Aphaenogaster picea

A common ant in the eastern United States, it can be found across a wide range of forest habitats. Aphaenogaster picea is closely related to Aphaenogaster rudis, with which is shares many morphological and biological characteristics. It will preferentially nest in downed wood and old stumps but is rather opportunistic and flexible in that it will nest under bark, under objects on the ground, in soil, or in any cavity that provides a suitable range of temperature and protection. Their omnivorous foragers are important dispersers of myrmecochorous seeds.

Identification
Aphaenogaster picea is diagnosed by the last four antennal segments being lighter in color than the rest of the antenna, by its piceous color and northern ranges in North America (DeMarco, 2015).

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

Biology
This species is closely related to Aphaenogaster rudis. An account of the biology of these species (see the biology section of the A. rudis species page) was summarized by Lubertazzi (2012).

Paluh et al (2015) found this ant was a preferred prey of the Eastern Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon cinereus).

Nomenclature

 * . Stenamma (Aphaenogaster) fulvum var. piceum Wheeler, W.M. 1908f: 621.
 * [First available use of Stenamma (Aphaenogaster) fulvum subsp. aquia var. piceum Emery, 1895c: 305 (w.q.m.) U.S.A (Connecticut, Pennsylvania, District of Columbia, New York, New Jersey), CANADA (no state data); unavailable (infrasubspecific) name.]
 * [Note: type-locality designated as Connecticut by Creighton, 1950a: 148.]
 * Combination in Aphaenogaster (Attomyrma): Emery, 1921f: 57.
 * As unavailable (infrasubspecific) name: Wheeler, W.M. 1900c: 48; Wheeler, W.M. 1901c: 724; Wheeler, W.M. 1904e: 303; Wheeler, W.M. 1905f: 383; Wheeler, W.M. 1906b: 6; Wheeler, W.M. 1910g: 565; Wheeler, W.M. 1916m: 586; Emery, 1921f: 57; Smith, M.R. 1928c: 275; Dennis, 1938: 286; Wing, 1939: 162; Wesson, L.G. & Wesson, R.G. 1940: 93; Smith, M.R. 1951a: 796.
 * Subspecies of fulva: Buren, 1944a: 284.
 * Subspecies of rudis: Enzmann, J. 1947b: 150 (in key); Creighton, 1950a: 148; Smith, M.R. 1958c: 118; Smith, M.R. 1967: 352; Smith, D.R. 1979: 1362.
 * [Note: picea was made available earlier than rudis; hence picea has priority (Bolton, 1995b: 72).]
 * Status as species: Bolton, 1995b: 72; Umphrey, 1996: 558 (in key); Mackay & Mackay, 2002: 76; Coovert, 2005: 48; MacGown & Forster, 2005: 71; Ellison, et al. 2012: 230; Mackay & Mackay, 2017: 358 (redescription).
 * Senior synonym of punctithorax: Mackay & Mackay, 2017: 358.
 * punctithorax. Aphaenogaster texana subsp. punctithorax Cole, 1938a: 239, fig. 2 (w.) U.S.A. (Tennessee).
 * Unidentifiable taxon: Creighton, 1950a: 151;
 * unidentifiable taxon; incertae sedis in Aphaenogaster: Smith, D.R. 1979: 1364; Bolton, 1995b: 72.
 * Junior synonym of picea: Smith, M.R. 1951a: 796; Mackay & Mackay, 2017: 358.

References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics

 * Booher D., J. A. MacGown, R. M. Duffield, and S. P. Hubbell. 2012. Density and Dispersion of Cavity Dwelling Ant Species in Nuts of Eastern US Forest Floors. Entomological Society of America annual meeting Knoxville, 2012.
 * Cole A. C., Jr. 1949. The ants of Mountain Lake, Virginia. Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 24: 155-156.
 * 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.
 * DeMarco B. B., and A. I. Cognato. 2016. A multiple-gene phylogeny reveals polyphyly among eastern North American Aphaenogaster species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zoologica Scripta DOI: 10.1111/zsc.12168
 * 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
 * Dennis C. A. 1938. The distribution of ant species in Tennessee with reference to ecological factors. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 31: 267-308.
 * 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
 * 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.
 * Enzmann J. 1947. New forms of Aphaenogaster and Novomessor. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 55: 147-152.
 * Field Museum Collection, Chicago, Illinois (C. Moreau)
 * Forster J.A. 2005. The Ants (hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Alabama. Master of Science, Auburn University. 242 pages.
 * 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.
 * 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.
 * Ivanov K., and J. Keiper. 2009. Effectiveness and Biases of Winkler Litter Extraction and Pitfall Trapping for Collecting Ground-Dwelling Ants in Northern Temperate Forests. Environ. Entomol. 38(6): 1724-1736.
 * Longino, J.T. 2010. Personal Communication. Longino Collection Database
 * 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. 2011. Ants collected during the 25th Annual Cross Expedition at Tims Ford State Park, Franklin County, Tennessee
 * 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.
 * 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.
 * Merle W. W. 1939. An Annotated List of the Ants of Maine (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomological News. 50: 161-165
 * Smith M. R. 1934. A list of the ants of South Carolina. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 42: 353-361.
 * Sturtevant A. H. 1931. Ants collected on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Psyche (Cambridge) 38: 73-79
 * Umphrey G. J. 1996. Morphometric discrimination among sibling species in the fulva-rudis-texana complex of the ant genus Aphaenogaster (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Can. J. Zool. 74: 528-559.
 * 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 W. M. 1900. The habits of Ponera and Stigmatomma. Biological Bulletin (Woods Hole). 2: 43-69.
 * Wheeler W. M. 1906. Fauna of New England. 7. List of the Formicidae. Occasional Papers of the Boston Society of Natural History 7: 1-24
 * Wing M. W. 1939. An annotated list of the ants of Maine (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomological News 50:161-165.