Dorymyrmex flavus

AntWiki: The Ants --- Online
Dorymyrmex flavus
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Order: Hymenoptera
Family: Formicidae
Subfamily: Dolichoderinae
Tribe: Leptomyrmecini
Genus: Dorymyrmex
Species: D. flavus
Binomial name
Dorymyrmex flavus
McCook, 1879

Dorymyrmex flavus casent0005321 profile 1.jpg

Dorymyrmex flavus casent0005321 dorsal 1.jpg

Specimen labels

Synonyms

In an Oklahoma study Roeder et al. (2018) found the CTmax (critical thermal maximum) for this species was 51.5 ± 0.5 C and the average worker mass was 0.216 ± 0.012 mg.

Identification

Keys including this Species

Distribution

Latitudinal Distribution Pattern

Latitudinal Range: 40.23433333° to 11.934335°.

     
North
Temperate 		North
Subtropical 		Tropical South
Subtropical 		South
Temperate

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists

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

Distribution based on AntMaps

AntMapLegend.png

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.
pChart

Biology

Snelling (1195) - This species has been recently collected in a park near Blythe, Riverside County, California. Since D. flavus appears to be absent over most of New Mexico and all of Arizona, it seems likely that this California record represents an accidental introduction. The county park near Blythe is on the banks of the Colorado River and is heavily used by travellers from other states. The ant is now abundant in that park but has not been collected elsewhere in California.

Association with Other Organisms

Explore-icon.png Explore: Show all Associate data or Search these data. See also a list of all data tables or learn how data is managed.

This species is a prey for the tiger beetle Ellipsoptera hirtilabris (a predator) in United States (MacRae, 2019; Polidori et al., 2020) (ant species uncertain, either Dorymyrmex bureni or Dorymyrmex flavus).

Castes

Worker

Images from AntWeb

Dorymyrmex flavus casent0104736 head 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus casent0104736 profile 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus casent0104736 dorsal 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus casent0104736 label 1.jpg
Worker. Specimen code casent0104736. Photographer April Nobile, uploaded by California Academy of Sciences. Owned by CAS, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Dorymyrmex flavus castype00614 head 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus castype00614 profile 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus castype00614 dorsal 1.jpgDorymyrmex flavus castype00614 label 1.jpg
Syntype of Dorymyrmex pyramicus nigra. Worker. Specimen code castype00614. Photographer April Nobile, 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.

  • flavus. Dorymyrmex flavus McCook, 1879: 188, figs. a-c (w.) U.S.A. Johnson, C. 1989b: 190 (q.m.); Cokendolpher & Francke, 1985: 349 (k.). Combination in Conomyrma: Kempf, 1972a: 80; in Dorymyrmex: Shattuck, 1992c: 85. Subspecies of pyramicus: Mayr, 1886d: 433; Forel, 1911e: 285. Junior synonym of pyramicus: Creighton, 1950a: 348; of insanus: Snelling, R.R. 1973b: 5. Revived from synonymy, revived status as species and senior synonym of nigra: Johnson, C. 1989b: 187. See also: Snelling, R.R. 1995: 5.
  • nigra. Dorymyrmex pyramicus var. nigra Pergande, 1896: 871 (w.) MEXICO. Forel, 1912h: 36 (q.). Combination in Conomyrma: Kempf, 1972a: 79. Junior synonym of pyramicus: Creighton, 1950a: 348; of insanus: Snelling, R.R. 1973b: 5; of flavus: Johnson, C. 1989b: 187.

Type Material

Snelling (1995) - In selecting a lectotype specimen, Johnson had available to him a few specimens from Larissa, Cherokee County, Texas, a community that no longer exists. These specimens were labelled as "Dorymyrmex insanus var. flavus McC." in McCook's handwriting. Johnson assumed, perhaps correctly, that these were some of the original material examined by McCook. However, this is not absolutely certain, and it is entirely possible that these were specimens collected and identified at a later date. The note that the ants were "destroying cotton worms" would seem to suggest that they may, indeed, be original material. While McCook cited the distribution to be "Southern States," he did not specifically mention anyone state. Nor is there any reason to assume that McCook ever understood that there are other yellow species of Dorymyrmex in the southern states. Rather, it seems likely that with material from several states (implied by his statement on the distribution of D. flavus), McCook almost certainly had a mixed series.

As in the case of the neotype designation for D. insanus, Johnson did not use original orthography when designating his "lectotype": the specimen is labelled "Conomyrma flava (McCook)," rather than Dorymyrmex insanus var. flavus. I have examined with great care the few Larissa specimens that comprise the putative type series. There are a total of six specimens mounted on a single card on which were cut eight points; two specimens obviously now are lost, as indicated by the glue remnants on the two empty points.

The condition of these specimens is discouraging. When originally mounted, all were crushed against their respective points; gasters were uniformly flattened. Legs were "scrunched" up against and over the body, and the specimens are more or less covered by the adhesive material. In most specimens the heads are crushed and distorted. Finally, the specimens are dirty, with panicles of sand and other attached debris; the mouthparts cannot be studied because they are occluded by sand panicles and, in most specimens, glue as well. It is possible, however, to determine that the integument of the head and mesosoma is distinctly tessellate and moderately shiny.

These difficulties are true of all the Larissa specimens except the putative lectotype. In that specimen the head and body are not crushed; the gastral distonion is minor and limited to that resulting from normal drying of internal tissues. The specimen is not crushed flat against the point. The legs and antennae are fully visible, and no significant portions of the body are obscured by adhesive, din, or other debris; there is not a sand panicle to be seen anywhere on this specimen, including the mouthparts.

The "lectotype" differs radically from the other specimens on the card in one crucial character: in all the other individuals the mesonotal profile is obtusely angulate. Originally this feature was concealed, but I moved or removed legs so that the mesonotum was visible in all specimens. In the "lectotype" the mesonotum is nearly straight, exactly as in D. bureni.

Johnson's "lectotype" differs from the remaining specimens on the card in other features as well. The integument of the head and mesosoma is less sharply tessellate, hence shinier. Although difficult to determine in the other five specimens, the head of the "lectotype" is apparently both longer and relatively narrower; the antennal scape is proportionately longer. The psammophore is slightly nearer the oral cavity than the occipital foramen in the "lectotype" but slightly nearer the foramen in the others.

In short, in terms of preparation technique, physical condition, and morphological characteristics, the putative "lectotype" differs sharply from the other specimens with which it is now associated. In my opinion, it is conspecific with D. bureni and not with the other specimens on the card, all of which can be safely referred to D. flavus as that name has usually been interpreted. I can only conclude that Johnson's "lectotype" is, in fact, a specimen of D. bureni added to the card at a date later than the other specimens. As such, it is invalid and must be set aside.

At the same time, I do not believe it advisable to select a true lectotype from among the five authentic Larissa specimens, none of which is in sufficiently good condition that the important morphological characteristics are readily visible. Furthermore, while it is possible, even likely, that McCook had these specimens available when he described this ant, there is no way to prove that this is so.

The only obvious solution is to set aside all the Larissa specimens and to assume that no provable type material exists. It is then possible to designate a neotype that is consistent with McCook's original description and conforms to the visible morphological characteristics of the Larissa specimens. I have, therefore, selected as neotype a worker specimen collected 21 mi W Monahans, Ward Co., Texas, 6 June 1979, by O.F. Francke,].V. Moody, and F. W. Merickel; neotype is deposited in National Museum of Natural History; neoparatypes (8 females, 91 workers, 3 males) in The Natural History Museum, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Museum of Comparative Zoology, and USNM. Unless otherwise noted the text for the remainder of this section is reported from the publication that includes the original description.

Description

Worker

Snelling (1995) - Neotype, measurements (mm): HL 0.87; HW 0.74; SL 0.85; EL 0.27; TL 2.94. Indices and ratios: CI 85; SI 97; SI 2 114; 01 31; OMR 140; IOR 130.

Head broadest at level of eyes; in frontal view, sides gently and evenly convex, above broadly rounded onto venex; venex slightly convex in frontal view. Eye large, OMD about one-half as long as distance from eye summit to level of venex margin.

Promesonotal profile gently convex, mesonotum obtusely angulate behind. In profile, basal face of propodeum weakly sinuate; posterior tubercle erect and sharp, about as high as long; posterior declivity nearly straight.

Mandible shiny, costate for nearly entire length. Clypeus and lower face shiny, head distinctly shagreened and less shiny dorsally; mesosoma and gaster similar to upper one-half of head.

Front of head, above level of lower eye margins, with dense appressed pubescence; mesosoma (sparser on sides) and gaster similar. Erect setae as described for Dorymyrmex insanus, except pronotum without discal seta pair.

Color yellowish, head slightly reddish, and last three gastral segments medium brown; appendages yellowish, last flagellar segment brownish.

Neoparatype (mm): HL 0.83-0.91; HW 0.69-0.79; SL 0.83-0.90; EL 0.24-0.27; TL 2.83-3.08. Indices and ratios: CI 83-87; SI 98-100; SI 2 112-114; 01 29-30; OMR 79-81; IOR 130-138.

Neoparatypes agree generally with above description but largest workers with venex margin nearly flat in frontal view; of the 91 paralectotype workers, 27 have at least one (most often two) erect submedian setae on the disc of the pronotum.

Queen

Snelling (1995) - (mm): HL 1.05-1.09; HW 1.05-1.08; SL 0.95-0.97; EL 0.37-0.40; TL 5.74-6.13. Indices and ratios: CI 98-101; SI 87-92; SI2 89-91; 01 35-36; OMR 171-200; IOR 161-172.

Head broadest above eyes, margins weakly convex in frontal view, dorsally broadly rounded onto venex; venex margin nearly flat to weakly convex. Eye margins, in frontal view, coincident with or slightly exceeding head margin; distance from eye summit ro level of venex about two times OMD.

Mesosoma, in dorsal view, about as wide as head. Pilosity about as described for D. insanus but head margins in frontal view with few suberect or erect hairs. Color light yellowish brown, with variable slightly duskier blotches on head and mesosoma; gaster more brownish, terga more yellowish basad and with broad pallid apical margins.

Karyotype

Explore-icon.png Explore: Show all Karyotype data or Search these data. See also a list of all data tables or learn how data is managed.
  • 2n = 26 (USA) (Cokendolpher & Francke, 1984) (as Conomyrma flava).

References

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

  • Alayo D. P. 1974. Introduccion al estudio de los Himenopteros de Cuba. Superfamilia Formicoidea. Academia de Ciencias de Cuba. Instituto de Zoologia. Serie Biologica no.53: 58 pp. La Habana.
  • Albrecht M. 1995. New Species Distributions of Ants in Oklahoma, including a South American Invader. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 75: 21-24.
  • Borgmeier T. 1923. Catalogo systematico e synonymico das formigas do Brasil. 1 parte. Subfam. Dorylinae, Cerapachyinae, Ponerinae, Dolichoderinae. Archivos do Museu Nacional (Rio de Janeiro) 24: 33-103.
  • Buren W. F. 1941. A preliminary list of Iowa ants. Iowa State College Journal of Science 15: 111-117
  • Buren W. F. 1944. A list of Iowa ants. Iowa State College Journal of Science 18:277-312
  • Cokendolpher J. C., and O. F. Francke. 1985. Karyotype of Conomyrma flava (McCook) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 92: 349-351.
  • Cokendolpher J. C., and O. F. Francke. 1990. The ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of western Texas. Part II. Subfamilies Ecitoninae, Ponerinae, Pseudomyrmecinae, Dolichoderinae, and Formicinae. Special Publications, the Museum. Texas Tech University 30:1-76.
  • Cole A. C., Jr. 1942. The ants of Utah. American Midland Naturalist 28: 358-388.
  • Cook J. L. 2003. Conservation of biodiversity in an area impacted by the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 187–195.
  • Dash S. T. and L. M. Hooper-Bui. 2008. Species diversity of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Louisiana. Conservation Biology and Biodiversity. 101: 1056-1066
  • Dattilo W. et al. 2019. MEXICO ANTS: incidence and abundance along the Nearctic-Neotropical interface. Ecology https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2944
  • Fernandez Triana J. L., H. Sariol, M. A. Vega Castillo, S. Ricardo, M. Gonzalez, and E. P. Ferrer. 2002. Datos preliminares dobre la biodiversidad del orden Hymenoptera en la provincia Granma, Cuba. Bol. S.E.A. 31: 43-48.
  • Forel A. 1908. Ameisen aus Sao Paulo (Brasilien), Paraguay etc. gesammelt von Prof. Herm. v. Ihering, Dr. Lutz, Dr. Fiebrig, etc. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien 58: 340-418.
  • Forel A. 1912. Formicides néotropiques. Part V. 4me sous-famille Dolichoderinae Forel. Mémoires de la Société Entomologique de Belgique. 20: 33-58.
  • Forster J.A. 2005. The Ants (hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Alabama. Master of Science, Auburn University. 242 pages.
  • General D., and L. Thompson. 2008. New distributional records of ants in Arkansas. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science 62: 148-150.
  • Gregg R. E. 1945 (1944). The ants of the Chicago region. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 37: 447-480
  • Johnson C. 1989. Taxonomy and Diagnosis of Conomyrma insane (Buckley) and C. flava (McCook) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insecta Mundi. 3: 179-194
  • Jusino-Atresino R., and S. A. Phillips, Jr. 1992. New ant records for Taylor Co., Texas. The Southern Naturalist 34(4): 430-433.
  • Kempf, W.W. 1972. Catalago abreviado das formigas da regiao Neotropical (Hym. Formicidae) Studia Entomologica 15(1-4).
  • 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.
  • Luederwaldt H. 1918. Notas myrmecologicas. Rev. Mus. Paul. 10: 29-64.
  • MacGown J. A., T. L. Schiefer, and M. G. Branstetter. 2015. First record of the genus Leptanilloides (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Dorylinae) from the United States. Zootaxa 4006 (2): 392–400.
  • MacGown J. A., and R. Whitehouse. 2015. A preliminary report of the ants of West Ship Island. A report submitted to the Gulf Islands National Seashore. Mississippi Entomological Museum Report #2015-02. 9 pp.
  • MacGown, J.A and J.A. Forster. 2005. A preliminary list of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Alabama, U.S.A. Entomological News 116(2):61-74
  • MacGown, J.A. and T. Lockley. Ants of Horn Island, Jackson County, Mississippi
  • Mackay W. P., and E. E. Mackay. 2002. The ants of New Mexico (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 400 pp.
  • Mallis A. 1941. A list of the ants of California with notes on their habits and distribution. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 40: 61-100. 
  • Mann W. M. 1916. The Stanford Expedition to Brazil, 1911, John C. Branner, Director. The ants of Brazil. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 60: 399-490
  • Mann W. M. 1920. Additions to the ant fauna of the West Indies and Central America. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 42: 403-439.
  • McDonald D. L., D. R. Hoffpauir, and J. L. Cook. 2016. Survey yields seven new Texas county records and documents further spread of Red Imported Fire Ant, Solenopsis invicta Buren. Southwestern Entomologist, 41(4): 913-920.
  • Menozzi C, Russo G. 1930. Contributo alla conoscenza della mirmecofauna della Repubblica Dominicana (Antille). Bollettino del Laboratorio di Zoologia Generale e Agraria della Reale Scuola Superiore d'Agricoltura. Portici. 24: 148-173.
  • Morrison, L.W. 2002. Long-Term Impacts of an Arthropod-Community Invasion by the Imported Fire Ant, Solenopsis invicta. Ecology 83(8):2337-2345
  • 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.
  • Pergande, T. 1895. Mexican Formicidae. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences Ser. 2 :850-896
  • Rico-Gray,V., J.G. Garcia-Franco, M. Palacios-Rios, C. Diaz-Castelazo, V. Parra-Tabla and J.A. Navarro. 1998. Geographical and Seasonal Variation in the Richness of Ant-Plant Interactions in Mexico. Biotropica 30(2):190-200.
  • Rios-Casanova, L., A. Valiente-Banuet, and V. Rico-Gray. (2004). Las hormigas del Valle de Tehuacan (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): una comparacion con otras zonas aridas de Mexico. Acta Zoologica Mexicana 20: 37-54.
  • Roeder K. A., and D. V. Roeder. 2016. A checklist and assemblage comparison of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge in Oklahoma. Check List 12(4): 1935.
  • Serrano-Cardozo, V. H., J. A. Lemos-Espinal, and G. R. Smith. 2008. Comparative diet of three sympatric Sceloporus in the semiarid Zapotitlan Valley, Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 79: 427-434.
  • Shattuck S. O. 1994. Taxonomic catalog of the ant subfamilies Aneuretinae and Dolichoderinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). University of California Publications in Entomology 112: i-xix, 1-241.
  • Smith M. R. 1918. A key to the known species of South Carolina ants, with notes (Hym.). Entomological News 29: 17-29.
  • Smith M. R. 1924. An annotated list of the ants of Mississippi (Hym.) (continued from page 54). Entomological News 35: 77-85.
  • Smith M. R. 1934. A list of the ants of South Carolina. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 42: 353-361.
  • Smith M. R. 1935. A list of the ants of Oklahoma (Hymen.: Formicidae). Entomological News 46: 235-241.
  • Smith M. R. 1936. A list of the ants of Texas. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 44: 155-170.
  • Smith M. R. 1937. The ants of Puerto Rico. Journal of Agriculture of the University of Puerto Rico 20: 819-875.
  • Smith M. R., and W. A. Morrison. 1916. South Carolina ants. Entomological News 27: 110-111.
  • Snelling R.R. 1995. Systematics of Nearctic Ants of the Genus Dorymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Contributions in Science. 454: 1-14
  • Snelling, R.R. 1995. Sytematics of Nearctic ants of the genus Dorymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Contributions in Science Natural Histrory Museum of Los Angeles County 454:1-14
  • Tanquary M. C. 1912. A preliminary list of ants from Illinois. Trans. Ill. Acad. Sci. 4: 137-142.
  • Van Pelt A. F. 1948. A Preliminary Key to the Worker Ants of Alachua County, Florida. The Florida Entomologist 30(4): 57-67
  • Vásquez-Bolaños M. 2011. Lista de especies de hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) para México. Dugesiana 18: 95-133
  • Wheeler G. C., and J. Wheeler J. 1989. A checklist of the ants of Oklahoma. Prairie Naturalist 21: 203-210.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1901. The compound and mixed nests of American ants. Part II (continued). American Naturalist. 35: 701-724.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1904. The ants of North Carolina. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 20: 299-306.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1905. The ants of the Bahamas, with a list of the known West Indian species. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 21: 79-135.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1908. The ants of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 24: 117-158.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1913. The ants of Cuba. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 54: 477-505.
  • Wheeler W. M. 1932. A list of the ants of Florida with descriptions of new forms. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 40: 1-17.
  • Wheeler W. M., and W. M. Mann. 1914. The ants of Haiti. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 33: 1-61.
  • Wheeler, William Morton. 1936. Ants From Hispaniola and Mona Island. Bulletin: Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. 80(2):192-211.
Retrieved from "https://antwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Dorymyrmex_flavus&oldid=720196"