Dorymyrmex bicolor

A desert species with common desert ant behaviors; fast moving and forages at high temperatures. Nests in unshaded areas surmounted by a crater of fine sand. Feeds on living and dead insects and honeydew.

Identification
Cuezzo and Guerrero (2011) - Worker CI equal or over 90. Worker bicolored: head, mesosoma, and petiole, dark reddish; gaster black. Same pattern of color is found in queen. Posterior margin of the head slightly concave in frontal view. Dorsal face of pronotum with no erect setae. Mesonotal profile continuous with pronotum, with a distinct dorsal and declivitous face before mesopropodeal suture. Queen Head slightly wider than long with the posterior margin of head strongly concave. Maximum diameter the head behind of compound eyes.

Several species of Dorymyrmex (Dorymyrmex pyramicus, Dorymyrmex thoracicus, etc.) have the same pattern of colors and could be confused with D. bicolor s. str. In some papers, D. bicolor was confused with D. pyramicus, because of its pattern of colors (orange head, mesosoma and petiole with dark gaster), but two main characters are useful to identify and to differentiate both species: head width (larger in workers and queens of D. bicolor) and mesonotum interrupted in lateral view, with a well-defined dorsal and declivitous faces, often descending vertically or nearly so, into mesopropodeal suture, (as described below, D. pyramicus has a promesonotal profile continuous, convex in lateral view). Apparently, D. bicolor belongs to a complex of species, as observed by Forel (1911). The identity of this complex could be solved with a more detailed and extensive research, especially comparing nest series from the west part of USA.

Distribution
Southwestern US to Peru.

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Nearctic Region: United States. Neotropical Region: Belize, Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru.

Biology
Cuezzo and Guerrero (2011) - The nest, briefly described by Wilson (1957), has a small entrance hall with more regularly formed craters than Dorymyrmex insanus. Dorymyrmex insanus and Dorymyrmex pyramicus are sympatric in the northern part of its distributional range. Both species mentioned above are very active in open areas between 11:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m and share similar habits of foraging according to Wilson’s observations.

Nomenclature

 *  bicolor. Dorymyrmex pyramicus var. bicolor Wheeler, W.M. 1906d: 342 (w.q.) U.S.A. Gallardo, 1916a: 63 (q.); Crozier, 1970: 114 (k.). Combination in D. (Conomyrma): Gallardo, 1916a: 63; in D. (Biconomyrma): Kusnezov, 1952g: 430; in Conomyrma: Snelling, R.R. 1973b: 4; in Dorymyrmex: Shattuck, 1992c: 85. Subspecies of pyramicus: Creighton, 1950a: 349. Raised to species: Kusnezov, 1952g: 430; Cole, 1958b: 130. See also: Wilson, 1958b: 76; Johnson, C. 1989b: 192; Shattuck, 1994: 75; Cuezzo & Guerrero, 2011: 6.

Worker
Cuezzo and Guerrero (2011) - (n = 25):HL: 0.78–1.1;HW: 0.7–1; EL: 0.18–0.28; EW: 0.15–0.2; SL: 0.78–1.05; WL: 1.25–1.53; CI: 90-91; SI: 105–111; REL: 23–25; OI: 73–86; TLI: 139–161.

Worker bicolored: head, mesosoma, and petiole, dark reddish; gaster black. Funicle and legs darker than rest of the body in some specimens. Head: square in frontal view, almost as wide as long, sides slightly convex. Posterior margin of head feebly convex medially. Scape short (SI: 105–111). Psammophore with short hairs disposed in a triangle, far from the foramen magnum, slightly reaching the oral cavity. Mesosoma: promesonotum in profile, forming a continuous convexity; end of mesonotum with well-differentiated dorsal and declivitous faces, anterior to metanotal suture. Propodeal tubercle short, upward directed, with wide base. Metasoma: petiolar scale forward directed.

Queen
Cuezzo and Guerrero (2011) - (n = 7): HL: 1.18–1.23; HW: 1.25–1.33; EL: 0.38–0.4; EW: 0.18–0.23; SL: 1.08–1.13; WL: 2.43–2.6; CI: 106–108; SI: 91-92; REL: 32-33; OI: 47–56; TLI: 206–212.

Similar to worker in color. Whitish pubescence covering all body tagma. Head: Wider than long, with convex sides, in frontal view. Posterolateral corner rounded, posteriormargin of head slightly concave. Masticatory margin of mandible with six teeth and two or three denticles; basal margin completely dentate with a well-differentiated angle between both margins. Scape surpassing posterior margin of the head by more than twice its maximum diameter. Mesosoma: Parapsidal furrow well developed, diverging forward, axilla not divided. Anepisternum and katepisternum incompletely divided by a short pleural suture. Wings: forewing with only one close radial cell, one cubital cell, and no discoidal cell; pterostigma well developed, longer than wide. Hindwing with three cells closed in basal area; hamuli with 12 hooks. Metasoma: petiolar scale tall, stout, forward directed, and rounded apically. Ventral face of petiole slightly convex. Gaster with dark brown tergites and covered with whitish pubescence.



Etymology
Cuezzo and Guerrero (2011) - The name of bicolor is referred to the particular pattern of colors found in all known castes (worker and queen).

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Allred D. M. and A. C. Cole. 1971. Ants of the national reactor testing station. Great Basin Naturalist. 31: 237-242
 * Allred, D.M. 1982. The ants of Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 42:415-511.
 * Beck D. E., D. M. Allred, W. J. Despain. 1967. Predaceous-scavenger ants in Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 27: 67-78
 * 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.
 * 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
 * Cuezzo F. and Guerrero, R. J. 2011. The ant genus Dorymyrmex Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Dolichoderinae) in Colombia. Psyche 2012, Article ID 516058 (doi:10.1155/2012/516058): 24 pp
 * Dattilo W. et al. 2019. MEXICO ANTS: incidence and abundance along the Nearctic-Neotropical interface. Ecology https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2944
 * Davidson, D.W., S.C. Cook and R. R. Snelling. 2004. Liquid-feeding performances of ants (Formicidae): ecological and evolutionary implications. Oecologia 139: 255266.
 * Des Lauriers J., and D. Ikeda. 2017. The ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the San Gabriel Mountains of Southern California, USA with an annotated list. In: Reynolds R. E. (Ed.) Desert Studies Symposium. California State University Desert Studies Consortium, 342 pp. Pages 264-277.
 * Emery C. 1913. Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Dolichoderinae. Genera Insectorum 137: 1-50.
 * Fernandes, P.R. XXXX. Los hormigas del suelo en Mexico: Diversidad, distribucion e importancia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).
 * Greenberg L., M. Martinez, A. Tilzer, K. Nelson, S. Koening, and R. Cummings. 2015. Comparison of different protocols for control of the Red Imported Fire Ant, Solenopsis invicta Buren (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), in Orange County, California, including a list of co-occurring ants. Southwestern Entomologist 40(2): 297-305.
 * 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 29:10091026/
 * Kempf, W.W. 1972. Catalago abreviado das formigas da regiao Neotropical (Hym. Formicidae) Studia Entomologica 15(1-4).
 * La Rivers I. 1968. A first listing of the ants of Nevada. Biological Society of Nevada, Occasional Papers 17: 1-12.
 * Landero-Torres I., M. A. Garcia-Martinez, M. E. Galindo-Tovar, O. R. Leyva-Ovalle, H. E. Lee-Espinosa, J. Murguia-Gonzalez, and J. Negrin-Ruiz. 2014. An ornamental Heliconias crop as a reservoir of the native myrmecofauna: a case of tropical horticulture in Central Veracruz, Mexico. Southwestern Entomologist 39(1): 135-146.
 * Longino, J.T. 2010. Personal Communication. Longino Collection Database
 * Lopez-Moreno I. R., M. E. Diaz-Betancourt, and T. Suarez Landa. 2003. Insectos sociales en ambientes antropizados: las hormigas de la ciudad de Coatepec, Veracruz, Mexico. Sociobiology 42(3): 604-622.
 * 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.
 * Matsuda T., G. Turschak, C. Brehme, C. Rochester, M. Mitrovich, and R. Fisher. 2011. Effects of Large-Scale Wildfires on Ground Foraging Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Southern California. Environmental Entomology 40(2): 204-216.
 * 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.
 * 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.
 * Rivas-Arancibia, S. P., H. Carrillo-Ruiz, A. Bonilla-Arce, D. M. Figueroa-Castro, and A. R. Andres-Hernandez. 2014. Effect of disturbance on the ant community in a semiarid region of central Mexico. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 12: 703-716.
 * Rodriguez Fernandez N., H. Carillo-Ruiz, S. P. Rivas-Arancibia, L. N. Quiroz-Robledo, and A. R. Andrés Hernandez. 2010. Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Jardin Botanico Ignacio Rodriguez de Alconedo of the Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico. Dugesiana 17(2): 113-124.
 * Sanders N. J., J. Moss, and D. Wagner. 2003. Patterns of ant species richness along elevational gradients in an arid ecosystem. Global Ecology & Biogeography 12: 93102.
 * 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.
 * 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
 * Ward P. S. 2005. A synoptic review of the ants of California (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa 936: 1-68.
 * Wetterer, J. K.; Ward, P. S.; Wetterer, A. L.; Longino, J. T.; Trager, J. C.; Miller, S. E. 2000. Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Santa Cruz Island, California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 99:25-31.
 * Wetterer, J.K., P.S. Ward, A.L. Wetterer, J.T. Longino, J.C. Trager and S.E. Miller. 2000. Ants (Hymenoptera:Formicidae) of Santa Cruz Island, California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Science 99(1):25-31.
 * Wheeler G. C. and Wheeler J. 1973. Ants of Deep Canyon. Riverside, Calif.: University of California, xiii + 162 pp
 * Wheeler W. M. 1906. The ants of the Grand Cañon. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 22: 329-345.
 * Wheeler, G.C. and J. Wheeler. 1985. A checklist of Texas ants. Prairie Naturalist 17:49-64.
 * Whitford W. G. 1978. Structure and seasonal activity of Chihuahua desert ant communities. Insectes Sociaux 25(1): 79-88.
 * Wilson E. O. 1958. Sympatry of the ants Conomyrma bicolor (Wheeler) and C. pyramica (Roger). Psyche (Cambridge) 64: 76.