Fulakora lurilabes

AntWiki: The Ants --- Online
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Fulakora lurilabes
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Order: Hymenoptera
Family: Formicidae
Subfamily: Amblyoponinae
Tribe: Amblyoponini
Genus: Fulakora
Species: F. lurilabes
Binomial name
Fulakora lurilabes
(Lattke, 1991)

Amblyopone lurilabes casent0102199 profile 1.jpg

Amblyopone lurilabes casent0102199 dorsal 1.jpg

Specimen labels

A ground dwelling species.


Modified from Lattke (1991): The dense anterior sculpturing on the cephalic dorsum separates this species from Fulakora elongata (Santschi) and Fulakora monrosi Brown, which are predominantly smooth and shining. Fulakora lurilabes is apparently sympatric with F. elongata in northern Argentina, and F. monrosi is an endemic Chilean ant. Fulakora armigera (Mayr) is larger in size, with proportionally much larger gular teeth, and larger punctures and more prominent rugae on the cephalic dorsum than F. lurilabes. An apparently exclusive character that separates F. lurilabes from the rest of New World Fulakora is the spot on each posterolateral propodeal face.

Keys including this Species


Latitudinal Distribution Pattern

Latitudinal Range: 11.304° to -22.809943°.

Tropical South

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists

Neotropical Region: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela (type locality).

Lattke (1991): Most of the records for this species are concentrated in northern South America, with the exception of a specimen from northern Argentina and the Peruvian record. The large gaps in its distribution is unexpected considering the fact that this species is apparently not uncommon, judging from the number of specimens available for study.

Distribution based on AntMaps


Distribution based on AntWeb specimens

Check data from AntWeb


Lattke (1991): The holotype nest consisting of two queens and 17 workers was found beneath a stone in a coffee plantation. Beneath the same stone and apparently with overlapping nest limits was a colony of Basiceros disciger (Mayr). Other samples come from leaf litter samples taken mostly in humid and wet forests, between elevations of 70-1000 m. A Peruvian specimen was captured in clay soil at the base of a large tree growing in mature "tierra firme" forest.


Males of this species have not been collected.



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

  • lurilabes. Amblyopone lurilabes Lattke, 1991c: 2, fig. 2 (w.q.) VENEZUELA, COLOMBIA, ECUADOR, TRINIDAD, ARGENTINA, PERU.
    • Type-material: holotype worker, 17 paratype workers, 1 paratype queen.
    • Type-locality: holotype Venezuela: Portuguesa, 6 km. SE Biscucuy, 9°18’N, 70°01’W, 1000 m., 18.viii.1983, no. 438 (J. Lattke); paratypes: 11 workers, 1 queen with same data, 1(?) worker Colombia: Guajira, Serranía de Macuira, 6-8 km. S Nazareth, 70-200 m., 13.vi.1975 (W.L. Brown & C. Kugler), 1(?) worker Colombia: Magdalena, Parque Tayrona, nr Pueblito, 200 m., 15.x.1977 (C. Kugler), 1(?) worker Colombia: Meta, Villavicencio, 3.iii.1972 (S. & J. Peck), 1(?) worker Ecuador: Pichincha, Tinalandia, 16 km. Santo Domingo de los Colorados, 4.vi.1976 (S. & J. Peck), 1(?) worker Ecuador: Manabí, 73 km. NE Chone, 300 m., 12.vi.1976 (S. & J. Peck).
    • Type-depositories: MIZA (holotype); CASC, LACM, MCZC, MZSP (paratypes).
    • Combination in Stigmatomma: Yoshimura & Fisher, 2012a: 19;
    • combination in Fulakora: Ward & Fisher, 2016: 691.
    • Status as species: Bolton, 1995b: 62; Lacau & Delabie, 2002: 40 (in key); Wild, 2007b: 23; Arias-Penna, 2008a: 45; Feitosa, 2015c: 97; Guénard & Economo, 2015: 226; Fernández, Delsinne & Arias-Penna, 2019: 505.
    • Distribution: Agentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad, Venezuela.

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



Holotype (paratypes) dimensions: HL 0.76 (0.72-0.80), ML 0.54 (0.50-0.56), HW 0.60 (0.57-0.70), SL 0.34 (0.35-0.40), WL 0.90 (0.94-1.00) mm, CI 0.79 (0.79-1.00), SI 0.57 (0.57-0.63); n=5.

Head in full face view with straight to gently convex posterior border, sides slightly convex and diverging anterad. Gular teeth small and acute. Anterior clypeal border convex, usually with 6 teeth: median pair may be separate or fused to a variable degree, single tooth on each side, and heavy, usually bidentate lateral teeth. Sometimes a single tooth may be present between median teeth and lateral tooth; one specimen with small denticle between median teeth. Inner mandibular margin with large basal triangular tooth, smaller subbasal tooth, series of four basally fused double teeth. A small preapical, usually bicuspid tooth present before long, sharp apical tooth. Dorsal and ventral mandibular surfaces longitudinally rugose. Scape with longitudinal rugulae and low oval depressions.

Cephalic dorsum densely reticulate-punctate and with noticeable longitudinal rugulae on anterior one-fourth to one-third of head, much weaker rugulae, sometimes barely discernible, extend caudad toward vertex. Some oblique striae on gular area. A narrow longitudinal median strip of smoother sculpture present, extending from behind frontal carinae to vertex. Microsculpture on posterior cephalic dorsum coriarious. Head ventrum smooth, with scattered piligerous punctures; occiput smooth and shining with some punctures. Eyes consisting of single ommatidium situated behind cephalic midlength.

Mesosoma laterally with nearly flat dorsal margin, promesonotal suture marked, metanotal suture totally effaced. Propodeal dorsum slightly higher than rest of mesosomal dorsum, broadly curving into gently convex declivitous face. Propodeal dorsum smooth and shining, with scattered punctures, declivitous face glabrous. Mesosoma widest at pronotum, narrowest at mesonotum, which is transverse; propodeum has broadly convex sides that diverge caudad. Pronotal sides smooth and shining with scattered punctures. Metepisternal and lateral propodeal faces glabrous, except for inferoposterior transverse striae with some punctures below propodeal spiracle. Katepisternum with transverse rugulae, anepisternum smooth and shining.

Petiole laterally with straight to slightly concave anterior face, meeting the flat to slightly convex dorsal face at right angle. Petiole dorsally longer than wide, postpetiole transverse. Subpetiolar process elongate, with slightly concave inferior margin. Gaster smooth and shining with scattered piligerous punctures. Femora and tibia, especially middle and hind, laterally compressed. Apex of fore tibia with large pectinate spur, mesotibia with small slender spur and metatibia with large curved pectinate spur and an accompanying smaller, more slender one. Empodia present, claws simple.

Head very dark brown; antennae, mandibles, petiole, and posterior pronotal margins dark ferruginous yellow. Mesosoma mostly black; gaster light to dark yellowish-brown. Legs ferruginous yellow. Lateroposterior corners of propodeum with oblong patch usually testaceous to dark ferruginous yellow. Body with short standing hairs on mesosoma, longer on anterior face of pronotum, posterior margin of propodeal dorsal face and toward apex of gaster. Pubescence mostly sparse and appressed.


HL 0.72, 0.71; ML 0.44, 0.47; HW 0.58, 0.56; SL 0.35, 0.35; ED 0.10, 0.11; WL 1.00, 1.00 mm; CI 0.81, 0.79; MI 0.76, 0.84; SI 0.60, 0.63.

Two paranidotypes with same collection data as holotype. Deposited in IZAV. Significant differences from the workers are the usual: presence of compound eyes, ocelli, and more mesosomal development, plus wing stumps. Punctures of cephalic dorsum are shallower than in worker, and the longitudinal rugulae are more noticeable. Pilosity more abundant than worker.

Type Material

Holotype worker: VENEZUELA, Portuguesa, 6 km SE Biscucuy, 9°18'N 70º01'W, 1000 m, 18-VIII-1983, J. Lattke, leg. no. 438. Deposited in Instituto de Zoologia Agricola. Paratypes: (1) Eleven nidoparatypic workers and queen with the same collection data as the holotype. One worker each in Museum of Comparative Zoology, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo.


The name of this species is a conjugation of the Latin adjective for pale yellowish, luridus, and the Latin noun for spot, labes. The name alludes to the unique propodeal spots.


References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

  • Fernández F., and T. M. Arias-Penna. 2008. Las hormigas cazadoras en la región Neotropical. Pp. 3-39 in: Jiménez, E.; Fernández, F.; Arias, T.M.; Lozano-Zambrano, F. H. (eds.) 2008. Sistemática, biogeografía y conservación de las hormigas cazadoras de Colombia. Bogotá: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, xiv + 609 pp.
  • Fernández, F. and S. Sendoya. 2004. Lista de las hormigas neotropicales. Biota Colombiana Volume 5, Number 1.
  • Franco W., N. Ladino, J. H. C. Delabie, A. Dejean, J. Orivel, M. Fichaux, S. Groc, M. Leponce, and R. M. Feitosa. 2019. First checklist of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of French Guiana. Zootaxa 4674(5): 509-543.
  • Groc S., J. H. C. Delabie, F. Fernandez, M. Leponce, J. Orivel, R. Silvestre, Heraldo L. Vasconcelos, and A. Dejean. 2013. Leaf-litter ant communities (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in a pristine Guianese rainforest: stable functional structure versus high species turnover. Myrmecological News 19: 43-51.
  • Groc S., J. Orivel, A. Dejean, J. Martin, M. Etienne, B. Corbara, and J. H. C. Delabie. 2009. Baseline study of the leaf-litter ant fauna in a French Guianese forest. Insect Conservation and Diversity 2: 183-193.
  • Lapolla, J.S., T. Suman, J. Soso-Calvo and T.R. Schultz. 2006. Leaf litter ant diversity in Guyana. Biodiversity and Conservation 16:491–510
  • Lattke, J. E. 1991. Studies of neotropical Amblyopone Erichson (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Contributions in Science (Los Angel.) 428: 1-7
  • Medeiros Macedo L. P., E. B. Filho, amd J. H. C. Delabie. 2011. Epigean ant communities in Atlantic Forest remnants of São Paulo: a comparative study using the guild concept. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 55(1): 75–78.
  • Resende J. J., G. M. de M. Santos, I. C. do Nascimento, J. H. C. Delabie, and E. M. da Silva. 2011. Communities of ants (Hymenoptera – Formicidae) in different Atlantic rain forest phytophysionomies. Sociobiology 58(3): 779-799.
  • Silvestre R., M. F. Demetrio, and J. H. C. Delabie. 2012. Community Structure of Leaf-Litter Ants in a Neotropical Dry Forest: A Biogeographic Approach to Explain Betadiversity. Psyche doi:10.1155/2012/306925
  • Siqueira de Castro F., A. B. Gontijo, W. Duarte da Rocha, and S. Pontes Ribeiro. 2011. As comunidades de formigas de serapilheira nas florestas semidecíduas do Parque Estadual do Rio Doce, Minas Gerais. MG.BIOTA, Belo Horizonte 3(5): 5-24.
  • Soares, S.M. and J.H. Schoereder. 2001. Ant-nest distribution in a remnant of tropical rainforest in southeastern Brazil. Insectes Sociaux 48:280-286
  • Vasconcelos, H.L., J.M.S. Vilhena, W.E. Magnusson and A.L.K.M. Albernaz. 2006. Long-term effects of forest fragmentation on Amazonian ant communities. Journal of Biogeography 33:1348-1356
  • Wild, A. L.. "A catalogue of the ants of Paraguay (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)." Zootaxa 1622 (2007): 1-55.