Azteca constructor

Longino (2007) - The taxonomy and biology of A. constructor are reviewed in Longino (1989b, 1991a, b). The species is an obligate Cecropia ant. It inhabits a broad range of habitats and elevations. It is often associated with forest gaps or edges where there are relatively larger and older Cecropia trees. Mature colonies occupy a single carton nest in the bole of the tree. The nest is spindle-shaped and causes a deformation of the trunk. All larvae and alate sexuals are concentrated in this single nest. Branch tips, which all communicate internally with the carton nest, contain only workers and Hemiptera. Workers of this species are extremely aggressive, and respond to any disturbance by pouring out of large fissures near the carton nest and blackening the trunk surface (Longino 1991a).

Identification
Longino (2007) - The queens of A. constructor are very distinctive and not easily confused with any other species. Workers of A. constructor and Azteca xanthochroa are very similar. Large workers of A. constructor retain a chocolate brown color, while large workers of A. xanthochroa become more mottled orange. The petiolar node of A. constructor workers is relatively low, while the posteroventral lobe is relatively deep and strongly convex. Workers of A. xanthochroa are the reverse, with relatively taller node and shallower ventral lobe.

Distribution
Guatemala south through Central America to coastal northeastern South America.

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Neotropical Region: Costa Rica, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago.

Biology
Longino (2007) - Alate queens of this species and another common Cecropia ant, A. xanthochroa, are relatively common in Malaise trap samples from the Atlantic slope rainforests of Costa Rica. No other Azteca species are common in Malaise traps, even though they are common in the environment. Even the other common Cecropia ants, Azteca alfari and Azteca ovaticeps, are not common in Malaise samples. This implies that there is something distinctive about the behavior of queens of these two species that makes them more susceptible to capture.

Nomenclature

 * . Azteca constructor Emery, 1896c: 2, figs. 2a-e, 3 (w.q.m.) COSTA RICA.
 * Status as species: Forel, 1899c: 110; Forel, 1912h: 50; Emery, 1913a: 32; Wheeler, W.M. 1922c: 14; Wheeler, W.M. 1942: 225; Kempf, 1972a: 31; Brandão, 1991: 329; Longino, 1991: 1585 (redescription); Shattuck, 1994: 15; Bolton, 1995b: 78; Longino, 2007: 26 (redescription); Branstetter & Sáenz, 2012: 253; Guerrero, 2019: 705.
 * Senior synonym of emmae: Longino, 1991: 1585; Shattuck, 1994: 15; Bolton, 1995b: 78; Longino, 2007: 26.
 * Senior synonym of guianae: Longino, 1991: 1585; Shattuck, 1994: 15; Bolton, 1995b: 78; Longino, 2007: 26.
 * emmae. Azteca emmae Forel, 1904e: 702 (footnote) (s.w.q.m.) COSTA RICA.
 * Status as species: Forel, 1908b: 62; Emery, 1913a: 32; Kempf, 1972a: 31.
 * Junior synonym of constructor: Longino, 1991: 1585; Shattuck, 1994: 15; Bolton, 1995b: 78; Longino, 2007: 26.
 * guianae. Azteca constructor var guianae Wheeler, W.M. 1942: 226 (w.q.) GUYANA.
 * Subspecies of constructor: Kempf, 1972a: 31.
 * Junior synonym of constructor: Longino, 1991: 1585; Shattuck, 1994: 15; Bolton, 1995b: 79; Longino, 2007: 26.

Worker
Longino (2007) - (n=10): HLA 1.36 (1.24–1.44,3), HW 1.01 (0.68–1.35), SL 0.76 (0.53–0.89), CI 94 (94–101,3), SI 64 (60–69,3).

Palpal formula 5,3; middle and hind tibia with prominent pectinate apical spur; dorsal surface of mandible faintly roughened, not smooth and shining, with sparse small piligerous puncta, setae in puncta short to long, larger puncta with long setae near masticatory margin; medial and lateral clypeal lobes at about same level, medial lobe at most weakly projecting beyond lateral lobes; head with convex sides, strongly cordate posterior margin; mesosoma in lateral profile with promesonotum forming a broad convexity, promesonotal suture weakly impressed, such that pronotum and mesonotum tend toward being separate convexities, mesonotum more strongly convex than pronotum; metanotal groove broad; petiole in profile with node less massive than sternal lobe, perpendicular distance from tergosternal suture to apex of node less than distance to ventral margin of sternal lobe (in contrast to Azteca xanthochroa, on which the petiolar node is larger relative to sternal lobe); scape with abundant erect setae, length of setae about one half maximum width of scape; mid and hind tibia with abundant erect setae, longest setae about one half maximum width of tibia; sides of head with abundant short erect setae from mandibular insertions to level of eye, becoming sparse to absent posterior to eye; posterior margin of head with abundant long curved setae; mesosomal dorsum with abundant erect setae, those on pronotum long, on mesonotum shorter, on dorsal face of propodeum very short, grading into pubescence; color brown.

Queen
Longino (2007) - (n=12): HLA 1.75 (1.56–1.79,6), HW 1.61 (1.45–1.73), SL 0.87 (0.79–0.94), CI 94 (91–98,6), SI 51 (49–53,6).

Palpal formula 5,3; middle and hind tibia with prominent pectinate apical spur; dorsal surface of mandible roughened, dull, with sparse small piligerous puncta, setae in puncta short, larger puncta with long setae near masticatory margin; medial and lateral clypeal lobes at about same level (medial lobe not projecting anteriorly); head quadrate, with sides somewhat convex, weakly cordate posteriorly; petiolar node low, triangular, acute, but apex rounded, not sharp; posteroventral petiolar lobe evenly convex, shallow, not strongly developed, ending before posterior margin of sternite, leaving small rim formed by posteriormost portion of sternite; scape with abundant erect setae, about as long as one half to two thirds maximum width of scape; middle and hind tibia with abundant erect setae, longest of these about as long as maximum width of tibia (MTSC 20–35); sides of head with erect setae variably abundant, from nearly absent to moderately abundant; posterior margin of head with abundant very long setae; pronotum with abundant long setae on posterior third; mesoscutum, scutellum, and propodeum with dense brush of abundant setae; petiolar node with variable number of long setae on apex, abundant long setae on posteroventral lobe; all gastral terga with abundant erect setae; color black.

Type Material
Longino (2007) - Syntype workers, queens, males: Costa Rica, Atlantic and Pacific slopes (Alfaro) [label: Jimenez, C. R. v.95] (examined).

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Dattilo W. et al. 2019. MEXICO ANTS: incidence and abundance along the Nearctic-Neotropical interface. Ecology https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2944
 * Del Toro, I., M. Vázquez, W.P. Mackay, P. Rojas and R. Zapata-Mata. Hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) de Tabasco: explorando la diversidad de la mirmecofauna en las selvas tropicales de baja altitud. Dugesiana 16(1):1-14.
 * Emery C. 1896. Alcune forme nuove del genere Azteca For. e note biologiche. Bollettino dei Musei di Zoologia ed Anatomia Comparata della Reale Università di Torino 11(230): 1-7.
 * Emery C. 1896. Studi sulle formiche della fauna neotropica. XVII-XXV. Bullettino della Società Entomologica Italiana 28: 33-107.
 * Emery C. 1913. Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Dolichoderinae. Genera Insectorum 137: 1-50.
 * Fernández, F. and S. Sendoya. 2004. Lista de las hormigas neotropicales. Biota Colombiana Volume 5, Number 1.
 * Forel A. 1908. Fourmis de Costa-Rica récoltées par M. Paul Biolley. Bulletin de la Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles 44: 35-72.
 * Forel A. 1912. Formicides néotropiques. Part V. 4me sous-famille Dolichoderinae Forel. Mémoires de la Société Entomologique de Belgique. 20: 33-58.
 * 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.
 * INBio Collection (via Gbif)
 * Kempf, W.W. 1972. Catalago abreviado das formigas da regiao Neotropical (Hym. Formicidae) Studia Entomologica 15(1-4).
 * Longino J. T. 1991. Taxonomy of the Cecropia-inhabiting Azteca ants. Journal of Natural History 25: 1571-1602
 * Longino J. T. 2007. A taxonomic review of the genus Azteca (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Costa Rica and a global revision of the aurita group. Zootaxa 1491: 1-63
 * Longino J. T. 2013. Ants of Nicargua. Consulted on 18 Jan 2013. https://sites.google.com/site/longinollama/reports/ants-of-nicaragua
 * Longino J. et al. ADMAC project. Accessed on March 24th 2017 at https://sites.google.com/site/admacsite/
 * Maes, J.-M. and W.P. MacKay. 1993. Catalogo de las hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) de Nicaragua. Revista Nicaraguense de Entomologia 23.
 * Salinas P. J. 2010. Catalogue of the ants of the Táchira State, Venezuela, with notes on their biodiversity, biogeography and ecology (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Amblyioponinae, Ponerinae, Proceratiinae, Myrmicinae, Ecitoninae, Formicinae, Pseudomyrmecinae, Dolichoderinae). Boletín de la SEA 47: 315-328.
 * 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.
 * Solomon, S.E. and A.S. Mikheyev. 2005. The ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) fauna of Cocos Island, Costa Rica. Florida Entomologist 88(4):415-423
 * Vásquez-Bolaños M. 2011. Lista de especies de hormigas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) para México. Dugesiana 18: 95-133
 * Wheeler W. M. 1922. The ants of Trinidad. American Museum Novitates 45: 1-16.
 * Wheeler W. M. 1942. Studies of Neotropical ant-plants and their ants. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 90: 1-262.