Dinoponera mutica

Nothing is known about the biology of .

Identification
Lenhart et al. (2013) - Worker. Dinoponera mutica is identified by its smooth and shiny integument with a bluish luster, a rounded pronotal corner lacking a tooth-like process, gular striations on the ventral surface of the head, long and flagellate pubescence, scape length longer than head width and petiole with even dorsal corners.

Dinoponera quadriceps is the closest to Dinoponera mutica in terms of morphological characters. Dinoponera quadriceps has a finely micro-sculptured integument which is not shiny, lacks gular striations and has a petiole which bulges on the dorso-anterior edge. Dinoponera longipes and Dinoponera hispida may also be confused with D. mutica but these species lacks the dense golden pubescence of the former, or the short, stiff setae and forward bulging petiole of the latter.

Key to Dinoponera workers / Clave para la identificación de las obreras de Dinoponera / Chave para identificação de operários de Dinoponera

Distribution
Dinoponera mutica is found in central South America in the Brazilian states of Rondônia, Mato Grosso, Goias and Mato Grosso do Sul, in eastern Bolivia and northwest Paraguay (Lenhart, Dash & Mackay, 2013).

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Neotropical Region: Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay.

Nomenclature

 *  mutica. Dinoponera grandis subsp. mutica Emery, 1901a: 48 (w.) BRAZIL. Wheeler, G.C. & Wheeler, J. 1952c: 607 (l.). Raised to species: Kempf, 1971: 378.

Worker
Lenhart et al. (2013) - (mm) (n=12) TBL: 29.42–32.34 (30.99); MDL: 4.10–5.48 (4.71); HL: 5.13–6.30 (5.65); HW: 5.13–5.64 (5.39); SL: 5.43–6.05 (5.72); WL: 7.53–8.61 (8.20); PL: 2.26–2.67 (2.41); PH: 2.82–3.38 (3.17); PW: 1.54–1.90 (1.76); GL: 8.61–11.99 (10.06); HFL: 7.18–8.00 (7.60).

A description of the morphology of the worker is given in Kempf (1971): “Antennal scape remarkably longer than head width. Pubescence on front and vertex generally longer and denser than in gigantea, but lacking the golden luster on longipes. Gular face smooth and shiny, with fine, more or less distinct striation antero-laterally and antero-mesially (sometimes nearly effaced). Sides of head smooth and shining in spite of the very fine, superficial microsculpture which is reticulate-punctate. Antero-inferior corner of pronotum obtusely angulate or rounded. Pronotal disc smooth and shiny, lacking irregular fossae and wrinkles; the paired swellings rather weakly expressed. Tarsus I of hind leg decidedly longer than head width. Petiole of distinctive shape…, shorter than that of gigantea and longipes, but width-length proportion still under 0.08; anterior and posterior upper corners subequally rounded; smooth and shining; vertical sulcus on posterior face usually obsolete, present only in one Bolivian specimen. Terga I and II of gaster very indistinctly, superficially and finely reticulate-punctate yet quite smooth and shining, lacking the dense foviolae of longipes on disc where the pubescence is likewise scarce. Stridulatory file well-developed, triangular but short, visible only when acrotergite of tergum II is fully exposed.”

Type Material
Lenhart et al. (2013) - Syntype workers, BRAZIL: Mato Grosso, Germain (leg.) [examined] (specific locality of Rondonópolis proposed by Kempf (1971).

Additional References

 * Lenhart, P.A., Dash, S.T. & Mackay, W.P. 2013. A revision of the giant Amazonian ants of the genus Dinoponera (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 31, 119–164.