- 1 Identification
- 2 Distribution
- 3 Biology
- 4 Castes
- 5 Nomenclature
- 6 References
- 7 References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics
Zettel and Laciny (2015) - Echinopla senilis is very similar to Echinopla lineata. With more specimens of E. lineata available, some differences given by Mayr (1862) and subsequently by Mayr (1865) are not diagnostic. In fresh specimens of E. lineata the appressed hair is as abundant as in Echinopla senilis, and the shape of the petiole is rather variable. A bluish black colour of the body (“blauschwarz” in Mayr 1862, “dunkelblau” in Mayr 1865) can hardly be recognized in the lectotype of E. senilis. However, the sculptural differences are rather strong and were clearly pointed out by Gustav Mayr (1862, 1865): On the clypeus and on the sides of the mesosoma the striation is regularly striate in E. lineata whereas it is intermixed with punctures in E. senilis; at the hind margin of the propodeum and on the posterior face of the petiole, the sculpture consists of transverse striae in E. lineata whereas it is irregular and fine in E. senilis. Moreover the propodeum is anteriorly more strongly, more roundly constricted in E. senilis.
Distribution based on Regional Taxon Lists
Distribution based on AntMaps
Distribution based on AntWeb specimens
Check data from AntWeb
The following information is derived from Barry Bolton's Online Catalogue of the Ants of the World.
- senilis. Echinopla senilis Mayr, 1862: 690 (w.) INDIA (Nicobar Is).
- Subspecies of lineata: Emery, 1896d: 382.
- Raised to species: Zettel & Laciny, 2015: 118.
- Lectotype (designated by Zettel & Laciny, 2015: 118), worker, Southern Group (as Sambelong), Nicobar Island, Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Vienna.
- Paralectotype (designated by Zettel & Laciny, 2017: 15), 1 worker, Southern Group (as Sambelong), Nicobar Island, Museo Civico di Storia Naturale, Genoa.
Lectotype (worker, designation by Zettel & Laciny, 2015) from “Sambelong” (Mayr 1862). Although the collection of Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Vienna contains two specimens labelled as E. senilis, only one specimen fairly agrees with Mayr’s (1862) original description and is designated as the lectotype. This lectotype does not bear a locality label and we do not know about records that connect the code letter K with a specific locality of the Novara expedition. We trust Mayr (1862) that the type was collected in “Sambelong”, a name for the Southern Group of the Nicobar Islands. The second specimen in NHMW was probably mislabelled by the former curator Anton Handlirsch (1865–1935) when he integrated Mayr’s collection into the museum’s main collection. It is a typical specimen of E. lineata and bears the same code letter Q as the lectotype of E. lineata.
Zettel & Laciny (2017) - Unexpectedly, a hitherto unrecognized syntype was found in the collection of Carlo Emery in MCSN. It probably came to C. Emery by exchange with Gustav Mayr. The specimen largely agrees with the lectotype in the diagnostic characters given by Zettel & Laciny (2015) except that the most posterior part of the propodeum is transversely striate as in Echinopla lineata. Like the lectotype it does not possess a bluish shimmer as described by Mayr (1862, 1865). Label details: 1 paralectotype (worker, MCSN), labelled "O", "Novara\ 1857–59.\Reise", "Echinopla\ senilis Mayr\ Mus. Wien. Typus", "MUSEO GENOVA\ coll. C. Emery\ (dono 1925)", "Echinopla\ senilis\ det. Herbert Zettel 2015", "Ripreparata\ 27.X.2015 R. Poggi", "Echinopla senilis\ Mayr, 1862\ PARALECTOTYPE", "G2", "Paralectotypus\ Echinopla\ senilis Mayr, 1862\ H. Zettel & A. Laciny 2016".
Unless otherwise noted the text for the remainder of this section is reported from the publication that includes the original description.
Zettel and Laciny (2015) - Lectotype. TL 7.2; HW1 1.85; HW2 1.80; HL 1.67; EL 0.37; SL 1.72; SW 0.20; HaL 0.36; PML 1.30; PMW 1.63; PpL 1.13; PpW 1.28; PH 0.50; PL 0.55; PW 1.28; GL 1.96; GW 2.15. Indices: CI 110; SI 93; MI 149.
Zettel & Laciny (2017) - Measurements of paralectotype: TL 7.37; HW1 1.96; HW2 1.91; HL 1.89; EL 0.40; SL n.a.*; SW n.a.*; HaL n.a.*; PML 1.39; PMW 1.67; PpL 1.30; PpW 1.37; PH 0.51; PL 0.59; PW 1.28; GL 2.25; GW 2.22. Indices: CI 103; SI n.a.*; MI 161. *Both antennae missing.
- Emery, C. 1896j. Saggio di un catalogo sistematico dei generi Camponotus, Polyrhachis e affini. Mem. R. Accad. Sci. Ist. Bologna (5)5:363-382 (page 382, Variety of lineata)
- Mayr, G. 1862. Myrmecologische Studien. Verh. K-K. Zool.-Bot. Ges. Wien 12: 649-776 (page 690, worker described)
- Zettel, H. and Laciny, A. 2015. Contributions to the taxonomy of the ant genus Echinopla Smith, 1857 (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Deutsche entomologische Zeitschrift. 62:101–121. doi:10.3897/dez.62.5093.
- Zettel, H. & Laciny, A. 2017. Further additions to the taxonomy and distribution of the ant genus Echinopla. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien, B, 119: 7-16.
References based on Global Ant Biodiversity Informatics
- Emery C. 1886. Saggio di un catalogo sistematico dei generi Camponotus, Polyrhachis e affini. Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze dell'Istituto di Bologna 5: 363-382
- Forel A. 1903. Les fourmis des îles Andamans et Nicobares. Rapports de cette faune avec ses voisines. Rev. Suisse Zool. 11: 399-411.
- Mohanraj P., M. Ali, and K. Veerakumari. 2010. Formicidae of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Indian Ocean: Bay of Bengal). Journal of Insect Science 10: Article 172
- Mohanraj, P., M. Ali and K. Veenakumari. 2010. Formicidae of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Indian Ocean: Bay Of Bengal). Journal of Insect Science 10:172.