Camponotus festai

A thermophile species that has been observed in open and arid environments, most often on hills with pastures and shrubs.

Identification
A member of the Camponotus samius species complex (Tanaemyrmex).

Salata et al. (2020) - Hind tibia and scape with decumbent to suberect pilosity and additional long, erect setae; gena with numerous erect setae; mesosoma and legs in major and minor workers uniformly reddish-brown, always brighter than black to dark brown head and gaster; gaster uniformly coloured without brighter colouration on its basal part, scape brownish black to black, funiculus yellowish-brown to brown; pilosity on gaster dense.

Ionescu-Hirsch (2009) - Camponotus festai, together with Camponotus riedeli and Camponotus samius, belong to a species complex characterized by abundant, long, decumbent, and erect setae on the scape and tibiae (Radchenko, 1997b), and distant and strongly divergent frontal carinae (Emery, 1920). Major and media workers of C. festai and C. riedeli have a row of erect coarse setae on the dorsal surface of the scape, in addition to decumbent pilosity and distal bristles, and suberect to erect bristle-like setae on the dorsal surface of the hindtibia, whereas C. samius has no such setae. C. festai differs from C. riedeli Pisarski by the shorter, suberect bristle-like setae on the hindtibia (in C. riedeli, the length of such setae sometimes exceeds the maximum tibial diameter) and by the usually unicolorous mesosoma and legs, as opposed to a variable color of the mesosoma and legs (in C. riedeli, the mesosoma ventrolaterally and the coxae are distinctly paler than the mesosomal dorsum); in only five out of 80 specimens of C. festai is the dorsum of the mesosoma and tarsi dark brownish-black, and the pleura of mesosoma and coxae red. C. festai differs from C. samius by having prismatic hindtibia, as opposed to flattened hindtibia without a distinct dorsomedial ridge, and more abundant pilosity. C. festai has distinctly more erect setae on the scape: on average 13.4 (range = 3–21, n = 34) compared to 5.9 (range = 1–12, n = 14). The major worker has on the dorsum of the mesosoma more than 90 setae (n = 10) in C. festai and 56–60 setae (n = 10) in C. samius. C. festai has a distinctly broader head in the major workers: HW/HL ranges 0.91–1.10 (n = 10) in C. festai, and 0.87–0.90 (n = 10) in C. samius.

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Palaearctic Region: Greece, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey.

Nomenclature

 * . Camponotus maculatus subsp. festai Emery, 1894d: 1 (s.w.) LEBANON.
 * Emery, 1898c: 149 (q.); Tohmé, G. & Tohmé, 1999: 476 (m.).
 * Combination in C. (Myrmoturba): Forel, 1913d: 434;
 * combination in C. (Tanaemyrmex): Emery, 1925b: 99.
 * Subspecies of maculatus: Emery, 1896d: 370 (in list); Emery, 1898c: 149; Forel, 1913d: 434.
 * Status as species: Emery, 1905d: 31 (in text); Emery, 1908a: 187 (redescription); Emery, 1920c: 6, 10 (in key); Emery, 1925b: 99; Aktaç, 1977: 126; Agosti & Collingwood, 1987a: 58; Kugler, J. 1988: 259; Bolton, 1995b: 99; Radchenko, 1996b: 1200 (in key); Radchenko, 1997d: 808; Tohmé, G. & Tohmé, 1999: 476 (redescription); Vonshak, et al. 2009: 39; Ionescu-Hirsch, 2010: 72; Legakis, 2011: 30; Borowiec, L. & Salata, 2012: 475; Kiran & Karaman, 2012: 6; Karaman, C. & Aktaç, 2013: 53 (in key); Borowiec, L. 2014: 31; Tohmé, G. & Tohmé, 2014: 138; Lebas, et al. 2016: 154.
 * Senior synonym of caeciliae: Emery, 1908a: 187; Emery, 1925b: 99; Bolton, 1995b: 99; Radchenko, 1997d: 808; Tohmé & Tohmé, 1999: 476; Kiran & Karaman, 2012: 6.
 * caeciliae. Camponotus maculatus r. caeciliae Forel, 1906c: 188 (s.w.) TURKEY.
 * Subspecies of samius: Tohmé, G. & Tohmé, 2014: 138 (error).
 * Junior synonym of festai: Emery, 1908a: 187; Emery, 1925b: 99; Bolton, 1995b: 90; Radchenko, 1997d: 808; Tohmé & Tohmé, 1999: 476; Kiran & Karaman, 2012: 6.

Description
Ionescu-Hirsch (2009) - TL = 6.9–13.4, HL = 1.60–3.55, HW = 1.13–3.75, EL = 0.40–0.65, SL = 2.09–3.13, ML = 2.66–4.57, PW = 1.04–1.99, mTbL = 1.76–2.85, hTbL = 2.54–3.87 (n = 20).

Type Material
Salata et al. (2020) - Syntype major worker, Bekfeya, Lebanon [Syntype worker images examined, AntWeb, CASENT0905286.

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Borowiec L. 2014. Catalogue of ants of Europe, the Mediterranean Basin and adjacent regions (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Genus (Wroclaw) 25(1-2): 1-340.
 * Borowiec L., and S. Salata. 2012. Ants of Greece - Checklist, comments and new faunistic data (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Genus 23(4): 461-563.
 * Emery, C.. "Beiträge zur Kenntniss der palaearktischen Ameisen." Öfversigt af Finska Vetenskaps-Societetens Förhandlingar (Helsinki) 20 (1898): 124-151.
 * Forel A. 1906. Fourmis d'Asie mineure et de la Dobrudscha récoltées par M. le Dr. Oscar Vogt et Mme Cécile Vogt, Dr. méd. Ann. Soc. Entomol. Belg. 50: 187-190.
 * Forel, A.. "Fourmis de la faune méditerranéenne récoltées par MM. U. et J. Sahlberg." Revue Suisse de Zoologie 21 (1913): 427-438.
 * Ionescu-Hirsch A. 2009. An annotated list of Camponotus of Israel (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with a key and descriptions of new species. ISRAEL JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY 39: 5798.
 * Kiran K., and C. Karaman. 2012. First annotated checklist of the ant fauna of Turkey (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa 3548: 1-38.
 * Kugler J. 1988. The zoogeography of Israel. 9. The zoogeography of social insects of Israel and Sinai. Monographiae biologicae 62: 251-275.
 * Tohme G. 1996. Formicidae. Etude de la diversité biologique n° 4 . Ministère de lAgriculture à Beyrouth (Eds.). P85-87.
 * Tohme G., and H. Tohme. 2014. Nouvelles liste des especes de fourmis du Liban (Hymenoptera, Formicoidea). Lebanese Science Journal 15(1): 133-141.
 * Tohmé, G., and H. Tohmé. "Redescription of Camponotus festai Emery, 1894 et description de C. Sannini n. Sp. Deux fourmis du Liban et la Syrie." Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de France 104 (5) (1999): 473-480.
 * Vonshak M., and A. Ionescu-Hirsch. 2009. A checklist of the ants of Israel (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Israel Journal of Entomology 39: 33-55.