The Ants of Africa
Genus Cerapachys
Cerapachys occipitalis (Bernard)

{Cerapachys occidentalis}

Cerapachys occipitalis (Bernard)

return to key {link to the Hymenoptera Name Server} Type locality Guinea (Phyracaces occipitalis, Bernard, 1952: 216, illustrated, worker); holotype worker only from log mould, Mt. Nimba, Station B6.14, Camp IV, 1000 m, forest, by Lamotte - resurrected here from synonymy with foreli (by Brown, 1975; and in Bolton, 1995); worker only described .

TL 3.9 mm; colour black, shiny, appendages red-brown; head shiny anteriorly but posterior third with 20 strong longitudinal rugae, not reaching as far forward as the eyes. Dorsum of whole thorax and declivity of propodeum with 16 similar rugae. On the petiole these rugae intercross, giving the appearance of elongated dimples. The gastral segments have serrated rows of large round puncturations. Also, fine yellow hairs are less dense than most other species, giving a relatively shining appearance. Head rounded less angular than most other African relatives. Lower border of cheeks limited by an entrenched carina for the whole length, as in foreli (after Bernard, 1952).

Bernard remarked on the poor original description of foreli (from the Ivory Coast by Santschi), and noted that he had not found the foreli holotype in Santchi's collection although it might be in the Silvestri collection. Nevertheless, he felt clear differences could be used to separate the two forms, viz - foreli had an entirely smooth head, with more marked posterior angles; the eyes were bigger, taking up one-third of the head length (here eyes about one-quarter); declivity of propodeum concave (here flat); petiole much less strongly sculpted; base of gastral tergites with transverse striae (here without). Certainly, comparison with the Cerapachys foreli which I examined (and drew as Phyracaces langi) plus the cotype image (from the MCZ, see above) justifies Bernard's decision to define a new species (I suspect that Brown, 1975: 56, as with others of his revisions, paid insufficient attention to Bernard's descriptions). Brown (1975) wrote of it as "very crudely described and figured by Bernard".

Contents
© 2007 - Brian Taylor CBiol FIBiol FRES
11, Grazingfield, Wilford, Nottingham, NG11 7FN, U.K.

href="cerapachys_occipitalis.htm"