Cyphomyrmex wheeleri

Cyphomyrmex wheeleri
Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Arthropoda
Class:	Insecta
Order:	Hymenoptera
Family:	Formicidae
Subfamily:	Myrmicinae
Tribe:	Attini
Genus:	Cyphomyrmex
Species:	C. wheeleri
Binomial name
	Cyphomyrmex wheeleri; Forel, 1900 Specimen Label

Unusual for the genus in its preference for arid habitats.

Photo Gallery

Male ants in the fungus garden of a Cyphomyrmex wheeleri colony. Austin, Texas, USA. Photo by Alex Wild.

Identification

Side view of a worker

Kempf (1966) - C. wheeleri is closest to Cyphomyrmex costatus. Following are the main differences for the worker caste: Larger size (cf. measurements); body very sharply reticulate-punctate throughout; anterior clypeal border scarcely notched; carinae on vertex weak; postocular carina sharp, the supraocular tubercle lying below the carina; eyes larger with more facets; midpronotal denticles present; antero-inferior pronotal and epinotal teeth acute; petiole with a pair of postero-dorsal teeth; tergum I of gaster without four strongly raised longitudinal costae.

Keys including this Species

Key to US Cyphomyrmex species

Distribution

United States: known from California, Arizona and Texas. Mexico: Durango.

Latitudinal Distribution Pattern

Latitudinal Range: 38.85° to 19.12160833°.


North Temperate	North Subtropical	Tropical	South Subtropical	South Temperate

Source: AntMaps

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists

Nearctic Region: United States (type locality).
Neotropical Region: Mexico.

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.

Habitat

Arid environments, desert shrublands and grasslands.

Biology

Explore Fungus Growing

For additional details see Fungus growing ants.

A handful of ant species (approx. 275 out of the known 15,000 species) have developed the ability to cultivate fungus within their nests. In most species the fungus is used as the sole food source for the larvae and is an important resource for the adults as well. Additionally, in a limited number of cases, the fungus is used to construct part of the nest structure but is not as a food source.

These fungus-feeding species are limited to North and South America, extending from the pine barrens of New Jersey, United States, in the north (Trachymyrmex septentrionalis) to the cold deserts in Argentina in the south (several species of Acromyrmex). Species that use fungi in nest construction are known from Europe and Africa (a few species in the genera Crematogaster, Lasius).

The details of fungal cultivation are rich and complex. First, a wide variety of materials are used as substrate for fungus cultivating. The so-called lower genera include species that prefer dead vegetation, seeds, flowers, fruits, insect corpses, and feces, which are collected in the vicinity of their nests. The higher genera include non leaf-cutting species that collect mostly fallen leaflets, fruit, and flowers, as well as the leafcutters that collect fresh leaves from shrubs and trees. Second, while the majority of fungi that are farmed by fungus-feeding ants belong to the family Lepiotaceae, mostly the genera Leucoagaricus and Leucocoprinus, other fungi are also involved. Some species utilise fungi in the family Tricholomataceae while a few others cultivate yeast. The fungi used by the higher genera no longer produce spores. Their fungi produce nutritious and swollen hyphal tips (gongylidia) that grow in bundles called staphylae, to specifically feed the ants. Finally, colony size varies tremendously among these ants. Lower taxa mostly live in inconspicuous nests with 100–1000 individuals and relatively small fungus gardens. Higher taxa, in contrast, live in colonies made of 5–10 million ants that live and work within hundreds of interconnected fungus-bearing chambers in huge subterranean nests. Some colonies are so large, they can be seen from satellite photos, measuring up to 600 m3.

Based on these habits, and taking phylogenetic information into consideration, these ants can be divided into six biologically distinct agricultural systems (with a list of genera involved in each category):

Nest Construction

A limited number of species that use fungi in the construction of their nests.

some Crematogaster
some Lasius

Lower Agriculture

Practiced by species in the majority of fungus-feeding genera, including those thought to retain more primitive features, which cultivate a wide range of fungal species in the tribe Leucocoprineae.

Coral Fungus Agriculture

Practiced by species in the Apterostigma pilosum species-group, which cultivate fungi within the Pterulaceae.

some Apterostigma

Yeast Agriculture

Practiced by species within the Cyphomyrmex rimosus species-group, which cultivate a distinct clade of leucocoprineaceous fungi derived from the lower attine fungi.

some Cyphomyrmex

Generalized Higher Agriculture

Practiced by species in several genera of non-leaf-cutting "higher attine" ants, which cultivate a distinct clade of leucocoprineaceous fungi separately derived from the lower attine fungi.

Leaf-Cutter Agriculture

A subdivision of higher attine agriculture practiced by species within several ecologically dominant genera, which cultivate a single highly derived species of higher attine fungus.

Note that the farming habits of Mycetagroicus (4 species) are unknown. Also, while species of Pseudoatta (2 species) are closely related to the fungus-feeding genus Acromyrmex, they are social parasites, living in the nests of their hosts and are not actively involved in fungus growing. ‎

Mackay and Mackay (2002) - This species nests in the soil or under stones in creosote bush scrub. Nests consist of a few dozen workers and a single queen. Fungal gardens can be located a few centimeters under the soil surface in small chambers a few centimeters in diameter. Workers forage primarily at night or on moderately warm days in the spring and fall. They move slowly and feign death and are thus difficult to see. These ants are most commonly collected under stones or in pitfall traps. Males are attracted to lights.

Kempf (1966) reported:

C. wheeleri is more xerophilous than most species of the genus. According to Wheeler (1907: 765-8), whose field studies were made in the vicinity of Austin, it occurs only in arid regions. Nests were found principally on the higher and drier terraces of limestone hills, although a few nests were also discovered in the hard, pebbly soil of open wood at lower altitudes.

The hillside nests are invariably under large stones, which cover both horizontal and vertical galleries (the latter descending into the ground to a depth of 10-15 cm). One of the horizontal galleries communicates with the exterior at the edge of the stone. The entrance is sometimes marked by a small crater. The sessile fungus garden, having the size of pecan nut, is found at a particular widened portion of either the horizontal or the vertical galleries. The garden presents a flocculent appearance, and consists of small slivers of vegetable debris (probably entire sections of stems of herbaceous plants) bound together by the snow white mycelium. Skeletal parts of dead insects, principally fragments of coleopterous elytra, have been found inside the garden; they were probably added to the structure in order to give it consistency. The ants attach the refuse as a flat mass to the undersurface of the stone, or more rarely dump it outside the entrance.

The woodland nests were marked by craters of earth crumbs, around a small, circular opening of a vertical gallery, descending to appreciable depth into the soil. Wheeler was unable to unearth the fungus garden.

The colonies usually do not comprise more than a few dozen workers with a single queen. Their activity seems to be mainly nocturnal. Sexual forms appear in the nests ready for nuptial flight from early to late in June. As all other species of the present genus, the worker move slowly and "feign death" at the least disturbance.

Castes

Worker


.


.	Owned by Museum of Comparative Zoology.

Images from AntWeb


Worker. Specimen code casent0102834. Photographer Jen Fogarty, uploaded by California Academy of Sciences.	Owned by CAS, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Nomenclature

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

wheeleri. Cyphomyrmex wheeleri Forel, 1900e: 282 (w.q.) U.S.A. (Texas).
- Type-material: syntype workers (number not stated), 1 syntype queen.
- Type-locality: U.S.A.: Texas, Austin (W.M. Wheeler).
- Type-depositories: MCZC, MHNG, MZSP.
- Wheeler, W.M. 1907c: 726 (m.).
- Status as species: Wheeler, W.M. 1907c: 725 (redescription); Wheeler, W.M. 1910g: 568; Emery, 1924d: 342; Weber, 1940a: 409 (in key); Creighton, 1950a: 316; Smith, M.R. 1951a: 830; Kempf, 1966: 167 (redescription); Hunt & Snelling, 1975: 22; Smith, D.R. 1979: 1410; Snelling, R.R. & Longino, 1992: 480 (in key); Bolton, 1995b: 168; Mackay & Mackay, 2002: 102; Ward, 2005: 65.
- Distribution: Mexico, U.S.A.

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

Description

Worker

Kempf (1966) - Total length 2.8-3.4 mm; head length 0.71-0.85 mm; head width 0.62-0.72 mm; thorax length 0.83-1.06 mm; hind femur length 0.64-0.78 mm. Light yellowish-brown; older specimens also darker. Integument very sharply reticulate-punctate, opaque. Mandibles and funiculi more superficially sculptured and somewhat shining.

Head (fig 7). Anterior apron of clypeus flattened, only vestigially notched on convex anterior border; lateral teeth, next to origin of frontal lobes, small and almost hidden by the latter. Frontal lobes elongate-rounded and flat, covering cheeks in full-face view. Frontal carinae moderately diverging caudad, straight. Occipital corners lobate, prominent, longitudinally carinate. Paired carinae on vertex feeble, short, scarcely diverging cephalad. Preocular carina fading out above eyes, not curving mesad. Postocular carina extending foreward from lateral face of occipital lobe, becoming obsolete just in front of posterior orbit of eyes, closing completely the antennal scrobe. Supraocular tumulus dentiform, situated below the postocular carina. Inferior border of sides of head carinate on posterior half. Eyes with 8-10 facets across greatest diameter. Scape strikingly attenuate at base, strongly incrassate apicad, not projecting beyond antennal scrobe. Funicular segments III-IX about as broad as long, I and X longer than broad.

Thorax (fig 25). Pronotum with a pair of small denticles on disc, the latter laterally marginate between the marked humeral angle and the strong lateral pronotal tooth; antero-inferior corner acutely dentate. Mesonotum forming a shallowly impressed oval disc, the borders of which are flanked by the pair of anterior and posterior carinate welts; the anterior pair separated from the posterior pair by a small impression. Mesoepinotal suture distinct on bottom of broadly and deeply impressed mesoepinotal groove. Basal face of epinotum transversely shallowly concave, sides somewhat diverging caudad, bordered by carinae, which become foliaceous in front of the compressed, lamellate, acute, epinotal tooth; infradental lamellae low, bordering the upper half of the declivous face. Epinotal spiracle small, situated on the vestigial oblique carinule. Femora, especiaIly hind femora, postero-ventrally crested and bearing on basal first a broader foliaceous lobe. Tibiae subprismatic.

Pedicel (fig 25, 37). Petiolar node trapezoidal in dorsal view, broadest just behind the obliquely truncate anterior corners, its dorsum flattened, oblique; posterior corners with a raised, strong tooth; posterior border likewise raised and lamelliform, connecting the teeth from base to tip. Postpetiole decidedly broader than long, its dorsum with a shaIlow median impression between a pair of low, longitudinal welts, the extremities of which are tumuliform. Posterior border moderately and evenly rounded. Gaster anteriorly truncate; tergum I with a short antero-median impression, its sides submarginate.

Pilosity scarce, inconspicuous, decumbent throughout; dorsum of head and gaster with small, whitish, scale-like hairs.

Kempf (1964) Figs. 14-26
Kempf (1964) Figs. 27-50
Creighton (1950) Plate 40.

Queen

Wheeler (1907) - Length: 2.5-2.7 mm.

Very similar to the worker. Pronotum with prominent inferior and superior teeth, the former acute, the latter larger and blunt. Mesonotum prominent, flattened, with a faint median furrow anteriorly and a pair of broader Mayrian furrows. Scutellum with very broadly and faintly excised posterior border separating a pair of broad, acute teeth. Epinotum with the base convex and only about half as long as the abrupt concave declivity; spines similar to those of the worker but somewhat stouter.

Sculpture and pilosity as in the worker.

Color a little darker in old specimens. Wings opaque, infuscated; the membranes and veins in the anterobasal portion of both fore and hind wings fulvous.

Male

Wheeler (1907) - Length: 2.4-2.6 mm.

Head, without the mandibles and eyes, narrow, longer than broad, with straight posterior border. Mandibles like those of the worker but less distinctly denticulate. Frontal carinae with large, reflected lobes and strong, diverging posterior ridges reaching to the posterior corners where each terminates in a compressed, projecting tooth. Postorbital carinae absent. Antennae slender, scapes enlarged towards their tips which surpass the posterior corners of the head by about 1/3 of their length. Pronotum with indistinct inferior, but prominent and acute superior teeth. Mesonotum with distinct Mayrian furrows. Scutellum like that of the female, but with more deeply excised posterior border. Petiole and postpetiole like those of the worker and female. Gaster elliptical, convex above. Legs long and slender. Hind femora not angularly dilated below.

Opaque; very finely and densely punctate; gaster faintly shining or glossy.

Pilosity very similar to that of the worker and female.

Ferruginous; upper surface of head and the thoracic depressions blackish; basal segment of gaster dark brown above. Mandibles, antennae, legs and tip of gaster yellowish. Wings like those of the female.

Type Material

Kempf (1966) - Workers and a female collected by W. M. Wheeler in the environs of Austin, Texas, U.S.A.; three syntype or nidotype workers, received on exchange from the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College for my collection (WWK), were examined.

References

Alatorre-Bracamontes, C.E., Vásquez-Bolaños, M. 2010. Lista comentada de las hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) del norte de México. Dugesiana 17(1): 9-36.
Forel, A. 1900h. Fourmis du Japon. Nids en toile. Strongylognathus Huberi et voisins. Fourmilière triple. Cyphomymrex Wheeleri. Fourmis importées. Mitt. Schweiz. Entomol. Ges. 10: 267-287 (page 282, worker, queen described)
Hamilton, N., Jones, T.H., Shik, J.Z., Wall, B., Schultz, T.R., Blair, H.A., Adams, R.M.M. 2018. Context is everything: mapping Cyphomyrmex-derived compounds to the fungus-growing ant phylogeny. Chemoecology 28, 137–144. (doi:10.1007/S00049-018-0265-5).
Hanisch, P.E., Sosa-Calvo, J., Schultz, T.R. 2022. The last piece of the puzzle? Phylogenetic position and natural history of the monotypic fungus-farming ant genus Paramycetophylax (Formicidae: Attini). Insect Systematics and Diversity 6 (1): 11:1-17 (doi:10.1093/isd/ixab029).
Jesovnik, A., Sosa-Calvo, J., Lloyd, M.W., Branstetter, M.G., Andez. F.F., Schultz, T.R. 2017. Phylogenomic species delimitation and host-symbiont coevolution in the fungus-farming ant genus Sericomyrmex Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): ultraconserved elements (UCEs) resolve a recent radiation. Systematic Entomology 42, 523–542 (doi:10.1111/syen.12228).
Kempf, W. W. 1966 [1965]. A revision of the Neotropical fungus-growing ants of the genus Cyphomyrmex Mayr. Part II: Group of rimosus (Spinola) (Hym., Formicidae). Stud. Entomol. 8: 161-200 (page 167, see also)
Mackay, W.P. & Mackay, E.E. 2002. The Ants of New Mexico: 400 pp. Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, N.Y.
Mueller, U.G., Ishak, H.D., Bruschi, S.M., Smith, C.C., Herman, J.J., Solomon, S.E., Mikheyev, A.S., Rabeling, C., Scott, J.J., Cooper, M., Rodrigues, A., Ortiz, A., Brandão, C.R.F., Lattke, J.E., Pagnocca, F.C., Rehner, S.A., Schultz, T.R., Vasconcelos, H.L., Adams, R.M.M., Bollazzi, M., Clark, R.M., Himler, A.G., LaPolla, J.S., Leal, I.R., Johnson, R.A., Roces, F., Sosa-Calvo, J., Wirth, R., Bacci, M. 2017. Biogeography of mutualistic fungi cultivated by leafcutter ants. Molecular Ecology 26, 6921–6937 (doi:10.1111/mec.14431).
Wheeler, W. M. 1907d. The fungus-growing ants of North America. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 23: 669-807 (page 726, male described)

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

Backlin, Adam R., Sara L. Compton, Zsolt B. Kahancza and Robert N. Fisher. 2005. Baseline Biodiversity Survey for Santa Catalina Island. Catalina Island Conservancy. 1-45.
Boulton A. M., Davies K. F. and Ward P. S. 2005. Species richness, abundance, and composition of ground-dwelling ants in northern California grasslands: role of plants, soil, and grazing. Environmental Entomology 34: 96-104
Cover S. P., and R. A. Johnson. 20011. Checklist of Arizona Ants. Downloaded on January 7th at http://www.asu.edu/clas/sirgtools/AZants-2011%20updatev2.pdf
Dattilo W. et al. 2019. MEXICO ANTS: incidence and abundance along the Nearctic-Neotropical interface. Ecology https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2944
Fernandes, P.R. XXXX. Los hormigas del suelo en Mexico: Diversidad, distribucion e importancia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).
García-Martínez M. A., J. E. Valenzuela-González , D. L. Martínez-Tlapa , and L. N. Quiroz-Robledo. 2013. New Ant Species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Records for Veracruz State and Mexico. Southwestern Entomologist 38(4): 661-666.
Hunt J. H. and Snelling R. R. 1975. A checklist of the ants of Arizona. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science 10: 20-23
Johnson R. Personnal Database. Accessed on February 5th 2014 at http://www.asu.edu/clas/sirgtools/resources.htm
Johnson, R.A. and P.S. Ward. 2002. Biogeography and endemism of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Baja California, Mexico: a first overview. Journal of Biogeography 29:10091026/
Kempf W. W. 1966. A revision of the Neotropical fungus-growing ants of the genus Cyphomyrmex Mayr. Part II: Group of rimosus (Spinola) (Hym., Formicidae). Studia Entomologica 8: 161-200.
Klingenberg, C. and C.R.F. Brandao. 2005. The type specimens of fungus growing ants, Attini (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae) deposited in the Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil. Papeis Avulsos de Zoologia 45(4):41-50
LeBrun E. G., R. M. Plowes, and L. E. Gilbert. 2015. Imported fire ants near the edge of their range: disturbance and moisture determine prevalence and impact of an invasive social insect. Journal of Animal Ecology,81: 884–895.
Longino, J.T. 2010. Personal Communication. Longino Collection Database
Mackay W. P., and E. E. Mackay. 2002. The ants of New Mexico (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 400 pp.
Moody J. V., and O. F. Francke. 1982. The Ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of Western Texas Part 1: Subfamily Myrmicinae. Graduate Studies Texas Tech University 27: 80 pp.
O'Keefe S. T., J. L. Cook, T. Dudek, D. F. Wunneburger, M. D. Guzman, R. N. Coulson, and S. B. Vinson. 2000. The Distribution of Texas Ants. The Southwestern Entomologist 22: 1-92.
Smith M. R. 1936. A list of the ants of Texas. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 44: 155-170.
Van Pelt, A. 1983. Ants of the Chisos Mountains, Texas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) . Southwestern Naturalist 28:137-142.
Vasquez-Bolanos M. 2011. Checklist of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Mexico. Dugesiana 18(1): 95-133.
Vásquez-Bolaños M. 2011. Lista de especies de hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) para México. Dugesiana 18: 95-133
Weber N. A. 1970. Northern extent of attine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 72: 414-415.
Wheeler W. M. 1902. A new agricultural ant from Texas, with remarks on the known North American species. American Naturalist. 36: 85-100.
Wheeler W. M. 1907. The fungus-growing ants of North America. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 23: 669-807.
Wheeler, G.C. and J. Wheeler. 1985. A checklist of Texas ants. Prairie Naturalist 17:49-64.