Cyphomyrmex flavidus Pergande
publication ID |
13137 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6281625 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E2BB46CC-A049-3C6B-F90F-F1046B3D32E8 |
treatment provided by |
Christiana |
scientific name |
Cyphomyrmex flavidus Pergande |
status |
|
Cyphomyrmex flavidus Pergande View in CoL HNS
(Figs 30.23, 30.31)
Cyphomyrmex flavidus Pergande HNS , 1896: 895; [[worker]]
Cyphomyrmex rimosus dentatus Forel HNS , 1901: 124-5; [[worker]]. NEW SYNONYMY.
Cyphomyrmex rimosus dentatus HNS : Wheeler, 1907: 722-3; [[worker]], [[queen]]
Cyphomyrmex flavidus HNS : Wheeler, 1907: 726-7; 9. Kempf, 1966:172.
Cyphomyrmex dentatus HNS : Kempf, 1966:164, 184-6; Figs 8, 21, 31,46; [[worker]], [[queen]]
Pergande (1896) described C. flavidus HNS from seven worker specimens collected by Eisen and Vaslit at Santiago Ixtcuintla, near Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico. He compared this new species with C. kirbyi Mayr HNS and C. morschi Emery HNS . Three of the original seven cotypes are in the USNM; the remaining four have not been accounted for. Wheeler (1907) received one from Pergande, which may be in the AMNH; it was not located at MCZ in October, 1983.
Forel's (1901) C. rimosus dentatus HNS was also described from Mexican specimens, collected by Wheeler at Cuernavaca, Morelos. This form was compared only with C. rimosus HNS ; several cotypes are in the MCZ collections.
When Wheeler,1907: treated the North American fungusgrowing ants, he had available to him cotypes of both of these names. It is curious that he failed to recognize their co-identitv. He redescribed C. flavidus HNS from the cotype, compared it with C. wheeleri HNS , and asserted it to be '. .. intermediate in several respects between wheeleri HNS and rimosus HNS ...'
It may be that Wheeler's comparison of C. flavidus HNS with C. wheeleri HNS led Kempf (1966) to conclude that C. flavidus HNS is 'rather close to wheeleri HNS , with the same reticulate-punctate integument'. This, in fact is not true and in particular, the surface of the antennal scrobe is opaque and microgranulose, not at all shiny and reticulate as in C. wheeleri HNS . Also, unlike C. wheeleri HNS , the preocular carina is curved mesally in front of the eye. These two features, plus the absence of the mid-pronotal tubercles and the dilated and ventrally carinate metafemur, would place C. flavidus HNS in the dentatus HNS subgroup of the rimosus HNS group.
In Kempf s (1966) key to the species of the rimosus HNS group, the cotypes of C. flavidus HNS run directly and unequivocally to C. dentatus HNS . They match the figures and description supplied by Kempf, and agree with the cotypes of C. rimosus dentatus HNS in the MCZ collection. There is no doubt that the two are conspecific.
Of the three cotypes of C. flavidus HNS from the US N M, one bears a label, in Pergande's handwriting: ' Cyphomyromex flavidus HNS ( n. sp.) Type [lower left] and Perg. [lower right]'. This specimen has been marked Lectotype. The two remaining specimens are paralectotypes; one has been returned to the USNM and one is in the LACM.
In addition to specimens from Cuernavaca and Santiago Ixtcuintla. We have seen the following additional records. mexico: Cocula, Jalisco, Nov. 1923 (W.M. Mann; USNM); Estacion Biologia 'Chamela', Jalisco, 18 June 1984 (D. H. Feener; LACM); 75 km S. Culiacan, Sinaloa, 28 Aug. 1959 (L. A. Stange and A. S. Menke; LACM); Alamos, Sonora, 13 July 1976 (A. Mintzer; LACM). united states: Arizona, Tempe, Maricopa Co., 11 Nov. 1932 (Murphree; USNM:; Headquarters, 1600 ft elev., Organpipe Cactus National Monument, Pima Co., 1 Nov. 1952 (W.S. Creighton; LACM, Bloxton, Santa Cruz Co., 23 Sept. 1923 (W. M. Mann; USNM California: Indian Pass Rd., 500 ft elev., 7 mile E. Ogilbv Rd., Imperial Co., 7 May 1978 (R. R. Snelling and C. D. George. RRS No. 78-44; LACM), from midden of dolichoderine ant. Forelius foetidus HNS (Buckley), on hillside cactus scrub.
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 |