Incertogaster Boudinot, 2024

Boudinot, Brendon E., Bock, Bernhard L., Weingardt, Michael, Troeger, Daniel, Batelka, Jan, LI, Di, Richter, Adrian, Pohl, Hans, Moosdorf, Olivia T. D., Jandausch, Kenny, Hammel, Joerg U. & Beutel, Rolf G., 2024, Et latet et lucet: Discoveries from the Phyletisches Museum amber and copal collection in Jena, Germany, Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 71 (1), pp. 111-176 : 111

Genus † Incertogaster Boudinot gen. nov.

Type species.

† Inc. primitiva (Radchenko & Dlussky, 2019), by original designation.

Note.

Incertae sedis in Myrmicinae .

3.3.2.4.2. Genus Pheidole Westwood, 1839

Amber/copal species: Identifiable to species:

A. Mexican amber [Miocene, 23.0-16.0 Mya].

1. † Ph. pauchil Varela-Hernández & Riquelme, 2021. [w].

B. Dominican amber [Miocene, 20.4-13.8 Mya].

2. † Ph. anticua Casadei-Ferreira et al., 2019. [w].

3. † Ph. primigenia Baroni Urbani, 1995. [w].

4. † Ph. tethepa Wilson, 1985. [w]. [see Wilson 1985a].

C. East African copal sensu lato [Holocene, <36 Kya ( Solórzano-Kraemer et al. 2020)].

5. ‡ Ph. rasnitsyni Dubovikoff, 2011. [w]. [Note 1].

D. East African copal or Defaunation resin [Holocene, <36 Kya ( Solórzano-Kraemer et al. 2020)].

6. ‡ Ph. cordata (Holl, 1829). [w, s]. [Note 2].

= † Formica cordata Holl, 1829.

• Neotype here designated (specimen Pa 5889).

Compression fossil species: Species inquirenda.

E. Florissant formation [USA, Colorado; Eocene, 37.9-33.9 Mya].

(1.) † Ph. tertiaria Carpenter, 1930. [q]. [Note 3].

Note 1. Similar to the recent description of a Dorylus from putative Baltic amber (see section 4.2.1), the species ‡ Ph. rasnitsyni was initially interpreted as an Eocene fossil ( Dubovikoff 2011) but later reidentified as copal based on reevaluation of the material (Dubovikoff pers. comm. in Perkovsky 2016).

Note 2. We designate one soldier (= major) from the PMJ Pa collection (PMJ Pa 5889, copal, 14C-dated: ~700 years old) as the neotype of the ‡ Ph. cordata , and tentatively associate a minor worker (PMJ Pa 5827) with this name although we do not recognize this as a secondary type. See section 3.3.2.6.1 for elaboration and Casadei-Ferreira et al. (2019) for a recent review of this taxon.

Note 3. Given the single photograph available for this species, which is otherwise reported from two specimens ( Carpenter 1930), we consider † Ph. tertiaria in need of revised study, and strongly recommend against its use in divergence dating analysis until definitive synapomorphies of Pheidole may be documented. Most notably would be the occurrence of cross vein 2rs-m, which encloses the second submarginal cell and is otherwise absent from other Myrmicinae with the exception of various Myrmicini and Pogonomyrmecini .

3.3.2.4.2.1. Pheidole taxon treatment