Treatment:nomenclature
Discothyrea berlita Fisher, sp. nov.[p] Fig. 1–4.
materials_examined
[p]TYPE MATERIAL.— HOLOTYPE: Worker. MAURITIUS: Le Pouce Mt., Moka Range, 20°11′55″S, 057°31′44″E, 750 m, closed vegetation, 25 May 2005 (coll. B.L. Fisher et al.) Collection code: BLF12148, specimen code: CASENT0007016 (CASC).
description:
[p]Type worker measurements: HL 0.57, HW 0.52, CI 91, SL 0.36, SI 70, LS4 0.08, LT4 0.43, WL 0.64 IGR 0.19.
diagnosis
[p] DIAGNOSIS.— The following character combination differentiates berlita from all its congeners: scrobe absent, fused frontal carinae projecting perpendicular to the plane of the clypeus, expanding apically, not forming a thin lamellae; propodeal angle without acute teeth or spines; anterior margin of petiole concave when viewed from above.
etymology
[p] ETYMOLOGY.— The specific name is an arbitrary combination, to be treated as a noun in apposition.
description:
[p] WORKER DESCRIPTION.— Form of head, mandibles, and body as shown in Figures 1–4. Antennae 10-segmented; medium segments extremely short and not distinct when viewed with less than 100× magnification; scape expanded apically, reaching mid-point of head. Eyes with 2 or 3 facets. Without depressed scrobal area. Palpal segmentation requires dissection and thus was not determined. Mandible masticatory margin concave, with two teeth, sharp apical tooth and smaller acute basal tooth. Propodeal angle without teeth or acute angles; declivitous face of propodeum concave. Petiole thick, with lateral margins on anterior face; anterior margin concave when viewed from above. Petiole with distinct convex subpetiolar process. Abdominal segment III longer than broad.
[p] Head and mesosoma densely punctulate; petiole sculptured as mesosoma, abdominal segment III with sparse punctures; punctures evanescent on abdominal segment IV. Integument generally opaque, except shiny for impunctate areas of metasoma.
[p]Body, including mandible and appendages, covered with dense fine, very short whitish decumbent pubescence, becoming sparse on abdominal segment III, and dense and nearly erect on abdominal segment IV.
[p]Color testaceous red.
distribution
[p] DISTRIBUTION.— The single specimen was collected in a leaf litter sample in the only remaining patch of dense native vegetation near the summit of Le Pouce. Samples from other nearby mountain tops, Pieter Both (823 m), Calebasses (c.600 m), did not uncover any endemic Proceritiinae.
discussion
[p] COMMENTS.— The African species of Discothyrea fall into two groups: (1) those with the
----- Page 660 ---------- Page 661 -----clypeo-frontal fusion flat topped and broad and with a depressed scrobe region, and (2) those in which the process forms a simple convex or angular vertical plate and lack a depressed scrobe region (Brown 1958). The Discothyrea of Madagascar belong to the first group. D. berlita is most similar to those in the second group, but is distinct in that the vertical plate does not form a thin lamella, but is expanded apically (Fig. 3).
Treatment:nomenclature
Proceratium avium Brown, 1974[p] Figs. 5-13.
[p] Proceratium avium Brown, 1974: 71, figs. 1 and 2 (worker, gyne and male). Mauritius: Le Pouce Mt, 700- 800 m, Native forest, 1 Apr. 1969 (coll. W.L. Brown) [examined] AntWeb MCZTYPE32216 (MCZC) [de Andrade 2000:75]
[p]Proceratium avioide de Andrade 2003: 78, figs 37, 38 (worker, gyne and male). Mauritius: Le Pouce Mt, 700- 800 m, Native forest, 30 March 1969 (coll. W.L. Brown) [examined] AntWeb MCZTYPE35017 (MCZC). New synonymy [see justification below]
discussion
[p] During the trip to Le Pouce on May 25 and 30, seven new collections of Proceratium from Le Pouce were recorded (Table 2). Because of the small size of the forest patch, only two complete colonies were collected. For the other colonies we encountered, only a few foragers were removed. As Brown (1974) observed, foragers were returning to nests with what appeared to be spider eggs. In this case, they carried the eggs in the mandible, and did not support the eggs with the recurved gaster (Brown 1980). Baroni and de Andrade (2003) suggest the recurved gaster serves a phragmotic function, but I did not observe the recurved gaster being used to plug up the ant nest entrance.
materials_examined
[p]TABLE 2. Collection of Proceratium avium on 25 and 30 May 2005 at Le Pouce Mt., Moka Range, 20°11′55″S, 057°31′44″E, 750 m, closed vegetation.
[p]Collection Habitat Caste
[p]BLF12011 foraging on Nuxia verticillata with Pristomyrmex bispinosus 1 w
[p]BLF12014 foraging on Nuxia verticillata with Pristomyrmex bispinosus 2 w
[p]BLF12136 ex rot pocket, Nuxia verticillata, 1. 5 m above ground 1 erg Q, 127 w
[p]BLF12137 ex rot pocket, Nuxia verticillata, 1. 5 m above ground 1 erg. 352w
[p]BLF12139 foraging on Nuxia verticillata with Pristomyrmex bispinosus 2 w
[p]BLF12140 foraging on Nuxia verticillata 8 w
[p]BLF12142 foraging on Nuxia verticillata 2 w
discussion
[p] Of note is the fact that colony (BLF12137) included 352 workers, one ergatoid queen, and no males. Based on the colony size data reported in Baroni and de Adrade (2003), this is the largest colony size recorded for Proceratium. Collections in May by Brown in 1969 included males. All nests encountered were located in Nuxia verticillata Lamark (Loganiaceae), with entrances about 1.5–2 m above ground. This tree was also the preferred nesting site for Pristomyremx bispinosus. This tree, called bois maigre in Mauritius, has gnarled and twisted trunks. It is endemic to Mauritius and Reunion and appears to be the sole nesting site for Pristomyremx bispinosus and Proceratium avium. The high winds that are common on Le Pouce abrade the twisted and intertwined trunks and branches. This action damages the tree at the contact point between intersecting branches and leads to the creation of a rot pocket and nesting site.
[p] Three collections of Proceratium avium (BLF12011, 12014, and 12139) were foragers following Pristomyremx bispinosus. These two species are very similar in color and general appearance. Brown in 1969 also observed this behavior. It is unclear why Proceratium is interspersed among the foraging workers of P. bispinosus. Conservation of either of these species should include further investigation of potential beneficial interactions between the species.
----- Page 662 -----[p] JUSTIFICATION OF SYNONYMY.— Brown (1980) collected three series of Proceratium at Le Pouce in 1969, one on March 30, and two on April 1. The latter were located less than 500 meters from the March 30 collecting site. He described both of these samples as Proceratium avium (Brown 1974). De Andrade (Baroni Urbani and de Andrade 2003) reexamined these three collections and determined that they represent two species, P. avioide and P. avium. She based this on the
----- Page 663 -----observation that P. avium differs from P. avioide by the less impressed sculpture, by the denser pilosity, and by longer antennal scapes (P. avium SI 87.3-88.6, P. avioide SI 81.8–83.3).[p] The measurements of Brown and de Andrade are not consistent, especially for the P. avioide material she examined. Brown noted measurements for the three collections (workers n = 19) as HL 0.92–0.98, HW .091–0.98, CI 96–101 SL 0.90–0.99. Brown did not calculate SI. De Andrade notes that for her avium: HL 1.05–1.12, HW .090–0.94, CI 84.5–85.7 SL 0.93–0.97, SI 87.3–88.6 and P. avioide, HL 1.10–1.16, HW .092–0.97, CI 82.1–85.1, SL 0.90–0.96, SI 81.8–83.3. Note that CI for Brown ranged from 96–101, while for De Andrade, CI ranged from 82.1–85.7.
[p] One possible reason for these differences is the differences of HW and SL definitions. Based on the definitions presented above, I re-measured the type material using a calibrated micrometer (see Methods above). Measurements are presented in Table 3. These measurements confirm the relative differences between the Brown collections. However, when samples from the seven new collections are included, these differences become less distinct. The seven collections in the study, have even less impressed sculpture than P. avium, similar pilosity as P. avium, and longer antennal scapes then both P. avium and P. avioide (SI 98–103). Based on this study of Brown’s material and the new collections in this study, I identify all these collections as one species.
[p] The variation observed in these collections is interesting in such a small area. It is possible that because P. avium has ergatoid queens, and disperses presumably by budding with low dispersal ability, the complex topography of Le Pouce contributed to the observed variation. The possible restriction of the remaining population to the single forest patch at the base of the southeast peak, however, could severely limit the observed variation in the future.
description:
[p]TABLE 3. Measurements and scape index of type material and new collections. MCZTYPE32216 is the holotype of Proceratium avium, MCZTYPE35017 is the holotype of Proceratium avioide.
[p]Specimen number HW SL SI
[p]MCZTYPE35017 0.97 0.92 95
[p]MCZTYPE32216 1.01 0.96 96
[p]CASENT0055844 0.98 1.01 103
[p]CASENT0055842 0.99 1.00 101
[p]CASENT0059012 0.97 0.99 102
[p]CASENT0059013 1.03 1.01 98
[p]CASENT0059026 1.00 1.01 101
[p]CASENT0059030 0.99 1.01 102
[p]CASENT0059029 1.01 1.00 98
[p]min 0.97 0.92 95
[p]max 1.03 1.01 103
Treatment:nomenclature
Proceratium google Fisher, sp. nov.[p] Figs. 14-17.
materials_examined
[p] TYPE MATERIAL.— HOLOTYPE: Worker. MADAGASCAR: Antsiranana, 11.0 km WSW Befingotra, Réserve Spéciale Anjanaharibe-Sud, 14°45′S, 049°27′E, 1565 m, 16 Nov 1994 (coll. B.L. Fisher) sifted litter, montane rainforest, Collection code: BLF1232(6) — CASENT0100367, (CASC) PARATYPES: 2 workers with same data as holotype but with specimen codes CASENT010068 (BMNH), CASENT0100369 (MCZC); 1 worker 9.2 km WSW Befingotra, Réserve Spéciale Anjanaharibe-Sud, 14°45′S, 049°28′E, 1280 m, 5 Nov 1994 (coll. B.L. Fisher), CASENT0100370; (CASC); and 1 worker same as latter but collected at 1200 m on 9 Nov 1994, CASENT0100371 (CASC).
diagnosis
[p] DIAGNOSIS.— The following character combination differentiates P. google from all its congeners: abdominal segment IV tergite evenly rounded posteriorly, without concave impression near apex and not hypertrophied; truncate median clypeal lobe; low nodiform petiole without peduncle but with blunt anteroventral tooth; fore tibia with a basal spine, frontal carinae separate and diverging posteriorly; posterior dorsum of mesosoma and propodeal spines granulate-foveolate. P. google is easily distinguished from P. diplopyx, the only other described Proceratium from Madagascar, by the shape of the tergite of the abdominal segment IV. In P. diplopyx, the tergite is with a deep
----- Page 664 ---------- Page 665 -----concave notch near apex.[p]TABLE 4. Worker measurements: maximum and minimum based on all five Proceratium google specimens.
[p]Specimen
[p]CASENT # HL HW CI SL SI WL LS4 LT4 IGR
[p]0100367 Holotype 1.21 1.02 84 0.80 79 1.34 0.20 0.85 0.23
[p]0100370 Paratype 1.24 1.07 86 0.92 86 1.49 0.18 0.79 0.23
[p]0100371 Paratype 1.24 1.04 84 0.86 83 1.46 0.20 0.77 0.26
[p]0100368 Paratype 1.15 1.03 89 0.84 82 1.36 0.19 0.79 0.23
[p]0100369 Paratype 1.20 1.05 87 0.83 79 1.41 0.17 0.79 0.22
[p]min 1.15 1.03 84 0.83 79 1.36 0.17 0.77 0.22
[p]max 1.24 1.05 89 0.86 83 1.46 0.20 0.79 0.26
etymology
[p] ETYMOLOGY.— Named in recognition of the support from the Google company. I hope that Google will continue applying its talent to serve data relevant to the biodiversity community, conservation planners, and the general public. By creating a “Zoogle,” Google could help achieve free and democratic access to taxonomic and biodiversity data on species. P. google is also suspected to be a specialist egg predator of spiders, which is also why this ant is aptly named after Google— for the ability to hunt down obscure prey. The specific name is an arbitrary combination, to be treated as a noun in apposition.
description:
[p] WORKER DESCRIPTION.— Form of head, mandibles, and body as shown in Figures 14-17. In full-face view, posterior margin of head rounded, not concave; sides of head more or less straight medially; in profile, dorsal margin marginate. Mandible with 4 teeth. Palpal formula 4, 3. Antennae 12-segmented, scape does not reach posterior margin of head. Median clypeal lobe raised and notched medially. Eye a single, large, clear, convex facet that projects beyond the margin of the head in full-face view.
[p] Mesosoma in dorsal view pear-shaped, broader across pronotum than across propodeum. Metanotal grove unmarked. Propodeal spines granulate-tuberculate; declivitous face of propodeum concave, ending basally with an upturned tooth. Petiole longer than wide; subpetiolar process forming an obtuse tooth at midlength. Tibial spur present on each leg. Claws on all legs slender, simple.
[p]Abdominal segment IV tergum evenly rounded posteriorly, without concave impression near apex.
[p]Head, mesosoma, petiole, and abdominal segment III with dense granulate-foveolate sculpture. In contrast, abdominal segment IV predominantly smooth and shiny but with sparse foveae. Declivitous face of propodeum shiny smooth.
[p] Body covered with abundant pilosity consisting of fine, curved, tapered, yellow-white setae. Queen, male and larvae unknown.
distribution
[p] DISTRIBUTION.— Known only from an isolated mountain in Northeastern Madagascar, Réserve Spéciale Anjanaharibe-Sud, 14°45′S, 049°27′E, collected at an elevation of 1565 m. Collections in nearby mountains such as Marojejy did not locate any specimens of this species.