Dolichoderus mariae

This ground-nesting species forms large colonies and forages on low vegetation for arthropod prey and honeydew.

Identification Keys including this Taxon

 * Key to North American Dolichoderus workers

Distribution
Reported from Massachusetts west through Illinois to Minnesota and Oklahoma, and south to Florida and Mississippi.

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

Abundance
Can be locally abundant but populations can be spotty, particularly in the southern most portions of its range.

Nomenclature

 *  mariae. Dolichoderus mariae Forel, 1885a: 349 (w.) U.S.A. Mayr, 1886d: 436 (q.); Wheeler, W.M. 1905d: 306 (m.); Wheeler, G.C. & Wheeler, J. 1966: 726 (l.). Combination in D. (Hypoclinea): Emery, 1894c: 229. Senior synonym of blatchleyi, davisi: Creighton, 1950a: 334. See also: Smith, D.R. 1979: 1415; Johnson, C. 1989a: 2; Mackay, 1993b: 75; Shattuck, 1994: 58.
 * davisi. Dolichoderus mariae subsp. davisi Wheeler, W.M. 1905d: 308 (w.) U.S.A. Junior synonym of mariae: Creighton, 1950a: 334.
 * blatchleyi. Dolichoderus (Hypoclinea) mariae var. blatchleyi Wheeler, W.M. 1917i: 462 (w.) U.S.A. Junior synonym of mariae: Creighton, 1950a: 334.

Worker
Johnson (1989) - The species is basically bicolored. The mandibles, antennae, head, alitrunk, legs, and petiole are brownish-orange and the first segment of the gaster has a variable, anterior band of this lighter color. The remainder of the gaster is dark brown to black. Intensity of color varies from callow age to maturity in ants and somewhat through time for museum specimens. I have seen museum specimens of Dolichoderus over 50 years of age, however, with essentially the same color as found in recently collected material. Also color interpretation varies. Wheeler (1905a) described this species as "... yellowish blood-red, and gaster black", and also as "...bright-red and blue-black bodies".

Structurally, a fine granulation sculptures the integument of head, pro- and mesothorax, and faint depressions or foveolae also occur on the head. This sculpture is weak, leaving a superficially smooth, shining surface under low to moderate magnification. A more distinct granulation sculptures the propodeum where a network of delicate ridges enclose shallow polygon-like depressions. This sculpture is weak leaving a shining propodeum in strong light. The integument of petiole and especially the gaster is smooth and reflective. No erect hairs exist on head, scapes, or body, one of the more distinctive attributes of this species. In dorsal view, the length of the propodeum distinctly exceeds its width. The integument within the concavity of the declivous face of propodeum with a series of fine vertical ridges or striations; some specimens have a distinct, centrally-located vertical ridge. A delicate granulation within the concavity reduces reflectivity often to a near-opaque state.

Type Material
Type locality - Vineland, New Jersey.

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Blades, D.C.A. and S.A. Marshall. Terrestrial arthropods of Canadian Peatlands: Synopsis of pan trap collections at four southern Ontario peatlands. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada 169:221-284
 * Carroll T. M. 2011. The ants of Indiana (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Master's Thesis Purdue university, 385 pages.
 * Clark Adam. Personal communication on November 25th 2013.
 * 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
 * Davis W. T., and J. Bequaert. 1922. An annoted list of the ants of Staten Island and Long Island, N. Y. Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 17(1): 1-25.
 * 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.
 * Drummond F. A., A. M. llison, E. Groden, and G. D. Ouellette. 2012. The ants (Formicidae). In Biodiversity of the Schoodic Peninsula: Results of the Insect and Arachnid Bioblitzes at the Schoodic District of Acadia National Park, Maine. Maine Agricultural and forest experiment station, The University of Maine, Technical Bulletin 206. 217 pages
 * DuBois M. B. 1981. New records of ants in Kansas, III. State Biological Survey of Kansas. Technical Publications 10: 32-44
 * Emery C. 1895. Beiträge zur Kenntniss der nordamerikanischen Ameisenfauna. (Schluss). Zoologische Jahrbücher. Abteilung für Systematik, Geographie und Biologie der Tiere 8: 257-360.
 * General D. M., and L. C. Thompson. 2011. New Distributional Records of Ants in Arkansas for 2009 and 2010 with Comments on Previous Records. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science 65: 166-168.
 * Graham J.H., H.H. Hughie, S. Jones, K. Wrinn, A.J. Krzysik, J.J. Duda, D.C. Freeman, J.M. Emlen, J.C. Zak, D.A. Kovacic, C. Chamberlin-Graham, H. Balbach. 2004. Habitat disturbance and the diversity and abundance of ants (Formicidae) in the Southeastern Fall-Line Sandhills. 15pp. Journal of Insect Science. 4: 30
 * 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.
 * 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.
 * 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.
 * Johnson C. 1986. A north Florida ant fauna (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insecta Mundi 1: 243-246
 * Lubertazi, D. Personal Communication. Specimen Data from Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard
 * 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
 * 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. and JV.G. Hill. Ants of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (Tennessee and North Carolina).
 * Mackay, W.P. 1993. A review of the New World ants of the genus Dolichoderus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 22(1):1-148
 * 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. Personal Communication. Field Museum Specimen Data
 * Ouellette G. D., F. A. Drummond, B. Choate and E. Groden. 2010. Ant diversity and distribution in Acadia National Park, Maine. Environmental Entomology 39: 1447-1556
 * Smith M. R. 1935. A list of the ants of Oklahoma (Hymen.: Formicidae). Entomological News 46: 235-241.
 * Talbot M. 1956. Flight activities of the ant Dolichoderus (Hypoclinea) mariae Forel. Psyche 63: 134-139.
 * 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.
 * Van Pelt A. F. 1966. Activity and density of old-field ants of the Savannah River Plant, South Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 82: 35-43.
 * 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.
 * Warren, L.O. and E.P. Rouse. 1969. The Ants of Arkansas. Bulletin of the Agricultural Experiment Station 742:1-67
 * 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., and J. Wheeler J. 1989. A checklist of the ants of Oklahoma. Prairie Naturalist 21: 203-210.
 * Wheeler W. M. 1904. The ants of North Carolina. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 20: 299-306.
 * Wheeler W. M. 1905. An annotated list of the ants of New Jersey. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 21: 371-403.
 * 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
 * Young J., and D. E. Howell. 1964. Ants of Oklahoma. Miscellaneous Publication. Oklahoma Agricultural Experimental Station 71: 1-42.
 * Young, J. and D.E. Howell. 1964. Ants of Oklahoma. Miscellaneous Publications of Oklahoma State University MP-71