Myrmica punctiventris

The most frequently collected of the species in the punctiventris group, this ant appears primarily as a forest dweller associated with the eastern deciduous forest biome. The species has been found in a variety of wooded habitats: Laurentian maple, mixed hardwoods (Culvert 1974), mixed pines, oak, oak-hickory, and mixed stands. Kannowski (1959) reported it from bogs in Michigan. From dry to humid conditions M. punctiventris seems most prosperous in mesic partly open woods. Nests are small and found in soil under litter, mosses or rocks, in acorns and occasionally in wood fragments. Wesson and Wesson (1940) report nest entrances surmounted with turrets of crude carton. Colony structure, reproduction and genetics were recently documented (Snyder & Herbers, 1991; Herbers & Mouser, 1997).

Identification
A member of the punctiventris group.

M. punctiventris differs from Myrmica pinetorum as follows: averaging larger, coarser sculpture, frontal lobes less developed and less contrast between maximum and minimum width, longer scapes and spines. (Francoeur 2007)

Distribution
Eastern North America, from southern Canada south to US Gulf states.

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Nearctic Region: United States.

Biology
This species nests and may overwinter in hickory nuts and in acorns. Life history and natural history details of this species have been studied in great detail by Herbers and co-authors, e.g., Herbers 1989, Backus et al. 2006. They have shown this species varies in its choice of nesting location, polygyny, polydomy, allocation to growth and reproduction, and in their sex ratio. Variation is evident within and between populations, including ample evidence to show that populations are changing through time, i.e., they do not appear to have settled into expressing a stable, predictable set of traits.

Headley (1943) reported finding nests of Myrmica punctiventris in Oak acorns.

Association with Other Organisms
Below is a sociometric table of colony collection data.

Nomenclature

 *  punctiventris. Myrmica punctiventris Roger, 1863a: 190 (w.) U.S.A. Mayr, 1886d: 450 (q.); Emery, 1895c: 312 (m.). Senior synonym of isfahani: Weber, 1950b: 512. See also: Francoeur, 2007: 158.
 * isfahani. Myrmica punctiventris var. isfahani Forel, 1922: 92 (w.q.) U.S.A. Junior synonym of punctiventris: Weber, 1950b: 215.

Worker
Francoeur (2007) - Head in full face view subrectangular with convex sides; preoccipital margin straight and corners broadly rounded. Eyes small, convex and suboval, located slightly anteriorly of the mid point of the head sides. Anterior margin of clypeus anguloconvex; lateral wings thin and flat, with 1-3 short rugae. In dorsal view frontal lamellae laterally feebly developed over the antennal articulation, approximately triangular or anguloconvex in shape; posterior margin weakly narrower and ending as a carina merging into the head dorsum. Antennae: fossae rather shallow; scapes shorter than head length; in profile base evently bent, dorsoventrally flattened with a feeble dorsal concavity; in dorsal view shaft width regular along its axis. Funiculus segments 3-5 as large as long, others longer than broad; apical club of 4 segments.

Mesosoma in profile, mesometasternum external margin horizontally aligned, promesonotum very feebly convex, almost straight in larger specimens, distinctly higher than propodeum, both joining through an angle at the mesopropodeal furrow which remains shallow. In dorsal view promesonotum typically pear-shaped, posterior end of mesonotum narrower and anguloconvex. Strigil of protibia with basal tooth; meso- and metatibiae with delicate spurs, finely pectinate on the distal half. Propodeal lobes small, with a posterodorsal angle. Propodeal spines long and acuminate with a narrow base, longer than the distance separating their tips, projecting backwards and upwards, either almost straight or most often deflected, usually subparallel. Petiole short, about as high as long but narrower; peduncle hidden by propodeal lobes; anterior face of node seen in profile slightly concave, forming a right angle with the somewhat flattened dorsal surface, concave posterior face inclined down to posterior margin. Postpetiole shorter than high and wide, height and width about equal; node profile typically with very short anterior and posterior vertical surfaces, united by a large convex one; sternal process strongly convex and globular, making 1/3 of the postpetiole height.

Mandibles striate with piligerous punctures. Frons and clypeus with parallel, coarse rugae, separated by subopaque, faintly microsculptured surface; reminder of head with reticulation. Mesosoma generally striatorugulose; rugae thicker on pleurae and somewhat sinuous on promesonotum. Antennal fossae with parallel and convex rugae. Petiole and postpetiole rugose. Gaster smooth and shining; first segment with large round punctures. Long erect hairs moderately abundant on body; suberect on scapes. Gastric dorsum without distinct pubescence. General body color light to dark reddish brown; gaster darker; appendages lighter or more yellowish.

Queen
Francoeur (2007) - Basically similar to workers in shape of head, characters of sculpture, color and pilosity of body but with the following usual caste differences: three ocelli present; mesosoma modified for flight; body size larger. Sculpture coarser on posterior half of dorsum of head, on petiole and postpetiole. Mesosoma coarsely rugose; surface between rugae faintly microsculptured. Mesopleural transverse groove rather large and shallow, impressed; katepisternum with widely spaced, oblique, parallel rugae. Surface between spines smooth and shining. Wings tinted brownish. Submarginal cell of anterior wing partly subdivided.

Male
Francoeur (2007) - Smaller than queen. In full face view head slightly longer than broad, narrower before eyes, with shallow elongated antennal fossae, posterior half evenly rounded. Mandibles elongate, blade subtriangular; masticatory margin with three apical teeth followed by 2-3 denticles. Clypeus convex, anterior margin angulate. Malar space short. Frontal triangle shallow and weakly delimited. Frontal lobes poorly developed, but distinct, as thin carinae with straight lateral margins that diverge posteriorly, originating from toruli. Antennae 13-merous; scapes very long, equal to first 6-7 funicular segments; in profile scape base with faint dorsal flattening; length of second funicular segment equal to the length of next two; club 5-merous. Eyes large and globular. Ocelli rather large, 0.07-0.09 mm in diameter; distance between posterior ocelli 3-4 x diameter of anterior ocellus.

In lateral view, mesosoma elongate; mesonotum high. Mayrian furrows not impressed, weakened or absent posteriorly. Mesoscutellum anguloconvex posteriorly in dorsal view. Spurs of meso- and metatibiae pectinate. Metapleural lamellae small. Wings as in queen, usually darker. Propodeum with more or less developed prominences marked by carinae, sometimes spiniform, surface between them smooth and shining; spiracles rounded and well marked. In profile petiole short, with anterior peduncle mostly hidden by propodeal lobes; ventral margin straight or very weakly concave with an anterior denticule; node with anterior slope straight, summit rounded with horizontal rugulae. Postpetiole shorter, slightly wider than long; in profile higher than long; anterior and dorsal surfaces of dorsum forming a convex slope with apex posterior to center; sternum longer than high, ventral margin straight or convex.

Head sculpture generally fine; rugulae present on front, shorter and stronger around eyes and malar space, anastomosed on temples, surface punctulate. Mandibles subopaque, faintly sculptured. Clypeus faintly sculptured, often with short median ruga extending back anterior margin. Frontal triangle punctulate. Frons with rugulae reaching the ocellar triangle, median part often only punctulate and shining; lateral lobes reduced to feebly lamellar parallel carinae originating from toruli. Temples punctate, with a varying abundance of short, partly anastomosed rugulae. Antennal scapes with suberect hairs over pubescence, most shorter than width of scape; funiculi with few short, suberect fine hairs on segments over the pubescence, sparse on club. Mesosoma generally rugulose. Pronotum partly shagreened and mesoscutum partly smooth and shining; mesoscutellum with longitudinal rugulae; mesopleuron with stronger rugulae on dorsoposterior corner of katepisternum; anepisternum with an anterior smooth area; transverse grooves feebly impressed, dark. Propodeal protuberences with a row of fine erect hairs. Petiole node with rugulae. Postpetiole node smooth and shining with lateral shagreening; sternum with rugulae. Body pilosity moderately abundant, fine, erect to decumbent; denser on legs. Gaster smooth and shining; first segment with very faint punctures. Body color black to blackish brown; appendages lighter.

Type Material
Francoeur (2007) - North America (according to Creighton, 1950). Based on known range: eastern N. A. Type material, if still in existence, should be in the Berlin Museum.

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Backus, V.L., C DeHeer and J.M. Herbers. 2006. Change in movement and subdivision of Myrmica punctiventris (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) colonies in north temperate forests is related to a long-term shift in social organization. Insectes Sociaux 53:156-160
 * Banschbach V. S., and E. Ogilvy. 2014. Long-term Impacts of Controlled Burns on the Ant Community (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of a Sandplain Forest in Vermont. Northeastern Naturalist 21(1): 1-12.
 * Belcher A. K., M. R. Berenbaum, and A. V. Suarez. 2016. Urbana House Ants 2.0.: revisiting M. R. Smith's 1926 survey of house-infesting ants in central Illinois after 87 years. American Entomologist 62(3): 182-193.
 * Brandt, M. and S. Foitzik. 2004. Community Context and Specialization Influence Coevolution between a Slavemaking Ant and Its Hosts. Ecology 85(11):2997-3009
 * Carroll T. M. 2011. The ants of Indiana (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Master's Thesis Purdue university, 385 pages.
 * Clark A. T., J. J. Rykken, and B. D. Farrell. 2011. The Effects of Biogeography on Ant Diversity and Activity on the Boston Harbor Islands, Massachusetts, U.S.A. PloS One 6(11): 1-13.
 * Cole A. C. 1940. A Guide to the Ants of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee. American Midland Naturalist 24(1): 1-88.
 * Coovert G. A. 2005. The Ants of Ohio (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ohio Biological Survey, Inc. 15(2): 1-207.
 * Coovert, G.A. 2005. The Ants of Ohio (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Ohio Biological Survey Bulletin New Series Volume 15(2):1-196
 * Dash S. T. and L. M. Hooper-Bui. 2008. Species diversity of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Louisiana. Conservation Biology and Biodiversity. 101: 1056-1066
 * Del Toro I., K. Towle, D. N. Morrison, and S. L. Pelini. 2013. Community Structure, Ecological and Behavioral Traits of Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Massachusetts Open and Forested Habitats. Northeastern Naturalist 20: 1-12.
 * Del Toro, I. 2010. PERSONAL COMMUNICATION. MUSEUM RECORDS COLLATED BY ISRAEL DEL TORO
 * Deyrup, M. 2003. An updated list of Florida ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Florida Entomologist 86(1):43-48.
 * DuBois M. B. 1981. New records of ants in Kansas, III. State Biological Survey of Kansas. Technical Publications 10: 32-44
 * DuBois M. B. 1985. Distribution of ants in Kansas: subfamilies Ponerinae, Ecitoninae, and Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 11: 153-952
 * DuBois M. B. 1985. Distribution of ants in Kansas: subfamilies Ponerinae, Ecitoninae, and Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 11: 153-953
 * DuBois M. B. 1985. Distribution of ants in Kansas: subfamilies Ponerinae, Ecitoninae, and Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 11: 153-954
 * DuBois M. B. 1985. Distribution of ants in Kansas: subfamilies Ponerinae, Ecitoninae, and Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 11: 153-955
 * DuBois M. B. 1985. Distribution of ants in Kansas: subfamilies Ponerinae, Ecitoninae, and Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 11: 153-956
 * Dubois, M.B. and W.E. Laberge. 1988. An Annotated list of the ants of Illionois. pages 133-156 in Advances in Myrmecology, J. Trager
 * Ellison A. M. 2012. The Ants of Nantucket: Unexpectedly High Biodiversity in an Anthropogenic Landscape. Northeastern Naturalist 19(1): 43-66.
 * Ellison A. M., E. J. Farnsworth, and N. J. Gotelli. 2002. Ant diversity in pitcher-plant bogs of Massachussetts. Northeastern Naturalist 9(3): 267-284.
 * Ellison A. M., J. Chen, D. Díaz, C. Kammerer-Burnham, and M. Lau. 2005. Changes in ant community structure and composition associated with hemlock decline in New England. Pages 280-289 in B. Onken and R. Reardon, editors. Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Hemlock Woolly Adelgid in the Eastern United States. US Department of Agriculture - US Forest Service - Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West Virginia.
 * Ellison A. M., S. Record, A. Arguello, and N. J. Gotelli. 2007. Rapid Inventory of the Ant Assemblage in a Temperate Hardwood Forest: Species Composition and Assessment of Sampling Methods. Environ. Entomol. 36(4): 766-775.
 * Ellison A. M., and E. J. Farnsworth. 2014. Targeted sampling increases knowledge and improves estimates of ant species richness in Rhode Island. Northeastern Naturalist 21(1): NENHC-13NENHC-24.
 * Emery C. 1895. Beiträge zur Kenntniss der nordamerikanischen Ameisenfauna. (Schluss). Zoologische Jahrbücher. Abteilung für Systematik, Geographie und Biologie der Tiere 8: 257-360.
 * Forster J.A. 2005. The Ants (hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Alabama. Master of Science, Auburn University. 242 pages.
 * Francoeur A. 2007. The Myrmica punctiventris and M. crassirugis species groups in the Nearctic region. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute 80: 153-185.
 * Francoeur A., and K. Ivanov. 2008. The known range of Myrmica semiparasitica (Formicidae: Hymenoptera). Notes from Underground 13(1): 3 pages.
 * Frye J. A., T. Frye, and T. W. Suman. 2014. The ant fauna of inland sand dune communities in Worcester County, Maryland. Northeastern Naturalist, 21(3): 446-471.
 * Gaige F. M. 1925. Results of the Mershon expedition to the Charity Islandsm Lake Huron; the Formicidae of Charity island. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology 5: 1-29.
 * General D., and L. Thompson. 2008. Ants of Arkansas Post National Memorial: How and Where Collected. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science 62: 52-60.
 * General D., and L. Thompson. 2008. New distributional records of ants in Arkansas. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science 62: 148-150.
 * General D.M. & Thompson L.C. 2008. New Distributional Records of Ants in Arkansas for 2008. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science. 63: 182-184
 * Gotelli, N.J. and A.M. Ellison. 2002. Biogeography at a Regional Scale: Determinants of Ant Species Density in New England Bogs and Forests. Ecology 83(6):1604-1609
 * Guénard B., K. A. Mccaffrey, A. Lucky, and R. R. Dunn. 2012. Ants of North Carolina: an updated list (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa 3552: 1-36.
 * Headley A. E. 1943. The ants of Ashtabula County, Ohio (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). The Ohio Journal of Science 43(1): 22-31.
 * Heithaus R. E., and M. Humes. 2003. Variation in Communities of Seed-Dispersing Ants in Habitats with Different Disturbance in Knox County, Ohio. OHIO J. SCI. 103 (4): 89-97.
 * Herbers J. M. 2011. Nineteen years of field data on ant communities (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): what can we learn. Myrmecological News 15: 43-52.
 * Herbers J. N. 1989. Community structure in north temperate ants: temporal and spatial variation. Oecologia 81: 201-211.
 * Ipser R. M. 2004. Native and exotic ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Georgia: Ecological Relationships with implications for development of biologically-based management strategies. Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of Georgia. 165 pages.
 * Ipser, R.M., M.A. Brinkman, W.A. Gardner and H.B. Peeler. 2004. A Survey of Ground-Dwelling Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Georgia. The Florida Entomologist 87(3) 253-260.
 * Ivanov, K. 2019. The ants of Ohio (Hymenoptera, Formicidae): an updated checklist. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 70: 65–87.
 * Ivanov K., L. Hightower, S. T. Dash, and J. B. Keiper. 2019. 150 years in the making: first comprehensive list of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Virginia, USA. Zootaxa 4554 (2): 532–560.
 * Jeanne R. J. 1979. A latitudinal gradient in rates of ant predation. Ecology 60(6): 1211-1224.
 * Kjar D. 2009. The ant community of a riparian forest in the Dyke Marsh Preserve, Fairfax County, Virginiam and a checklist of Mid-Atlantic Formicidae. Banisteria 33: 3-17.
 * Kjar D., and E. M. Barrows. 2004. Arthropod community heterogeneity in a mid-Atlantic forest highly invaded by alien organisms. Banisteria 23: 26-37.
 * Kjar D., and Z. Park. 2016. Increased ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) incidence and richness are associated with alien plant cover in a small mid-Atlantic riparian forest. Myrmecological News 22: 109-117.
 * Lessard J. P., R. R. Dunn, C. R. Parker, and N. J. Sanders. 2007. Rarity and Diversity in Forest Ant Assemblages of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Southeastern Naturalist 1: 215-228.
 * Lessard, J.-P. and C.M. Buddle. 2005. The effects of urbanization on ant assemblages (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) associated with the Molson Nature Reserve, Quebec. Canadian Entomologist 137:215-225
 * Lessard, J.-P., R. R. Dunn and N. J. Sanders. 2009. Temperature-mediated coexistence in temperate forest ant communities. Insectes Sociaux 56(2):149-456.
 * Lynch J. F. 1981. Seasonal, successional, and vertical segregation in a Maryland ant community. Oikos 37: 183-198.
 * Lynch J. F. 1988. An annotated checklist and key to the species of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Chesapeake Bay region. The Maryland Naturalist 31: 61-106
 * Lynch J. F., and A. K. Johnson. 1988. Spatial and temporal variation in the abundance and diversity of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the soild and litter layers of a Maryland forest. American Midland Naturalist 119(1): 31-44.
 * MacGown J. A., J. G. Hill, R. L. Brown, T. L. Schiefer, J. G. Lewis. 2012. Ant diversity at Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge in Oktibbeha, Noxubee, and Winston Counties, Mississippi. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Bulletin 1197: 1-30
 * MacGown J. A., J. G. Hill, and M. Deyrup. 2009. Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Little Ohoopee River Dunes, Emanuel County, Georgia. J. Entomol. Sci. 44(3): 193-197.
 * MacGown J. A., J. G. Hill, and R. L. Brown. 2010.  Native and exotic ant in Mississippi state parks.  Proceedings:  Imported Fire Ant Conference, Charleston, South Carolina, March 24-26, 2008: 74-80.
 * MacGown J. A., and R. L. Brown. 2006. Survey of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Tombigbee National Forest in Mississippi. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 79(4):325-340.
 * 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 JV.G. Hill. Ants of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (Tennessee and North Carolina).
 * MacGown, J.A. and R.L. Brown. 2006. Survey of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Tombigbee National Forest in Mississippi. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 79(4):325-340.
 * MacGown, J.A., J.G. Hill, R.L. Brown and T.L. 2009. Ant Diversity at Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge in Oktibbeha, Noxubee, and Winston Counties, Mississippi Report #2009-01. Schiefer. 2009.
 * MacGown. J. 2011. Ants collected during the 25th Annual Cross Expedition at Tims Ford State Park, Franklin County, Tennessee
 * Macgown J. A., S. Y. Wang, J. G. Hill, and R. J. Whitehouse. 2017. A List of Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Collected During the 2017 William H. Cross Expedition to the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas with New State Records. Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 143(4): 735-740.
 * Mahon M. B., K. U. Campbell, and T. O. Crist. 2017. Effectiveness of Winkler litter extraction and pitfall traps in sampling ant communities and functional groups in a temperate forest. Environmental Entomology 46(3): 470–479.
 * Martelli, M.G., M.M. Ward and Ann M. Fraser. 2004. Ant Diversity Sampling on the Southern Cumberland Plateau: A Comparison of Litter Sifting and Pitfall Trapping. Southeastern Naturalist 3(1): 113-126
 * Menke S. B., E. Gaulke, A. Hamel, and N. Vachter. 2015. The effects of restoration age and prescribed burns on grassland ant community structure. Environmental Entomology http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvv110
 * Menke S. B., and N. Vachter. 2014. A comparison of the effectiveness of pitfall traps and winkler litter samples for characterization of terrestrial ant (Formicidae) communities in temperate savannas. The Great Lakes Entomologist 47(3-4): 149-165.
 * Munsee J. R. 1968. Nine species of ants (Formicidae) recently recorded from Indiana. Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci. 77: 222-227.
 * Nuhn, T.P. and C.G. Wright. 1979. An Ecological Survey of Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in a Landscaped Suburban Habitat. American Midland Naturalist 102(2):353-362
 * 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.
 * O'Neill J.C. and Dowling A.P.G. 2011. A Survey of the Ants (hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Arkansas and the Ozark Mountains. An Undergraduate Honors, University of Arkansas. 18pages.
 * Ouellette G. D. and A. Francoeur. 2012. Formicidae [Hymenoptera] diversity from the Lower Kennebec Valley Region of Maine. Journal of the Acadian Entomological Society 8: 48-51
 * Rowles, A.D. and J. Silverman. 2009. Carbohydrate supply limits invasion of natural communities by Argentine ants. Oecologia 161(1):161-171
 * Sackett T. E., S. Record, S. Bewick, B. Baiser, N. J. Sanders, and A. M. Ellison. 2011. Response of macroarthropod assemblages to the loss of hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), a foundation species. Ecosphere 2(7):art74. doi:10.1890/ES11-00155.1
 * Shik, J., A. Francoeur and C. Buddle. 2005. The effect of human activity on ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) richness at the Mont St. Hilaire Biosphere Reserve, Quebec. Canadian Field-Naturalist 119(1): 38-42.
 * Sturtevant A. H. 1931. Ants collected on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Psyche (Cambridge) 38: 73-79
 * Talbot M. 1976. A list of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Edwin S. George Reserve, Livingston County, Michigan. Great Lakes Entomologist 8: 245-246.
 * Toennisson T. A., N. J. Sanders, W. E. Klingeman, and K. M. Vail. 2011. Influences on the Structure of Suburban Ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Communities and the Abundance of Tapinoma sessile. Environ. Entomol. 40(6): 1397-1404.
 * Van Pelt A., and J. B. Gentry. 1985. The ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Savannah River Plant, South Carolina. Dept. Energy, Savannah River Ecology Lab., Aiken, SC., Report SRO-NERP-14, 56 p.
 * Wang C., J. Strazanac and L. Butler. 2000. Abundance, diversity and activity of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in oak-dominated mixed Appalachian forests treated with microbial pesticides. Environmental Entomology. 29: 579-586
 * Warren, L.O. and E.P. Rouse. 1969. The Ants of Arkansas. Bulletin of the Agricultural Experiment Station 742:1-67
 * Weber N. A. 1950. A revision of the North American ants of the genus Myrmica Latreille with a synopsis of the Palearctic species. III. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 43: 189-226.
 * Wesson L. G., and R. G. Wesson. 1939. Notes on Strumigenys from southern Ohio, with descriptions of six new species. Psyche (Cambridge) 46: 91-112.
 * Wheeler G. C., J. N. Wheeler, and P. B. Kannowski. 1994. Checklist of the ants of Michigan (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). The Great Lakes Entomologist 26(4): 297-310
 * Wheeler, G.C., J. Wheeler and P.B. Kannowski. 1994. CHECKLIST OF THE ANTS OF MICHIGAN (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE). Great Lakes Entomologist 26:1:297-310
 * Zettler J. A., M. D. Taylor, C. R. Allen, and T. P. Spira. 2004. Consequences of Forest Clear-Cuts for Native and Nonindigenous Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 97(3): 513-518.