Meranoplus spinosus

Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Indo-Australian Region: Indonesia, New Guinea.

Nomenclature

 *  spinosus. Meranoplus spinosus Smith, F. 1859a: 150 (w.) INDONESIA (Aru I.).
 * Combination in Procryptocerus: Donisthorpe, 1932c: 456.
 * Combination in Meranoplus: Chapman & Capco, 1951: 113.
 * [Note: specimen supposedly the worker holotype of Meranoplus spinosus (OXUM, examined) is actually a queen of a Neotropical Procryptocerus species. Therefore, either the type-locality is in error (unlikely), or the specimen has been changed, or both (Bolton, 1995b: 367).]
 * Status as species: Smith, F. 1862d: 413; Roger, 1863b: 39; Mayr, 1863: 428; Smith, F. 1871a: 334; Emery, 1897d: 569; Emery, 1924d: 228; Donisthorpe, 1932c: 456; Chapman & Capco, 1951: 113; Bolton, 1995b: 367.

TYPE-MATERIAL NOT FOUND

Type-material should be a holotype worker in, from “Aru.” The specimen labelled as holotype of spinosus in OXUM is a queen of a Procryptocerus species, labelled “Aroo.” Donisthorpe (1932c: 456) chose to accept this queen as the holotype and listed: “Meranoplus spinosus Smith l.c. p. 150, Worker, Aru; Dalla Torre l.c. clxxiv. C, p. 228 (1922) = Procryptocerus spinosus Smith. 1 dealated queen, “Aroo.”

This is entirely unacceptable because:
 * Smith’s original description is definitely of a worker.
 * The original description is good enough to tell that the specimen is a Meranoplus.
 * Procryptocerus is restricted to the Neotropics.

It must be concluded that either the label has been switched to the wrong specimen in the past, or that the original specimen was lost or destroyed and replaced with an incorrect substitute. Whichever, the genuine holotype of M. spinosus is lost.