Prenolepis

Every Ant Tells a Story - And Scientists Explain Their Stories Here
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Prenolepis
Temporal range: 37.2–0 Ma
Middle Eocene – Recent
Prenolepis imparis
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Order: Hymenoptera
Family: Formicidae
Subfamily: Formicinae
Tribe: Lasiini
Genus: Prenolepis
Mayr, 1861
Type species
Tapinoma nitens, now Prenolepis nitens
Diversity
19 species
1 fossil species
(Species Checklist)

Prenolepis imparis casent0102823 profile 1.jpg

Prenolepis imparis

Prenolepis imparis casent0102823 dorsal 1.jpg

Specimen Label

The genus Prenolepis is a relatively small clade of formicine ants that includes thirteen extant species and one fossil species. While most species are found in southern China and southeastern Asia (11 of the 13 extant species), there is one very widespread species found in North America and a species in southeastern Europe. One fossil species is known from mid-Eocene (ca. 44 Ma) Baltic amber (LaPolla & Dlussky 2010). Within the Formicinae, Prenolepis belongs to a speciose clade known as the Prenolepis genus-group, which includes six other genera: Euprenolepis, Nylanderia, Paraparatrechina, Paratrechina, Pseudolasius, and Zatania (LaPolla et al. 2010a; LaPolla et al. 2012).


Evolutionary Relationships
Formicinae

Myrmelachistini
  (2 genera)




Lasiini

Cladomyrma
  (13 species)





Lasius
  (123 species)



Myrmecocystus
  (30 species)






Zatania
  (6 species)




Paraparatrechina
  (42 species)



Prenolepis
  (19 species)






Nylanderia
  (147 species)




Pseudolasius
  (66 species)




Euprenolepis
  (8 species)



Paratrechina
  (6 species)











Melophorini
  (9 genera)




Formicini
  (8 genera)





Gesomyrmex, Oecophylla



Plagiolepidini
  (9 genera)





Gigantiops, Myrmoteras, Santschiella



Camponotini
  (8 genera)








Based on Ward et al. (2016) and Matos-Maravi et al. (2018).

Identification

Keys including this Genus

 

Keys to Species in this Genus

Distribution

Distribution and Richness based on AntMaps

Biology

Williams and LaPolla (2016) - Most of what is known about the biology and natural history of Prenolepis comes from what has been observed in the widespread North American species, Prenolepis imparis (sometimes called the false honey ant). The biology of P. imparis is recounted here, but it is not known how general its biology is overall with regards to other species in the genus, and it is important to bear in mind P. imparis is a temperate species whereas most Prenolepis are found in tropical habitats. In P. imparis, colonies are polygynous, but contain relatively small numbers of workers (typically a few thousand workers in a colony) (Wheeler & Wheeler 1986; Tschinkel 1987). The nests of P. imparis are exceedingly deep with no chambers found shallower than 60 centimeters below the ground surface and going down as far as 3.6 m (Tschinkel 1987).

False honey ants are peculiar in that the workers are cold-tolerant and forage during the cooler months when most other ant species are inactive. The colony enters an estivation period and becomes inactive above ground for the warmer months, during which time eggs are laid and brood are reared. Reproductives overwinter and emerge on the first warm day of spring for their nuptial flight. One characteristic of P. imparis colonies is the presence of workers with greatly extended gasters. Corpulents were once believed to be true repletes like those of genus Myrmecocystus (Wheeler 1930a; Talbot 1943) until Tschinkel (1987) determined that their enlarged state is actually caused by hypertrophied fat bodies and not the result of crop distention from retained liquid food. Prenolepis imparis is a generalist omnivore (Wheeler 1930a).

The biology of the European false honey ant (Prenolepis nitens) is similar to that of P. imparis (Lőrinczi 2015), but it remains unclear if other Prenolepis species, all of which are found in the tropics, display similar natural histories. It is worth noting that P. imparis and P. nitens are sister taxa and they may in fact be sister to the rest of the Prenolepis (LaPolla et al. 2012; this study). Across all Prenolepis species most specimens are collected using leaf litter extraction methods such as Berlese and Winkler extractors (LaPolla et al. 2010a). Even though P. imparis and P. nitens are one of the most commonly encountered ants in the temperate North, based on their relative rarity in collections, tropical Prenolepis species appear to be far less common. It is also possible that their biology makes them less likely to be collected using standard collecting methods. For instance, some Euprenolepis and Zatania species are known to be nocturnal. Unfortunately, for most species reproductives have not been collected.

Association with Other Organisms

All Associate Records for Genus

Explore Associate Data: All, Drilldown
Taxon Relationship Associate Type Associate Taxon Associate Relationship Locality Source Notes
Prenolepis henschei host nematode Heydenius formicinus parasite Baltic amber Poinar, 2002 Baltic amber fossil
Prenolepis imparis host fungus Laboulbenia formicarum pathogen Espadaler & Santamaria, 2012

Castes

Morphology

Worker Morphology

 • Antennal segment count 12 • Antennal club absent-gradual weak • Palp formula 6,4 • Total dental count 6-7 • Spur formula 1 simple, 1 simple • Eyes present • Scrobes absent • Sting absent

Karyotype

All Karyotype Records for Genus

Explore Karyotype Data: All, Drilldown
Taxon Haploid Diploid Karyotype Locality Source Notes
Prenolepis imparis 16 Switzerland Hauschteck, 1962
Prenolepis jerdoni 30 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 31 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 32 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 34 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 34 Malaysia Goni et al., 1982
Prenolepis jerdoni 36 Malaysia Goni et al., 1982
Prenolepis jerdoni 16 32 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 20 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 25 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome
Prenolepis jerdoni 27 Malaysia Imai et al., 1983 B Chromosome

Nomenclature

The following information is derived from Barry Bolton's New General Catalogue, a catalogue of the world's ants.

  • PRENOLEPIS [Formicinae: Plagiolepidini]
    • Prenolepis Mayr, 1861: 52. Type-species: Tapinoma nitens, by subsequent designation of Bingham, 1903: 325.
    • [Type-species not Formica imparis, unjustified subsequent designation by Emery, 1906b: 134, repeated in Wheeler, W.M. 1911f: 171 and Wheeler, W.M. 1922a: 940.]

Williams and LaPolla (2016) - For only two species are all castes known (Prenolepis imparis and Prenolepis nitens); therefore, we provide only a worker-based diagnosis for the genus. The character states for characters 12 (mesonotum with a strong mesonotal depression that gives the appearance of a mesonotal constriction) and 15 (presence of rugae that cross from the mesonotum to the mesopleuron) are assumed to be synapomorphies based on the phylogenetic analysis mentioned above.

1. Monomorphic, medium to large in size (2.4–4.9 mm in total length); ranging from pale yellow to dark brown in color.

2. The head, mesosoma, and gaster are typically covered in erect macrosetae that are thin and wispy. Pairs of erect macrosetae run medially from the clypeus to the posterior margin of the head.

3. Antennae 12-segmented; scapes vary in length among species (SI range 109–214), but they always surpass the posterior margin and most species have a scape index above 130; dense setation on scapes.

4. Eyes medium to large relative to head width (REL2 range 21–49) and placed far posterior to the midline of the head (EPI > 125); eyes convex, sometimes surpassing the lateral margin of the head in full-face view.

5. Mandibles with 5–7 teeth on the masticatory margin; apical tooth the longest, 3rd and 5th tooth from apical reduced and 6th tooth also reduced when 7 teeth are present; in many species the ectal surface of the mandibles has longitudinal striations.

6. Palp formula 6:4.

7. In profile view, the mesonotum in all Prenolepis species is curved and depressed immediately posterior to the pronotum, which gives the appearance of a mesonotal constriction; longitudinal rugae that extend from the mesonotum to the mesopleuron are present at the constriction; mesosoma can be robust as seen in P. nitens, but sometimes much more gracile as seen in Prenolepis subopaca (BLI range 122–206).

8. In profile view, the propodeum is at about the same height or slightly higher than the mesonotum; propodeum is either domed with a rounded dorsal face as seen in Prenolepis naoroji, or obtusely angled with a flat dorsal face as seen in Prenolepis angularis.

9. Mesonotal and metanotal sutures are absent or in complete and shallow.

10. In profile view, petiole is typically forward-inclined and wedge-shaped, but in some species the petiole is elongate with a more rounded dorsal apex of the scale.

11. Legs are elongate (profemur length 0.7–1.5mm).

The constriction of the mesonotum has long been used as a defining characteristic of Prenolepis. However, the mesonotal constriction observed in Prenolepis species is distinct from what has been described as a mesonotal constriction in species from other genera, including the following: Nylanderia emmae, Nylanderia opisopthalmia, Paratrechina umbra, Paraparatrechina pallida, Zatania gibberosa, and Zatania gloriosa. In profile view, all of these species have an elongated mesosoma with a flattened mesonotum. By contrast, the constriction seen in all Prenolepis species is defined by a distinct mesonotal depression immediately posterior to the pronotum and longitudinal rugae that extend from the mesonotum to the mesopleuron. The mesosoma is also not elongate in most Prenolepis species (except Prenolepis jerdoni, and P. subopaca). Understanding the difference between a true mesonotal constriction and an elongated mesosoma (which on first examination can appear to be the same thing) is essential if a species is to be placed in its proper genus. Confusion regarding this distinction has led to species being placed in Prenolepis that did not belong there. Another important morphological feature for determining proper genus placement within the Prenolepis genus-group is differences in mesosomal sutures. All species of Prenolepis, Paraparatrechina, and Zatania have shallow and incomplete mesosomal sutures. The other four genera, Nylanderia (except Nylanderia opisopthalmia, Paratrechina, Pseudolasius, and Euprenolepis, have mesosomal sutures that are deep and complete.

References

  • Agosti, D. 1991. Revision of the oriental ant genus Cladomyrma, with an outline of the higher classification of the Formicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Syst. Entomol. 16: 293-310 (page 296, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasius genus group)
  • Arnold, G. 1922. A monograph of the Formicidae of South Africa. Part V. Myrmicinae. Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 14: 579-674 (page 605, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Ashmead, W. H. 1905c. A skeleton of a new arrangement of the families, subfamilies, tribes and genera of the ants, or the superfamily Formicoidea. Can. Entomol. 37: 381-384 (page 384, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Plagiolepidini)
  • Bingham, C. T. 1903. The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Hymenoptera, Vol. II. Ants and Cuckoo-wasps. London: Taylor and Francis, 506 pp. (page 325, Type-species: Tapinoma nitens, by subsequent designation)
  • Bolton, B. 1994. Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 222 pp. (page 50, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Bolton, B. 2003. Synopsis and Classification of Formicidae. Mem. Am. Entomol. Inst. 71: 370pp (page 105, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Plagiolepidini)
  • Chapman, J. W.; Capco, S. R. 1951. Check list of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Asia. Monogr. Inst. Sci. Technol. Manila 1: 1-327 (page 219, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Dalla Torre, K. W. von. 1893. Catalogus Hymenopterorum hucusque descriptorum systematicus et synonymicus. Vol. 7. Formicidae (Heterogyna). Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 289 pp. (page 177, Prenolepis in Camponotinae)
  • Dlussky, G. M.; Fedoseeva, E. B. 1988. Origin and early stages of evolution in ants. Pp. 70-144 in: Ponomarenko, A. G. (ed.) Cretaceous biocenotic crisis and insect evolution. Moskva: Nauka, 232 pp. (page 77, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Donisthorpe, H. 1943g. A list of the type-species of the genera and subgenera of the Formicidae. [part]. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 11(10): 617-688 (page 685, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Acanthyomyopsini)
  • Emery, C. 1895l. Die Gattung Dorylus Fab. und die systematische Eintheilung der Formiciden. Zool. Jahrb. Abt. Syst. Geogr. Biol. Tiere 8: 685-778 (page 772, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Formicini)
  • Emery, C. 1925d. Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Formicinae. Genera Insectorum 183: 1-302 (page 224, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Emery, C.; Forel, A. 1879. Catalogue des Formicides d'Europe. Mitt. Schweiz. Entomol. Ges. 5: 441-481 (page 453, Prenolepis in Camponotinae [Camponotidae])
  • Forel, A. 1878c. Études myrmécologiques en 1878 (première partie) avec l'anatomie du gésier des fourmis. Bull. Soc. Vaudoise Sci. Nat. 15: 337-392 (page 377, Prenolepis in Camponotinae [Camponotidae])
  • Forel, A. 1886a. Einige Ameisen aus Itajahy (Brasilien). Mitt. Schweiz. Entomol. Ges. 7: 210-217 (page 209, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Camponotini)
  • Forel, A. 1893b. Sur la classification de la famille des Formicides, avec remarques synonymiques. Ann. Soc. Entomol. Belg. 37: 161-167 (page 165, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Formicini)
  • Forel, A. 1895b. A fauna das formigas do Brazil. Bol. Mus. Para. Hist. Nat. Ethnogr. 1: 89-139 (page 103, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Formicini)
  • Forel, A. 1899h. Formicidae. [part]. Biol. Cent.-Am. Hym. 3: 105-136 (page 125, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Formicini)
  • Forel, A. 1912j. Formicides néotropiques. Part VI. 5me sous-famille Camponotinae Forel. Mém. Soc. Entomol. Belg. 20: 59-92 (page 89, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Forel, A. 1917. Cadre synoptique actuel de la faune universelle des fourmis. Bull. Soc. Vaudoise Sci. Nat. 51: 229-253 (page 249, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Hölldobler, B.; Wilson, E. O. 1990. The ants. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, xii + 732 pp. (page 18, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Prenolepidini (anachronism))
  • Jaffe, K. 1993. El mundo de las hormigas. Baruta, Venezuela: Equinoccio (Ediciones de la Universidad Simón Bolívar), 188 pp. (page 14, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Kempf, W. W. 1972b. Catálogo abreviado das formigas da regia~o Neotropical. Stud. Entomol. 15: 3-344 (page 209, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Matos-Maraví, P., Clouse, R.M., Sarnat, E.M., Economo, E.P., LaPolla, J.S., Borovanska, M., Rabeling, C., Czekanski-Moir, J., Latumahina, F., Wilson, E.O., Janda, M. 2018. An ant genus-group (Prenolepis) illuminates the biogeography and drivers of insect diversification in the Indo-Pacific. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 123, 16–25 (doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2018.02.007).
  • Mayr, G. 1861. Die europäischen Formiciden. Nach der analytischen Methode bearbeitet. Wien: C. Gerolds Sohn, 80 pp. (page 52, Prenolepis as genus; Prenolepis in Formicinae [Formicidae])
  • Mayr, G. 1862. Myrmecologische Studien. Verh. K-K. Zool.-Bot. Ges. Wien 12: 649-776 (page 652, Prenolepis in Formicinae [Formicidae])
  • Mayr, G. 1865. Formicidae. In: Reise der Österreichischen Fregatte "Novara" um die Erde in den Jahren 1857, 1858, 1859. Zoologischer Theil. Bd. II. Abt. 1. Wien: K. Gerold's Sohn, 119 pp. (page 7, Prenolepis in Formicinae [Formicidae])
  • Mayr, G. 1868c. Die Ameisen des baltischen Bernsteins. Beitr. Naturkd. Preuss. 1: 1-102 (page 32, Prenolepis in Formicinae [Formicidae])
  • Smith, D. R. 1979. Superfamily Formicoidea. Pp. 1323-1467 in: Krombein, K. V., Hurd, P. D., Smith, D. R., Burks, B. D. (eds.) Catalog of Hymenoptera in America north of Mexico. Volume 2. Apocrita (Aculeata). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Pr (page 1444, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Stitz, H. 1939. Die Tierwelt Deutschlands und der angrenzenden Meersteile nach ihren Merkmalen und nach ihrer Lebensweise. 37. Theil. Hautflüger oder Hymenoptera. I: Ameisen oder Formicidae. Jena: G. Fischer, 428 pp. (page 379, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Lasiini)
  • Wheeler, G. C.; Wheeler, J. 1970b. Ant larvae of the subfamily Formicinae: second supplement. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 63: 648-656 (page 651, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Brachymyrmecini)
  • Wheeler, G. C.; Wheeler, J. 1976b. Ant larvae: review and synthesis. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 7: 1-108 (page 101, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Brachymyrmecini)
  • Wheeler, G. C.; Wheeler, J. 1985b. A simplified conspectus of the Formicidae. Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 111: 255-264 (page 258, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Brachymyrmecini)
  • Wheeler, W. M. 1910b. Ants: their structure, development and behavior. New York: Columbia University Press, xxv + 663 pp. (page 143, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Formicini)
  • Wheeler, W. M. 1915i [1914]. The ants of the Baltic Amber. Schr. Phys.-Ökon. Ges. Königsb. 55: 1-142 (page 117, Prenolepis in Camponotinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Wheeler, W. M. 1922i. Ants of the American Museum Congo expedition. A contribution to the myrmecology of Africa. VII. Keys to the genera and subgenera of ants. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 45: 631-710 (page 697, Prenolepis in Formicinae, Prenolepidini)
  • Williams, J. L. and J. S. LaPolla. 2016. Taxonomic revision and phylogeny of the ant genus Prenolepis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). 4200(2):201–258. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4200.2.1