Ectomomyrmex Mayr
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3817.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A3C10B34-7698-4C4D-94E5-DCF70B475603 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5117608 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03775906-A6C1-2CE2-FF17-FB4A13FAFC17 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe (2021-06-09 21:07:58, last updated 2024-11-28 18:55:35) |
scientific name |
Ectomomyrmex Mayr |
status |
|
Fig. 44 View FIGURE 44
Ectomomyrmex Mayr, 1867: 83 (as genus). Type-species: Ectomomyrmex javanus Mayr, 1867: 84 ; by subsequent designation of Bingham, 1903: 85. Gen. rev.
Ectomyrmex Donisthorpe, 1943b: 641 (incorrect subsequent spelling of Ectomomyrmex ).
Ectomomyrmex is a medium-sized genus (27 described species) restricted to Asia and Australia. They are apparently epigeic generalist predators.
Diagnosis. Ectomomyrmex workers can be identified by the following combination of characters: head, mesosoma and petiole strongly sculptured, head usually prismatic posteriorly, mesopleuron divided by a transverse groove, and petiole with a sweeping posterior face. Ectomomyrmex workers are similar to those of some Ponera species (e.g., P. alpha ), but Ectomomyrmex workers lack an anterior fenestra in the subpetiolar process and have two metatibial spurs and a divided mesopleuron. Ectomomyrmex is also superficially similar to Pachycondyla , but Ectomomyrmex lacks the complex metapleural gland orifice and hypopygial spines of Pachycondyla , and Pachycondyla lacks the prismatic head shape of Ectomomyrmex . Ectomomyrmex is also somewhat similar to Cryptopone and Pseudoponera , but differs from them in having strong sculpturing, larger eyes, no basal mandibular pit, a prismatic head, divided mesopleuron, slit-shaped propodeal spiracles, a sweeping posterior petiolar face, and no traction setae on the mesotibiae. Ectomomyrmex may be confused with Pseudoneoponera or Bothroponera , but Ectomomyrmex lacks the shaggy pilosity and longitudinally striate tergite A3 of Pseudoneoponera , and the large eyes, undivided mesopleuron, and block-like petiole of Bothroponera .
Synoptic description. Worker. Medium to large (TL 5–12.8 mm) ants with the standard characters of Ponerini . Mandibles triangular, with up to 10 teeth on the masticatory margin and often a faint basal groove. Anterior clypeal margin convex, sometimes medially emarginate. Frontal lobes small to moderate in size. Eyes very small to small, located anterior of head midline. Head usually prismatic posteriorly, with distinct angular ridges between dorsal and lateral surfaces. Mesopleuron divided by a transverse groove. Metanotal groove obsolete or reduced to a simple suture. Propodeum broad to narrowed dorsally, with sharp posterior margins. Propodeal spiracles slitshaped. Metapleural gland orifice sometimes with a posterior flange. Metatibial spur formula (1s, 1p). Petiole squamiform to nodiform, the scale usually much wider than long, in dorsal view with a convex anterior face and in lateral view a forward-sweeping posterior face. Gaster with a moderate girdling constriction between pre- and postsclerites of A4. Head, mesosoma and petiole deeply striate, rugoreticulate or punctate, the gaster usually finely punctate but sometimes striate (e.g. in E. acutus ). Head and body with abundant short pilosity and light to dense pubescence. Color black.
Queen. Similar to worker but slightly larger, winged, with ocelli, larger compound eyes, and the usual modifications of the thoracic sclerites ( Ogata, 1987).
Male. See description by Ogata (1987).
Larva. Not described.
Geographic distribution. Ectomomyrmex ranges across most of the Indo-Australian and Australasian regions, from India east to Japan and from northwestern China south to northern Australia ( Brown, 1963).
Ecology and behavior. Very little is known about the habits of Ectomomyrmex . Anecdotal observations, and the moderately small eyes of Ectomomyrmex workers, suggest that their foraging habits are somewhat intermediate between epigeic and hypogeic. They are apparently generalist arthropod predators ( Wilson, 1958c, 1959a), and Ke et al. (2008) observed that workers of E. astutus were particularly fierce predators of termites in an artificial arena. Wilson (1958c) observed E. aciculatus foraging diurnally on the forest floor among and under leaf litter, observed E. exaratus foraging on the forest floor, and reported that E. striatulus forms small colonies (fewer than 100 workers) and nests in rotting logs. Like its close relatives Ponera and Cryptopone , workers of Ectomomyrmex apparently feign death when disturbed ( Wilson, 1958c).
Phylogenetic and taxonomic considerations. Ectomomyrmex was described by Mayr (1867) to hold the species E. javanus and E. sundaicus (now a junior synonym of E. javanus ). Mayr did not designate a type species, but Bingham later (1903) designated E. javanus the type species. Subsequent to its original description, Ectomomyrmex was variously treated as a distinct genus (e.g., Dalla Torre, 1893; Brown, 1963; Ogata, 1987), as a subgenus of Pachycondyla (e.g., Emery, 1901; Wheeler, 1910; Forel, 1917), and eventually as a junior synonym of Pachycondyla ( Brown, 1973, and most subsequent authors; but see Ogata, 1987).
Molecular evidence gives strong support for a sister relationship between Ectomomyrmex and Ponera , and not between Ectomomyrmex and Pachycondyla ( Schmidt, 2013) . A close relationship between Ectomomyrmex and Ponera is also supported by morphology ( Taylor, 1967). P. alpha in particular is quite similar to Ectomomyrmex , and it is possible that these genera are not reciprocally monophyletic.
Bingham, C. T. (1903) The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Hymenoptera, Vol. II. Ants and Cuckoo-wasps. Taylor and Francis, London, 506 pp.
Brown, W. L. Jr. (1963) Characters and synonymies among the genera of ants. Part III. Some members of the tribe Ponerini (Ponerinae, Formicidae). Breviora, 190, 1 - 10.
Brown, W. L. Jr. (1973) A comparison of the Hylean and Congo-West African rain forest ant faunas. In: Meggers, B. J., Ayensu, E. S. & Duckworth, W. D. (Eds.), Tropical forest ecosystems in Africa and South America: a comparative review. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D. C., pp. 161 - 185.
Dalla Torre, K. W. von (1893) Catalogus Hymenopterorum hucusque descriptorum systematicus et synonymicus. Vol. 7. Formicidae (Heterogyna). W. Engelmann, Leipzig, 289 pp.
Donisthorpe, H. (1943 b) A list of the type-species of the genera and subgenera of the Formicidae. [part]. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 11 (10), 617 - 688.
Emery, C. (1901) Notes sur les sous-familles des Dorylines et Ponerines (Famille des Formicides). Annales de la Societe Entomologique de Belgique, 45, 32 - 54.
Forel, A. (1917) Cadre synoptique actuel de la faune universelle des fourmis. Bulletin de la Societe Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles, 51, 229 - 253.
Ke, Y., Zhuang, T., Wang, C., Zhao, S. & Tian, W. (2008) Agonistic behavior of six ant species to Coptotermes formosanus (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) in laboratory assays. Sociobiology, 51 (1), 199 - 206.
Mayr, G. (1867) Adnotationes in monographiam formicidarum Indo-Neerlandicarum. Tijdschrift voor Entomologie, 10, 33 - 117.
Ogata, K. (1987) A generic synopsis of the poneroid complex of the family Formicidae in Japan (Hymenoptera). Part 1. Subfamilies Ponerinae and Cerapachyinae. Esakia, 25, 97 - 132.
Schmidt, C. (2013) Molecular phylogenetics of ponerine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Ponerinae). Zootaxa, 3647 (2), 201 - 250. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3647.2.1
Taylor, R. W. (1967) A monographic revision of the ant genus Ponera Latreille (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pacific Insects Monographs, 13, 1 - 112.
Wheeler, W. M. (1910) Ants: their structure, development and behavior. Columbia University Press, New York, xxv + 663 pp.
Wilson, E. O. (1958 c) Studies on the ant fauna of Melanesia III. Rhytidoponera in western Melanesia and the Moluccas. IV. The tribe Ponerini. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 119, 303 - 371.
Wilson, E. O. (1959 a) Some ecological characteristics of ants in New Guinea rain forests. Ecology, 40 (3), 437 - 447.
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 |
|
SubFamily |
Ponerinae |
Tribe |
Ponerini |
Ectomomyrmex Mayr
Schmidt, C. A. & Shattuck, S. O. 2014 |
Ectomomyrmex
Bingham, C. T. 1903: 85 |
Mayr, G. 1867: 83 |
Mayr, G. 1867: 84 |
1 (by felipe, 2021-06-09 21:07:58)
2 (by ExternalLinkService, 2021-07-20 19:05:53)
3 (by ExternalLinkService, 2021-11-03 00:04:35)
4 (by ExternalLinkService, 2021-11-03 01:41:09)
5 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-08-18 20:25:56)
6 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-08-18 20:40:37)
7 (by plazi, 2023-11-02 21:23:42)
8 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-11-08 22:40:14)
9 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-11-14 00:00:28)