Crematogaster walshi

Crematogaster walshi
Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Arthropoda
Class:	Insecta
Order:	Hymenoptera
Family:	Formicidae
Subfamily:	Myrmicinae
Tribe:	Crematogastrini
Genus:	Crematogaster
Species:	C. walshi
Binomial name
Crematogaster walshi Forel, 1902 Specimen Labels

Nothing is known about the biology of Crematogaster walshi.

Identification

Hosoishi and Ogata (2012) - This species is distinct in having the strongly bilobed postpetiole.

Keys including this Species

• Key to Crematogaster brevis group workers
• Key to Indian Crematogaster

Distribution

Latitudinal Distribution Pattern

Latitudinal Range: 30.75° to 30.75°.

North Temperate	North Subtropical	Tropical	South Subtropical	South Temperate

• Source: AntMaps

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists

Oriental Region: India (type locality), Sri Lanka, Vietnam.
Palaearctic Region: China.

Distribution based on AntMaps

Distribution based on AntWeb specimens

Check data from AntWeb

Countries Occupied

Number of countries occupied by this species based on AntWiki Regional Taxon Lists. In general, fewer countries occupied indicates a narrower range, while more countries indicates a more widespread species.

Estimated Abundance

Relative abundance based on number of AntMaps records per species (this species within the purple bar). Fewer records (to the left) indicates a less abundant/encountered species while more records (to the right) indicates more abundant/encountered species.

Nomenclature

The following information is derived from Barry Bolton's Online Catalogue of the Ants of the World.

• walshi. Crematogaster walshi Forel, 1902c: 205 (w.) INDIA (West Bengal).
  • Type-material: lectotype worker (by designation of Hosoishi & Ogata, 2012: 26), 5 paralectotype workers.
  • Type-locality: lectotype India: Bengal, Pooree (J. Walsh); paralectotypes with same data.
  • Type-depositories: MHNG (lectotype); MHNG, NHMB (paralectotypes).
  • [Misspelled as walhsi by Santschi, 1924c: 7.]
  • Combination in C. (Orthocrema): Emery, 1922e: 132;
  • combination in C. (Mesocrema): Santschi, 1928b: 33.
  • Status as species: Forel, 1903a: 684; Bingham, 1903: 136; Forel, 1906b: 89; Forel, 1911h: 455; Emery, 1922e: 132; Menozzi, 1939a: 301 (in key); Chapman & Capco, 1951: 99; Bolton, 1995b: 165; Mathew & Tiwari, 2000: 328; Guénard & Dunn, 2012: 43; Hosoishi & Ogata, 2012: 26 (redescription); Bharti, Guénard, et al. 2016: 37; Dias, R.K.S. et al. 2020: 73.
  • Distribution: India, Sri Lanka.

Unless otherwise noted the text for the remainder of this section is reported from the publication that includes the original description.

Description

Worker

Hosoishi and Ogata (2012) - HW 0.72-0.93; HL 0.76-0.92; CI 93-103; SL 0.49-0.58; SI 62-69; EL 0.13-0.17; PW 0.42-0.53; WL 0.83-1.03; PSL 0.04-0.08; PtL 0.21-0.27; PtW 0.21-0.27; PtH 0.13-0.17; PpL 0.13-0.18; PpW 0.2-0.26; PtHI 59-68; PtWI 93-105; PpWI 139-162; WI 87-100 (Lectotype and five paralectotype workers measured).

Workers monomorphic.

Compound eyes not projecting from lateral margin of head, the outer margin of eye almost flush with head capsule in full face view. Scape not reaching posterior corner of head, the scape with standing setae.

Anterior margin of pronotal collar almost straight or slightly convex in dorsal view. Metanotal groove concave in lateral view. Propodeal spines developed, but their length variable. Anterior margin of metapleural gland bulla exceeding anterior margin of propodeal spiracle.

Petiole in dorsal view broader anteriorly than posteriorly in smaller workers, broader at middle portion in larger workers. Postpetiole strongly bilobed behind without a distinct longitudinal median sulcus. Subpetiolar and subpostpetiolar processes undeveloped.

Clypeus relatively smooth, but with feeble rugulae. Dorsal face of mesosoma almost smooth and shining. Dorsolateral face of pronotum smooth in dorsal view. Lateral surface of pronotum smooth and shining. Mesopleuron weakly sculptured, but the higher portion with longitudinal rugulae in lateral view.

Dorsal face of head, clypeus and mesosoma with abundant standing setae. Fourth abdominal tergite with sparse standing setae.

Type Material

Hosoishi and Ogata (2012) - LECTOTYPE worker (top specimen of three on one pin, Musee d'Histoire Naturelle Genève worker) (by present designation) and five paralectotype workers from INDIA: Pooree, Bengale [Puri, Bengal] (Walsh) (MHNG, Naturhistorisches Museum, Basel) [examined].

References

• Akbar, S.A., Bharti, H., Wachkoo, A.A. 2023. Crematogaster bonnieae (Hymenoptera, Formicidae), a new acrobat-ant species from the Western Ghats, India. Annales Zoologici Fennici 60, 9-17 (doi:10.5735/086.060.0103).
• Chanda, A. 2017. A study on ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Medinipur, West Bengal, India. International Journal of Entomological Research 2(5): 1-4.
• Emery, C. 1922c. Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Myrmicinae. [part]. Genera Insectorum 174B: 95-206 (page 132, Combination in C. (Orthocrema))
• Forel, A. 1902c. Myrmicinae nouveaux de l'Inde et de Ceylan. Rev. Suisse Zool. 10: 165-249 (page 205, worker described)
• Hosoishi, S. & Ogata, K. 2012. Revision of the Crematogaster brevis complex in Asia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa. 3349:18-30.
• Khachonpisitsak, S., Yamane, S., Sriwichai, P., Jaitrong, W. 2020. An updated checklist of the ants of Thailand (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). ZooKeys 998, 1–182 (doi:10.3897/zookeys.998.54902).
• Liu, C., Fischer, G., Hita Garcia, F., Yamane, S., Liu, Q., Peng, Y.Q., Economo, E.P., Guénard, B., Pierce, N.E. 2020. Ants of the Hengduan Mountains: a new altitudinal survey and updated checklist for Yunnan Province highlight an understudied insect biodiversity hotspot. ZooKeys 978, 1–171 (doi:10.3897/zookeys.978.55767).
• Santschi, F. 1928b. Nouvelles fourmis de Chine et du Turkestan Russe. Bull. Ann. Soc. Entomol. Belg. 68: 31-46 (page 33, Combination in C. (Mesocrema))

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

• Bharti H. 2001. Check list of ants from north-west India I. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology 21(2): 163-167.
• Forel A. 1911. Sur le genre Metapone n. g. nouveau groupe des Formicides et sur quelques autres formes nouvelles. Rev. Suisse Zool. 19: 445-459.
• Ghosh S. N., S. Sheela, B. G. Kundu, S. Roychowdhury, and R. N. Tiwari. 2006. Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae. Pp. 369-398 in: Alfred, J. R. B. (ed.) 2006. Fauna of Arunachal Pradesh. (Part -2). [State Fauna Series 13.]. New Delhi: Zoological Survey of India, iv + 518 pp.
• Guénard B., and R. R. Dunn. 2012. A checklist of the ants of China. Zootaxa 3558: 1-77.
• Pajni H. R., and R. K. Suri. 1978. First report on the Formicid fauna (Hymenoptera) of Chandigarh. Res. Bull. (Science) Punjab University 29: 5-12.
• Tak N. 2008. Ants of Rajasthan. Conserving Biodiversity of Rajasthan Zool. Surv. India. 149-155.
• Tak N. 2009. Ants Formicidae of Rajasthan. Records of the Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper No. 288, iv, 46 p
• Tak N. 2010. Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae. Zool. Surv. India, Fauna of Ranthambore National Park, Conservation Area Series 43: 133-144.
• Tak N., and S. L. Kazmi. 2011. On a collection of Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae from Uttarakhand. Rec. zool. Surv. India : 111(2) : 39-49.