reveals a solution to the problem that will allow us to reserve priority for the name gladiator . Although Mayr himself, as well as later authors, regarded the 1862 Stenomyrmex gladiator as without a description, and therefore a nomen nudum, the context of that entry can reasonably be held to furnish descriptive material that applies unequivocally to the S. gladiator combination. On page 711 of Mayr’s 1862 paper appears the beginning of the diagnosis of his " Stenomyrmex n.g. ". This continues on the top of page 712; the diagnosis concludes, "Das Stielchen trägt einen dicken oder dünnen Kegel, der oben in einen Dorn endet oder Zweizähnig ist". Mayr includes only two species in his genus: S. emarginatus and S. gladiator . It is clear that the generic diagnosis applies to both species except for the part about the petiole; 5. emarginatus has the «zweizähnig» node, and the node of S. gladiator (fig. 27) is the one ending in the «Dorn». This, then, is the original description, and Mayr is the author of the species.

Donisthorpe (1932: 467) named this species again, but fortunately he used the label name gladiator that he found on Smith’s (British Museum) specimen, so the name falls harmlessly as both a synonym and a homonym.

Smith originally had samples collected by Wallace in northern Celebes and on the island of Mysol. I collected this striking species again in northern Celebes in wet forest on the lower slopes of Mt. Klabat. The nest contained approximately 50 workers and was made in a rotten stump at about 500 m elevation. Another small colony came from a rotten branch lying on the forest floor of a steep slope at Silea, 28 km west of Kendari, southeastern Celebes.