Camponotus, Mayr, 1861

Dhadwal, Tarun & Bharti, Himender, 2023, Two new species of the genus Camponotus Mayr, 1861 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) with five new records from India, European Journal of Taxonomy 901 (1), pp. 1-51 : 32-48

Identification key to the known species of genus Camponotus from India based on the worker caste

1. Mesosoma viewed from the side forming a regular arch without interruption by propodeum ( Fig. 19A ) ......................................................................................................................................... 2

– Mesosoma viewed from the side interrupted by the propodeum, not forming a regular arch ( Fig. 19B– D ) .................................................................................................................................................... 53

2. Head with lateral and ventral setae abundant, long and suberect, providing a ‘bearded’ appeareance ( Fig. 20A ) ......................................................................................................................................... 3

– Head with lateral and ventral setae absent to short, and never abundant ( Fig. 20B ) ........................ 4

3. Head subtriangular with a shallowly concave posterior margin, body uniformly jet-black ( Fig. 21A ) ........................................................................ C. parabarbatus Bharti & Wachkoo, 2014

– Head subrectangular, with gently convex posterior margin, body red brown in color ( Fig. 21B ) ..... ...................................................................................................................... C. barbatus Roger, 1863

4. Metatibia spined beneath .................................................................................................................. 5

– Metatibia without spined beneath ................................................................................................... 27

5. Head, mesosoma and gaster concealed with sericeous pubescence or erect hairs ( Fig. 22 ) ............ 6

– Head, mesosoma and gaster lacking pubescence ( Fig. 22B ) ....................... C. dolendus Forel, 1892

6. Gaster completely covered with sericeous pubescence ( Fig. 23A ) .................................................. 7

– Gaster not covered with sericeous pubescence, but with either erect or decumbent setae ( Fig. 23B ) ......................................................................................................................................................... 12

7. Clypeus with a median lobe produced anteriorly ( Fig. 24A ) ........................................................... 8

– Clypeus lacking a median lobe ( Fig. 24B ) .................................................... C. mendax Forel, 1895

8. Clypeal lobe anteriorly transverse .................................................................................................... 9

– Clypeal lobe anteriorly emarginated medially ................................................................................ 10

9. Body with grey pubescence ( Fig. 25A ) ..................................................... C. binghamii Forel, 1894

– Body with yellow pubescence ( Fig. 25B ) ....................................................... C. parius Emery, 1889

10. Petiolar node thin, slightly convex anteriorly and flat posteriorly ...................................................11

– Petiolar node thick and strongly convex anteriorly ..................... C. rufoglaucus tenuis Forel, 1907

11. Mesosoma smooth; gaster black with a green ash-grey strip in the middle ....................................... ......................................................................................................... C. cinerascens (Fabricius, 1787)

– Mesosoma finely microreticulate; gaster reddish brown with no ash-grey strip in middle ................ ............................................................................................................ C. rufoglaucus (Jerdon, 1851)

12. Gaster is covered in long, reclining yellowish setae ( Fig. 26A ) ..................................................... 13

– Gaster with short, sparse erect setae ( Fig. 26B ) ............................................................................. 14

13. Pronotum angled anterolaterally; head with triangular shape widest occipitally ( Fig. 27A–B ) ......... .......................................................................................................... C. fulvopilosus (De Geer, 1778)

– Pronotum rounded anterolaterally; head with rectangular shape, widest at the middle ( Fig. 27C–D ) ..................................................................................................................... C. japonicus Mayr, 1866

14. Pronotum tightly constricted in the front, forming a neck ( Fig. 28A ) ............................................ 15

– Pronotum not tightly constricted in front, not forming a neck ( Fig. 28B ) ...................................... 17

15. Anterior margin of clypeus transverse and dentate ........................................................................ 16

– Anterior margin of clypeus convex and feebly dentate .... C. ashokai Karmaly & Narenderan, 2006

16. Head as long as broad with lateral sides converging anteriorly ( Fig. 29A ) ........................................ ............................................................................................................ C. angusticollis (Jerdon, 1851)

– Head distinctly longer than broad with lateral sides parallel ( Fig. 29B ) ............................................ ...................................................................................... C. angusticollis sanguinolentus Forel, 1895

17. Head, mesosoma and gaster black .................................................. C. compressus (Fabricius, 1787)

– Head, mesosoma and gaster never all black ................................................................................... 18

18. Scape flat .................................................................................... C. misturus fornaronis Forel, 1892

– Scape cylindrical ............................................................................................................................. 19

19. Metatibia compressed ( Fig. 30A ) ................................................................................................... 20

– Metatibia cylindrical ( Fig. 30B ) ..................................................................................................... 26

20. Body unicoloured, castaneous red in colour ................................................................................... 21

– Head and gaster black or castaneous red, mesosoma varying from yellow to brown in colour ......... 22

21. In major worker body length over 15 mm and in minor worker body length over 10 mm ................ ..................................................................................................................... C. festinus (Smith, 1857)

– In major worker, body length not over than 8 mm; in minor worker body length 5 mm ................... ................................................................................................................... C. arrogans (Smith, 1858)

22. Median lobe of clypeus long and rectangular ( Fig. 31A ) ............................................................... 23

– Median lobe of clypeus short and round ( Fig. 31B ) ....................................................................... 25

23. Head, mesosoma and legs ferruginous-red to reddish-brown; gaster reddish-brown or blackishbrown ............................................................................................. C. sylvaticus basalis Smith, 1878

– Head black; mesosoma, gaster and legs partly yellow brown ........................................................ 24

24. Head much broader posteriorly than anteriorly, petiole node thin in profile and convex anteriorly .. ............................................................................................ C. sylvaticus paradichrous Emery, 1925

– Head as broad posteriorly as anteriorly, petiole node remarkably thick and convex anteriorly ......... ................................................................................................................. C. kattensis Bingham, 1903

25. Head and mesosoma reddish brown with gaster black; occipital margin widely emarginated in major workers ....................................................................................................... C. irritans (Smith, 1857)

– Head and mesosoma yellowish brown with gaster somewhat dark in colour; occipital margin feebly emarginated in major workers ........................................................ C. irritans carensis Emery, 1920

26. Head and mesosoma finely sculptured, shiny ( Fig. 32A ) ........................ C. oblongus (Smith, 1858)

– Head and mesosoma coarsely reticulate-punctate, matte ( Fig. 32B ) .................................................. ................................................................................................. C. oblongus binominatus Forel, 1916

27. Tibiae covered with long erect setae ............................................................. C. buddhae Forel, 1892

– Tibiae covered with very widely spaced, adpressed setae .............................................................. 28

28. Head, mesosoma and gaster unicoloured, black ............................................................................. 29

– Head, mesosoma and gaster bicoloured, never all black ................................................................ 31

29. Petiole node thick in profile, trapezoidal with rounded top ( Fig. 33A ) .............................................. .............................................................................................................. C. crassisquamis Forel, 1902

– Petiole node is thin in profile and tapered towards the top ( Fig. 33B ) ........................................... 30

30. Clypeus vertically carinate, tibiae prismatic ( Fig. 34A ) .............................. C. lamarckii Forel, 1892

– Clypeus not vertically carinate, tibiae cylindrical ( Fig. 34B ) ............................ C. sholensis sp. nov.

31. Mesosoma strongly convex anteriorly, forming a high shouldered look to the body ......................... ......................................................................................................................... C. invidus Forel, 1892

– Mesosoma moderately convex ....................................................................................................... 32

32. Tibiae cylindrical ............................................................................................................................ 33

– Tibiae compressed .......................................................................................................................... 40

33. Median lobe of clypeus anteriorly convex .............................................. C. wroughtonii Forel, 1893

– Median lobe of clypeus anteriorly transverse, straight ................................................................... 34

34. Head triangular, lateral occipital angles prominent ( Fig. 35A ); legs covered with sparse decumbent hairs ................................................................................................................................................. 35

– Head subtriangular, lateral occipital angles not prominent ( Fig. 35B ); legs covered with dense recumbent hairs ............................................................................................................................... 36

35. Head, mesosoma and gaster dark brown or black ...................... C. variegatus infuscus Forel, 1892

– Head, mesosoma and gaster entirely pale yellowish in colour ........................................................... ................................................................................................ C. variegatus dulcis Dalla Torre, 1893

36. Major worker: length under 8 mm, minor worker under 6 mm ...................................................... 37

– Major worker: length over 8 mm, minor worker: over 6 mm ........................................................ 38

37. Gaster without yellow spots on first and second abdominal tergites ( Fig. 36A ) ................................ ........................................................................................................... C. barbatus taylori Forel, 1892

– Gaster with yellow spots on first and second abdominal tergites ( Fig. 36B ) ..................................... ............................................................................................................ C. albosparsus Bingham, 1903

38. Node of petiole thick in profile and biconvex in shape .................................................................. 39

– Node of petiole thin in profile, convex anteriorly and flat posteriorly ............................................... ................................................................................................. C. variegatus somnificus Forel, 1902

39. Clypeus tectiform with short median lobe; mesosoma generally yellowish red, head and gaster brownish in colour ( Fig. 37A ) ............................................................... C. variegatus (Smith, 1858)

– Clypeus subcarinate without median lobe; mesosoma generally black, head and mesosoma brownish black ( Fig. 37B ) ....................................................................... C. variegatus bacchus (Smith, 1858)

40. Head, mesosoma and gaster finely rugulose and matte .................................................................. 41

– Head, mesosoma and gaster sparsely punctured, shining not matte ............................................... 45

41. Petiole node thick in profile, oval anteriorly convex and flat posteriorly ..... C. sklarus Bolton, 1995

– Petiole node thin slightly, rounded above, convex anteriorly and concave posteriorly .................. 42

42. Mandibles with 7 teeth, body covered with dense long pilosity ( Fig. 38A ) ................................... 43

– Mandibles with 5 teeth, body with sparse long pilosity ( Fig. 38B ) ................................................ 44

43. Clypeus weakly carinate and clypeal lobe anteriorly convex ( Fig. 39A ) ........................................... ................................................................................................................ C. nicobarensis Mayr, 1865

– Clypeus distinctly carinate and clypeal lobe anteriorly transverse ( Fig. 39B ) ................................... ............................................................................................................. C. exiguoguttatus Forel, 1886

44. Petiole nodiform; In dorsal view first and second gastral tergite with two white bands; half of coxal margin, trochanter and distal margin of femur with white bands ( Fig. 40A ) .... Camponotus sp. 101

– Petiole scale like; In dorsal view, whole gaster with black and yellowish alternate bands; half of coxal margin, trochanter and distal margin of femur without white bands ( Fig. 40B ) ....................... ....................................................................................................................... C. habereri Forel, 1911

45. Unicolored, head, mesosoma and gaster dark castaneous brown ................................................... 46

– Bicoloured, head and gaster fuscous brown, mesosoma variable from yellow-brown to dark brown ......................................................................................................................................................... 48

46. Pronotum longer than mesonotum, strongly constricted anteriorly forming a distinct neck ( Fig. 41A ) ......................................................................................................... C. carin Emery, 1889

– Pronotum almost equal in length to mesonotum, only slightly constricted in front not forming a distinct neck ( Fig. 41B ) .................................................................................................................. 47

47. Meso-metanotal suture indistinct ...................................................................... C. thraso Forel, 1893

– Meso-metanotal suture distinct ....................................... C. keralensis Karmaly & Narendran, 2006

48. Distance between frontal carinae equal to the distance between eyes and frontal carinae ( Fig. 42A ) ......................................................................................................................................................... 49

– Distance between frontal carinae distinctly greater than the distance between eyes and frontal carinae ( Fig. 42B ) ...................................................................................... C. irritans pallidus (Smith, 1857)

49. Coxae and base of femora yellow, without any trace of brown .......................................................... ....................................................................................... C. variegatus fuscithorax Dalla Torre, 1893

– Coxae and base of femora yellowish brown ................................................................................... 50

50. Body covered with erect dense pubescence, node of petiole thin and scale like ( Fig. 43A ) .......... 51

– Body covered with sparse erect pubescence, node of petiole thick and bluntly rounded in shape ( Fig. 43B ) ................................................................................................ C. meghalayaensis sp. nov.

51. Head distinctly longer than wide with parallel lateral sides and mandibles with 6 teeth ( Fig. 44A ) ........................................................................................................................ C. simoni Emery, 1893

– Head subtriangular, longer than wide with arched lateral sides and mandibles with 7 teeth ( Fig. 44B ) ........................................................................................................................................ 52

52. Eyes large, placed up in position to the median line of the head ............... C. timidus (Jerdon, 1851)

– Eyes small, frontal rather than lateral .............................................................. C. mitis (Smith, 1858)

53. The propodeum not elevated above metanotum, forming a continous line ( Fig. 45A ) .................. 54

– The propodeum is raised gibbous or forms an angle with the mesonotum, interrupting the regular arch of the mesosoma ( Fig. 45B ) .................................................................................................... 63

54. Clypeus anteriorly emarginated in the middle ( Fig. 46A ) .............................................................. 55

– Clypeus anteriorly not emarginated in the middle ( Fig. 46B ) ........................................................ 56

55. Head, mesosoma and gaster covered with long erect or suberect hair ( Fig. 47A ) ............................. ................................................................................................................... C. rufifemur Emery, 1900

– Body with very short and very sparse appressed pubescence ( Fig. 47B ) ........................................... ................................................................................................................ C. himalayanus Forel, 1893

56. Scape flattened ............................................................................................... C. radiates Forel, 1892

– Scape cylindrical ............................................................................................................................. 57

57. Larger species, with a body length of more than 10 mm in major worker and 7 mm in minor worker ............................................................................................................................................. 58

– Smaller species, with body length less than 7 mm, even in major workers ................................... 60

58. Clypeus broad and slightly tectiform, with a transverse anterior edge ........................................... 59

– Clypeus subcarinate, trapeziform and with a subcrenulate anterior border ........................................ ........................................................................................................................ C. socrates Forel, 1904

59. Body with abundant brown or yellow pilosity, especially in head and gaster ( Fig. 48A ) .................. .............................................................................................. C. aethiops cachmiriensis Emery, 1925 – Body with a few grey scattered hairs ( Fig. 48B ) ......................................... C. siemsseni Forel, 1901

60. Head, mesosoma and gaster black .................................................................................................. 61

– Head, mesosoma and gaster reddish brown .................................................................................... 62

61. Mesosomal dorsum and petiole without standing hairs; metanotal depression distinct ..................... ......................................................................................................................... C. keihitoi Forel, 1913

– Mesosomal dorsum and petiole with standing hairs; metanotal depression absent ............................ .............................................................................................................. C. quadrinotatus Forel, 1886

62. Head longer than broad, subtruncate anteriorly and occipital margin transverse; mandibles large ... ....................................................................................................... C. reticulatus latitans Forel, 1893

– Head as long as broad, not subtruncate anteriorly, occipital margin round; mandibles small ............ ............................................................................................................... C. indeflexus (Walker, 1859)

63. Propodeum elevated, rounded above and gibbous ( Fig. 49A ) ........................................................ 64

– Propodeum forming an angle with the mesonotum at the meso-metanotal suture; basal portion of propodeum horizontal, flat, or slightly concave; apical portion excavate ( Fig. 49B ) .................... 69

64. Humeri angulated ( Fig. 50A ) .......................................................................................................... 65

– Humeri rounded ( Fig. 50B ) ............................................................................................................ 66

65. Body completely black ( Fig. 51A ) .......................................................... C. wasmanni Emery, 1893

– Head black, mesosoma, petiole and first gastral tergite reddish in colour ( Fig. 51B ) ........................ .................................................................................................................. C. mutilarius Emery, 1893

66. Body length above 9 mm ................................................................................................................ 67

– Body length below 9 mm ............................................................................... C. confucii Forel, 1894

67. Mesosoma and petiole finely reticulate punctate and rugulose ( Fig. 52A ) .................................... 68

– Mesosoma and petiole coarsely punctured ( Fig. 52B ) ......................... C. holosericeus Emery, 1889

68. Bicoloured, head blood-red; mesosoma, petiole and gaster blackish in colour .................................. ................................................................................................................. C. singularis (Smith, 1858)

– Unicoloured, head, mesosoma, petiole and gaster dark blackish ........... C. camelinus (Smith, 1857)

69. Hind tibia spined beneath ............................................................................................................... 70

– Hind tibia without spined benath .................................................................................................... 74

70. Clypeus tectiform ( Fig. 53A ) ......................................................................... C. varians Roger, 1863

– Clypeus convex ( Fig. 53B ) ............................................................................................................. 71

71. Petiole rounded and knob like, body black ( Fig. 54A ) ................................................................... 72

– Petiole scale like with narrow apex, anterior surface slightly concave and sloping, posterior surface upright, body reddish ( Fig. 54B ) ...................................................... C. puniceps Donisthorpe, 1942

72. Body covered with dense pubescence, sculpture not distinct ......................................................... 73

– Body without dense pubescence, sculpture distinct ............................... C. opaciventris Mayr, 1879

73. Head, mesosoma without pubescence and gaster covered with dense golden pubescence ( Fig. 55A ) ............................................................................................................... C. sericeus (Fabricius, 1798)

– Head, mesosoma and gaster covered with dense greyish pubescence ( Fig. 55B ) .............................. ..................................................................................................... C. sericeus peguensis Emery, 1895

74. Propodeum with a pair of lamellate spines; dorsal surface transversely grooved ( Fig. 56A ) ........ 75

– Propodeum without spines; dorsal surface of petiole is smooth ( Fig. 56B ) ................................... 76

75. Petiole dorsally transversely grooved; head and mesosoma densely reticulate punctate and matte ....................................................................................................................... C. selene (Emery, 1889)

– Petiole with obtuse tip, not grooved; head and mesosoma densely punctuated not matte ................. ...................................................................................................... C. selene obtusatus ( Emery, 1895)

76. Petiole emarginated above; body entirely black ( Fig. 57A ) ............................................................... ................................................................................. C. horseshoetus Datta & Ray Chaudhury, 1985

– Petiole rounded above; head and mesosoma reddish, gaster somewhat dark ( Fig. 57B ) ............... 77

77. Mandibles triangular; clypeus is large and convex with anterior border rounded medially and sinuate at sides ................................................................................................... C. varius Donisthorpe, 1943

– Mandibles sub triangular; clypeus sub truncate anteriorly and anterolateral corners broadly rounded ........................................................................................................ C. nirvanae Forel, 1893

Note

Camponotus gretae Forel, 1902 and Camponotus luteus (Smith, 1858) are excluded from the key as their description is based on reproductive caste. Camponotus velox (Jerdon, 1851) is not included in the key because the identity of this taxon is obscure.

Figures

Fig. 19. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus arrogans (Smith, 1858). B. Camponotus socrates Forel, 1904. C. Camponotus holosericeus Forel, 1889. D. Camponotus selene (Forel, 1889). Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 20. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus parabarbatus Bharti & Wachkoo, 2014. B. Camponotus dolendus Forel, 1892. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 21. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus parabarbatus Bharti & Wachkoo, 2014. B. Camponotus barbatus Roger, 1863. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 22. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus rufoglaucus (Jerdon, 1851). B. Camponotus dolendus Forel, 1892. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 2 mm.

Fig. 23. Gaster in lateral view. A. Camponotus parius Forel, 1889. B. Camponotus japonicus Mayr, 1866. Scale bars: A = 0.5 mm; B = 1 mm.

Fig. 24. Clypeus in full face view. A. Camponotus rufoglaucus (Jerdon, 1851). B. Camponotus mendax Forel, 1895. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 25. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus binghamii Forel, 1894. B. Camponotus parius Forel, 1889. Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 26. Gaster in lateral view. A. Camponotus japonicus Mayr, 1866. B. Camponotus angusticollis (Jerdon, 1851). Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 2 mm.

Fig. 27. Pronotum and head in full face view. A–B. Camponotus fulvopilosus (De Geer, 1778). C–D. Camponotus japonicus Mayr, 1866. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 28. Pronotum. A. Camponotus angusticollis (Jerdon, 1851). B. Camponotus compressus (Fabricius, 1787). Scale bars: A = 2 mm; B = 1 mm.

Fig. 29. Head in full face view.A. Camponotus angusticollis (Jerdon, 1851).B. Camponotus angusticollis sanguinolentus Forel, 1895. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 30. Tibia. A. Camponotus arrogans (Smith, 1858). B. Camponotus buddhae Forel, 1892. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 31. Clypeus in full face view. A. Camponotus sylvaticus basalis Smith, 1878. B. Camponotus irritans (Smith, 1857). Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 32. Head and mesosoma. A. Camponotus oblongus (Smith, 1858). B. Camponotus oblongus binominatus Forel, 1916. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 33. Petiole in lateral view. A. Camponotus crassisquamis Forel, 1902. B. Camponotus lamarckii Forel, 1892. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 34. Clypeus in full face view. A. Camponotus lamarckii Forel, 1892. B. Camponotus sholensis sp. nov. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 35. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus variegatus infuscus Forel, 1892. B. Camponotus barbatus taylori Forel, 1892. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 36. Gaster in dorsal view.A. Camponotus barbatus taylori Forel, 1892.B. Camponotus albosparsus Bingham, 1903. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; b = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 37. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus variegatus (Smith, 1858). B. Camponotus variegatus bacchus (Smith, 1858). Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 38. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus nicobarensis Mayr, 1865. B. Camponotus exiguoguttatus Forel, 1886. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 39. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus nicobarensis Mayr, 1865. B. Camponotus exiguoguttatus Forel, 1886. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 40. Gaster in dorsal view. A. Camponotus sp. 101. B. Camponotus habereri Forel, 1911. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 41. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. Camponotus carin Forel, 1889. B. Camponotus thraso Forel, 1893. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 42. Medianportion of head.A. Camponotus variegatus fuscithorax DallaTorre, 1893.B. Camponotus irritans pallidus (Smith, 1857). Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 43. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus mitis (Smith, 1858). B. Camponotus meghalayaensis sp. nov. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 2 mm.

Fig. 44. Head in full face view. A. Camponotus simoni Forel, 1893. B. Camponotus mitis (Smith, 1858). Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 45. Mesosoma in profile view. A. Camponotus socrates Forel, 1904. B. Camponotus opaciventris Mayr, 1879. C. Camponotus mutilarius Forel, 1893. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 46. Clypeus. A. Camponotus himalayanus Forel, 1893. B. Camponotus socrates Forel, 1904. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 47. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus rufifemur Forel, 1900. B. Camponotus himalayanus Forel, 1893. Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 48. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus aethiops cachmiriensis Forel, 1925. B. Camponotus siemsseni Forel, 1901. Not to scale.

Fig. 49. Mesosoma in profile view. A. Camponotus mutilarius Forel, 1893. B. Camponotus opaciventris Mayr, 1879. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 50. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. Camponotus wasmanni Forel, 1893. B. Camponotus confucii Forel, 1894. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 51. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus wasmanni Forel, 1893. B. Camponotus mutilarius Forel, 1893. Not to scale.

Fig. 52. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus camelinus (Smith, 1857). B. Camponotus holosericeus Forel, 1889. Scale bars = 2 mm.

Fig. 53. Clypeus. A. Camponotus varians Roge, 1863. B. Camponotus puniceps Donisthorpe, 1942. Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 54. Petiole in lateral view. A. Camponotus sericeus (Fabricius, 1798). B. Camponotus puniceps Donisthorpe, 1942. Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 55. Body in profile view. A. Camponotus sericeus (Fabricius, 1798). B. Camponotus sericeus peguensis Forel, 1895. Scale bars: A = 2 mm; B = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 56. Propodeum in dorsal view. A. Camponotus selene (Forel, 1889). B. Camponotus nirvanae Forel, 1893. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 57. Body in dorsal view.A. Camponotus horseshoetus Datta & Ray Chaudhury, 1985.B. Camponotus nirvanae Forel, 1893. Scale bars = 1 mm.