Holcoponera crenaticeps

This species is only known from the type series. The ants were collected by Mann from beneath a stone.

Identification
Lattke (2004) - Scape surpasses posterior cephalic margin by at least twice apical width; third antennal segment longer than wide; frons longitudinally strigulose, densely rugulo-punctate laterally; promesonotal suture fine, partially impressed; metanotal sulcus fully developed but fine; metacoxal dorsum with low triangular tooth. Subpetiolar process roughly triangular in lateral view, projecting anterad, ventrally parallel sided, not cuneiform.

Also see the nomenclature section below.

Distribution
Endemic to Solomon Islands.

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Indo-Australian Region: Solomon Islands.

Castes
Queen and male unknown.

Nomenclature

 * . Wheeleripone crenaticeps Mann, 1919: 285, fig. 4 (w.) SOLOMON IS (Isabel I.).
 * Type-material: syntype workers (number not stated, “several”).
 * Type-locality: Solomon Is: Isabel I., Fulakora, 1916 (W.M. Mann).
 * Type-depository: MCZC.
 * Combination in Gnamptogenys: Brown, 1958g: 228;
 * combination in Holcoponera: Camacho, Franco, Branstetter, et al. 2022: 11.
 * Status as species: Wheeler, W.M. 1935g: 11; Brown, 1958g: 228; Bolton, 1995b: 209; Lattke, 2004: 62 (redescription); Sarnat, et al. 2013: 69; Camacho, Franco, Branstetter, et al. 2022: 11.
 * Distribution: Solomon Is.

Description
Lattke (2004) - Gnamptogenys crenaticeps could be mistaken for a member of the epinotalis group on first examination because of the petiolar node shape, reduced eyes, indistinct anepisternum, well-defined katepisternum, and the close distance of the propodeal spiracle from the declivity. The antennal scapes in the epinotalis group do not surpass the posterior cephalic border, the subpetiolar process is subquadrate in shape, and there is more sculpturing on the body such as strigulae and punctate. Nevertheless, some of the shared characteristics hint at a close relation with the epinotalis species.

Worker
Lattke (2004) - Metrics (n = 1): HL 0.88, HW 0.70, ML 0.44, SL 0.80, ED 0.12, WL 1.10 mm. CI 0.80, SI 1.14, MI 0.63, OI 0.17. Head elongate in frontal view, lateral margins broadly convex, posterior margin medially concave; anterior clypeal margin convex, lamella convex with median convex lobe; vertex mostly smooth, gradually curving onto frons; frontal lobe leaves dorsal lobe of torulus partially exposed; scape gradually widens apically, slightly arched basally, punctulate, surpassing posterior cephalic margin by at least twice apical width; first funicular segment longer than wide; frons longitudinally strigulose, densely rugulose-punctate laterally; clypeus longitudinally strigulose; mandibular dorsum shining and shallowly punctate, masticatory border denticulate. Eye hemispherical with reduced diameter (OI 0.17), but ommatidia large.

Pronotum anteroventrally pointed, ventral sulcus present; promesonotal suture fine, well impressed along half of pronotal width, absent along other half; metanotal sulcus slightly broader, well impressed; anepisternum indistinct; katepisternum with anterior sulcus. Dorsal mesosomal margin broadly convex in lateral view, metanotal sulcus slightly impressed; mesosoma mostly smooth, with sparse shallow punctae; brief longitudinal to oblique carinulae present around propodeal spiracle and metapleural ventral margin; metapleural propodeal sulcus impressed, forming broken series of fine lines; propodeal declivity flat, higher than wide, glabrous, without denticles or ridges, propodeal spiracle on rounded elevation, projecting slightly beyond declivity in lateral view, declivitous propodeal margin relatively straight, forming obtuse angle with dorsal margin in lateral view. Petiole in lateral view erect, dorsal margin convex, shorter than broadly convex anterior margin; subpetiolar process roughly triangular, projecting anterad; petiolar spiracle situated below anterolateral process, anterior ridge forms low transverse crest; postpetiolar process forming V-shaped overturned lip in anterior view, slightly swollen laterally; gaster mostly smooth. Basal fore tarsal segment with single stout seta opposite strigil, dorsum smooth with some punctae; second segment with four stout apical setae; segments 2-4 as long as wide; metacoxal dorsum with low triangular tooth. Dorsum of thorax and abdominal segments 1-4 with scattered erect to subdecumbent hairs. Head, mesosoma, petiole, and gaster dark brown; mandibles, scape, legs ferruginous brown.

Type Material
Lattke (2004) - Syntype workers: Solomon Islands, Isabel Island, Fulakora (Mann) [Examined].

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Brown W. L., Jr. 1958. Contributions toward a reclassification of the Formicidae. II. Tribe Ectatommini (Hymenoptera). Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 118: 173-362.
 * Lattke J. E. 2004. A taxonomic revision and phylogenetic analysis of the ant genus Gnamptogenys Roger in Southeast Asia and Australasia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Ponerinae). University of California Publications in Entomology 122: 1-266.
 * Mann W. M. 1919. The ants of the British Solomon Islands. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 63:273-391.
 * Mann, W.M. 1919. The ants of the British Solomon Islands. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard College 63: 273-391
 * Wheeler W.M. 1935. Check list of the ants of Oceania. Occasional Papers of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum 11(11):1-56.
 * Wheeler, William Morton.1935.Checklist of the Ants of Oceania.Occasional Papers 11(11): 3-56
 * Wilson Edward O. 1959. Adaptive Shift and Dispersal in a Tropical Ant Fauna. Evolution 13(1): 122-144