You are here
Ants
Ponerinae
EOL Text
This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011) |
Ponerinae is a subtribe of the Orchidaceae tribe Epidendreae. The Ponerinae are characterized by sympodial stems that do not form pseudobulbs, bear two or more leaves, and a racemose or paniculate inflorescence carrying flowers with four or six pollinia. It comprises four genera:
- Helleriella
- Isochilus
- Ponera, the type genus
- Nemaonia
References[edit]
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Wikipedia |
Source | http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ponerinae_(plant)&oldid=587519144 |
Ponerinae is a subfamily of ants in the Poneromorph subfamilies group, with about 1,600 species in 47 extant genera, including Dinoponera gigantea - one of the world's largest species of ant.
They are most easily identified from other subfamilies by a constricted gaster (abdomen). They are rare examples of stinging ants.[2]
Identification[edit]
Workers of this subfamily can be distinguished by the following traits:
- The outer borders of the frontal lobes form short semicircles or triangles, and have a pinched-in appearance posteriorly.
- The promesonotal suture is flexible.
- A constriction is present between abdominal segments 3 and 4, but segment 3 is not markedly reduced in size compared to segment 4 (i.e., postpetiole absent).
- Abdominal segments 3 and 4 exhibit tergosternal fusion.
- The sting is well developed.[3]
Genera[edit]
- Platythyreini Emery, 1901
- Platythyrea Roger, 1863
- Ponerini Lepeletier de Saint-Fargeau, 1835
- Anochetus Mayr, 1861
- †Archiponera Carpenter, 1930
- Asphinctopone Santschi, 1914
- Austroponera Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Belonopelta Mayr, 1870
- Boloponera Fisher, 2006
- Bothroponera Mayr, 1862
- Brachyponera Emery, 1900
- Buniapone Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Centromyrmex Mayr, 1866
- †Cephalopone Dlussky & Wedmann, 2012
- Cryptopone Emery, 1893
- †Cyrtopone Dlussky & Wedmann, 2012
- Diacamma Mayr, 1862
- Dinoponera Roger, 186
- Dolioponera Brown, 1974
- Ectomomyrmex Mayr, 1867
- Emeryopone Forel, 1912
- Euponera Forel, 1891
- Feroponera Bolton & Fisher, 2008
- Fisheropone Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Hagensia Forel, 1901
- Harpegnathos Jerdon, 1851
- Hypoponera Santschi, 1938
- Iroponera Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Leptogenys Roger, 1861
- Loboponera Bolton & Brown, 2002
- Mayaponera Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Megaponera Mayr, 1862
- Mesoponera Emery, 1900
- †Messelepone Dlussky & Wedmann, 2012
- Myopias Roger, 1861
- Neoponera Emery, 1901
- Odontomachus Latreille, 1804
- Odontoponera Mayr, 1862
- Ophthalmopone Forel, 1890
- Pachycondyla Smith, 1858
- Paltothyreus Mayr, 1862
- Parvaponera Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Phrynoponera Wheeler, 1920
- Plectroctena Smith, 1858
- Ponera Latreille, 1804
- †Ponerites Dlussky & Rasnitsyn, 2003
- Promyopias Santschi, 1914
- †Protopone Dlussky, 1988
- Psalidomyrmex André, 1890
- Pseudoneoponera Donisthorpe, 1943
- Pseudoponera Emery, 1900
- Rasopone Schmidt & Shattuck, 2014
- Simopelta Mann, 1922
- Streblognathus Mayr, 1862
- Thaumatomyrmex Mayr, 1887
- incertae sedis
- †Afropone Dlussky, Brothers & Rasnitsyn, 2004
- †Eogorgites Hong, 2002
- †Eoponerites Hong, 2002
- †Furcisutura Hong, 2002
- †Longicapitia Hong, 2002
- †Taphopone Dlussky & Perfilieva, 2014
References[edit]
- ^ Bolton, B. (2015). "Ponerinae". AntCat. Retrieved 9 January 2015.
- ^ Hoffman, Donald R. "Ant venoms" Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2010, vol. 10, pages 342-346. doi:10.1097/ACI.0b013e328339f325
- ^ "Subfamily: Ponerinae". antweb.org. AntWeb. Retrieved 21 September 2013.
- This article incorporates text from a scholarly publication published under a copyright license that allows anyone to reuse, revise, remix and redistribute the materials in any form for any purpose: "Subfamily: Ponerinae". antweb.org. AntWeb. Retrieved 21 September 2013. Please check the source for the exact licensing terms.
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Wikipedia |
Source | http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ponerinae&oldid=654479615 |
Ponerinae HNS
Postpetiole separated from the third abdominal segment by a constriction which is more or less marked (except in the Odontomachini and in certain males of Ponerini), almost always as broad as the third segment (except in Myrmecia HNS and a few others). Worker and female with a powerful sting. As a rule there is a stridulating organ on the basal surface of the tergite following the postpetiole; it consists of very fine transversal striae of the articulating surface. Median spur of the tibiae pectinate, when present, except on the middle tibiae of a few genera; lateral spur simple. Fore wing as a rule with two closed cubital cells; but there are many exceptions.
The dimorphism of the worker is feebly marked (except in Megaponera foetens HNS , where it is very pronounced) and the female as a rule is not very different from the worker; ergatoid females exist in many genera. In a few cases the male has no constriction behind the postpetiole; such males can usually be recognized from male Dolichoderinae by the feeble development of the mandibles. Ergatoid males are known for certain Ponerini.
larvae with the mandibles powerfully developed for ant larvae; the anterior portion of the body long, slender and neck-like, folded over the swollen abdominal portion; the segments are either densely hairy all over or covered with rows of peculiar tubercles beset with more or less prominent bristles; the larvae of Megaponera HNS and Bothroponera HNS are hairless.
Nymphs enclosed in a resistant cocoon, which may be opened by the adult without intervention of the worker. The West African Discothyrea oculata Emery HNS is the only case in which the nymphs are described as having no cocoon.
In the Ponerinae the larvae are nearly always fed with pieces of solid food, which is almost invariably animal matter. Arnold says that Euponera sennaarensis (Mayr) HNS is possibly an exception to the rule: This ant preys unceasingly on termites, but its nest very often contains considerable accumulations of grass seeds, which may perhaps be used as food.1
The economic value of the Ponerinae in tropical countries can hardly be overestimated, for it may be safely asserted that at least 80 per cent, of their food consists of termites, and they thereby constitute one of the chief checks to these pests of the tropics. Certain species are exceptional, such as Plectroctena mandibularis HNS , which feeds chiefly on millipedes and beetles, and Platythyrea arnoldi Forel HNS , whose food consists entirely of small beetles, mostly Tenebrionidae.
The colonies are usually small in ponerine ants, but may be very numerous in some species, such as Paltothyreus tarsatus HNS , Megaponera foetens HNS , Euponera sennaarensis HNS , many species of Leptogenys HNS and Odontomachus haematoda HNS .
The habit of foraging in files has been observed in several species of Ponerinae in different parts of the world. In our region this habit is displayed by Megaponera foetens HNS , and to a slight extent by Paltothyreus tarsatus HNS . The former marches in double file, and the striking disparity in size between the two forms composing the colony has a very singular appearance. Their prey consists entirely of termites, and when a suitable hunting-ground containing these animals has been found, the columns break up and pour into every hole and crack which leads to the invaded galleries. The method then adopted is as follows: each ant brings to the surface one or more termites, and then re-enters the galleries to bring up more victims. This is continued until each ant has retrieved about half a dozen termites, which, in a maimed condition, are left struggling feebly at the surface. The whole army reassembles again outside and each marauder picks up as many termites as it can conveniently carry, usually 3 or 4. The columns are then re-formed and march home. Less order is shown by P. tarsatus HNS , but I have often seen this ant carrying termites, in short single files composed of about a dozen workers. (G. Arnold, op. cit., pp. 7-8).
License | Public Domain |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation. |
Source | http://treatment.plazi.org/id/FD057F199163C08A2F5DBCBB498DC2EE |
License | Public Domain |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation. |
Source | http://treatment.plazi.org/id/AD2943255731589DF2FD3F0FE0A397FD |
Subfamily PONERINAE HNS . Acanthoponera nigra HNS , n. sp.
Worker.-Length, 2.7-3 mm.
Black. Mandibles brown. Scapes and tarsi blackish brown. Head , thorax and node opaque. Mandibles coarsely punctate. Head finely, longitudinally, striate-rugose on the middle, more reticulate-punctate on the sides. Pronotum finely reticulate-punctate. Mesonotum, epinotum and node and postpetiole more coarsely so. Declivity and gaster finely and densely punctate.
Hair reddish, long and erect, abundant throughout, shorter and suberect on the antennae and legs. Pubescence reddish, rather long and coarse, particularly on the gaster.
Head longer than broad, as broad in front as behind, the occipital border straight, the sides parallel, feebly convex, the angles rounded. Frontal carinae short, not as long as their distance apart, overhanging the antennal insertions in front. Clypeus convex above, the anterior border broadly convex. There is a strong carina extending from the anterior border of the clypeus to the occipital border. Eyes convex, placed at the posterior two-thirds of the head. Scapes extending slightly beyond the hind margin of the eyes; first segment of the funiculus three times longer than the second, the others subequal to the apical, which is longer than the two preceding together. Mandibles triangular, armed with five or six sharp teeth. Thorax one and a half times longer than broad. Pronotum one and two-third times broader than long, convex in front and on the sides. Suture between the mesonotum and epinotum very feebly defined. Mesonotum almost twice as long as broad. Epinotum fully twice as broad as long, the posterior border strongly concave, the angles produced. Declivity concave, with a distinct median furrow below, margined above and on the sides. Node one and two-third times broader than long, the anterior border and sides strongly convex, posterior border straight, or very feebly convex; in profile twice as high as long, parallel, the anterior, posterior and dorsal faces straight, the angles feebly rounded. There is a long, strong tooth in the middle of the under surface. This is continued in front, by a translucent membrane, as a plate-like projection. - Postpetiole slightly broader than long, strongly convex in front and on the sides. There is a strong constriction between the postpetiole and first segment of the gaster, the latter slightly broader than long. Legs short and stout.
Habitat.-Victoria: Mt. William, Grampians (J. Clark).
The colour and pilosity separate this from the other known species.
License | Public Domain |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation. |
Source | http://treatment.plazi.org/id/7106D6A6B5B7C7380C229F7026F53121 |
Diagnosis of male ants of the subfamily Ponerinae HNS in The Malagasy region
Antenna filiform, consisting of 13 segments. Scape not reaching posterior margin of head. Oblique mesopleural furrow not reaching pronotum at its posteroventral corner. Scuto-scutellar suture usually longitudinally sculptured. Petiole attached to abdominal segment III ventrally, so that dorsal constriction between the two segments is distinct and deep. Abdominal segment III as large as segment IV. Apical portion of abdominal sternum IX not bi-spinose. Pygostyles well developed. Hind tibia with one or two spurs. Forewing with costa, subcosta, radius, radial sector, media, cubitus, and anal veins present, as are 2r-rs, 2rs-m, 1m-cu, and cu-a cross veins.
Remarks. Our key includes all seven ponerine genera recorded from the Malagasy region. Discussions of other groups in the key to subfamilies will appear in future publications. Ergatoid males are known from several genera (e.g. Hypoponera HNS in Ponerinae HNS , Technomyrmex HNS in Dolichoderinae HNS , and Cardiocondyla HNS in Myrmicinae HNS ) but were excluded from this subfamily key. Ergatoid males of ponerine ants are easily distinguished by having: (1) abdominal segment III as large as segment IV; and (2) a distinct constriction between abdominal segments III and IV.
The characters used in the subfamily key are diagnostic for taxa in the Malagasy region only and might not apply to ants collected elsewhere. As in previous studies (Smith, 1943; Yoshimura & Onoyama, 2002), bispinose abdominal sternum IX is commonly used to separate the Cerapachyinae HNS from other subfamilies. Bolton(2003) mentions a single species, the Neotropical Pachycondyla crassinoda (Latreille HNS , 1802), having this character in the subfamily Ponerinae HNS . We use the character of abdominal sternum IX because it is diagnostic within the Malagasy region. No known character is universally applicable to separate the males of Ponerinae HNS , Formicinae HNS , and Dolichoderinae HNS . In this key, the longitudinally sculptured scuto-scutellar suture and the presence of the 2rs-m cross vein on the forewing is used to separate Ponerinae HNS from the other two subfamilies, Formicinae HNS and Dolichoderinae HNS .
A few exceptions, however, exist for these character states in the region. For example, the scuto-scutellar suture in Odontomachus coquereli HNS is smooth and shiny, not longitudinally sculptured. The 2rs-m cross vein on the forewing, however, is clearly present in O. coquereli HNS . Outside the region, species of Dolichoderus HNS have 2rs-m as illustrated in Brown & Nutting (1950: figs. 18 and 19, as the genera Dolichoderus HNS and Hypoclinea HNS ). Some small species of Ponera HNS have reduced venation (Brown & Nutting 1950). Bernard (1968) identified three dolichoderine genera - Dolichoderus HNS , Liometopum HNS , and Iridomyrmex HNS - by the presence of 2rs-m ("two cubital cells"), and illustrated a forewing of the genus Formica HNS with 2rs-m present (Bernard's figure 299).
Constriction between abdominal segments III and IV has often been used to separate Ponerinae HNS from other subfamilies (Bernard, 1968; Collingwood, 1979; Wheeler & Wheeler, 1986; Czechowski et al, 2002). This state, represented by an exposed presclerite of the fourth segment, is also used to separate Ponerinae HNS from Formicinae HNS in male-based keys of Japanese ants (Yoshimura & Onoyama, 2002). Shattuck (1992) also suggests that dolichoderine males can be distinguished from ponerine males by an abdominal constriction. However, this character state is often unclear in several ponerine genera (e.g. Hypoponera HNS , a part of Pachycondyla HNS ), including Malagasy species of these genera, and is not used in this key.
We use several regional characters to separate these three subfamilies (i.e. Ponerinae HNS , Formicinae HNS , and Dolichoderinae HNS ). All of the species in the subfamily Formicinae HNS examined in this study have long antennal scapes, while those of the species in the subfamily Ponerinae HNS are short. This difference between Ponerinae HNS and Formicinae HNS seems akin to that seen in European ants (Bernard, 1968). This is likely a useful character for distinguishing between the two subfamilies, but both types of scapes are found in dolichoderine genera.
Reduction in overall size of the mandible is used by Kutter (1977) to separate Ponerinae HNS from Formicinae HNS and Dolichoderinae HNS . It is potentially useful in a region where only species of the tribe Ponerini are distributed. A very short clypeus, a ponerine character used by Bernard (1968), can be used for some of the genera in the tribe Ponerini .
- Yoshimura, M., Fisher, B. L. (2007): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to subfamilies and treatment of the genera of Ponerinae. Zootaxa 1654, 21-40: 30-30, URL:http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2007f/zt01654p040.pdf
License | Public Domain |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation. |
Source | http://treatment.plazi.org/id/D9A312D320DDF4E50AD37E080A34C3AC |
Key to Genera of Malagasy males of subfamily Ponerinae HNS
1. Wings absent................................................................................ Hypoponera HNS (part 02; ergatoid males)
- Wings present.......................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Mandibles stout and fully developed, masticatory margins overlap completely when mandibles fully closed. Antennal scrobe well defined (Figs. 10a, b) and extends as long as length of antennal scape..... ................................................................................................................................................ Platythyrea HNS
- Mandibles very reduced in size and "lobate," the masticatory margins do not overlap completely when mandibles are fully closed. Antennal scrobe absent (Fig. 7e); if weakly defined, then length distinctly shorter than length of antennal scape.......................................................................................................3
3. Pretarsal claw multidentate to pectinate (Fig. 7b).................................................................. Leptogenys HNS
- Pretarsal claw edentate or with at most two preapical teeth (Fig. 9e).................................................... 4
4. Hind wing with jugal lobe (Fig. 1c)........................................................................................................ 5
- Hind wing without jugal lobe (as in Fig. 7g) .......................................................................................... 8
5. Notauli present on mesoscutum (Fig. 9h) ........................................................... Pachycondyla HNS (part 02)
- Notauli absent (Fig. 9c) ........................................................................................................................... 6
6. Apical portion of abdominal tergum VIII not forming spine (Fig. 5e) ................................... Anochetus HNS
- Apical portion of abdominal tergum VIII forming distinct spine (Fig. 8e) ............................................ 7
7. Body usually yellow (Madagascar), rarely black (Seychelles); petiole more or less conical in frontal view, with single, narrowly rounded or sharp apex (Fig. 8b) .......................................... Odontomachus HNS
- Body black; petiole in frontal view with dorsal margin broadly or bluntly rounded (Fig. 9d) .................. ............................................................................................................................ Pachycondyla HNS (part 01)
8. Apical portion of abdominal tergum VIII without down-curved spine (Fig. 6b) .. Hypoponera HNS (part 01)
- Apical portion of abdominal tergum VIII with down-curved spine ....................................................... 9
9. Hind tibia with one spur (as in Fig. 6d) ........................................................................................ Ponera HNS
- Hind tibia with two spurs (as in Fig. 7c) .................................................... Pachycondyla HNS (part 03 & 04)
- Yoshimura, M., Fisher, B. L. (2007): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to subfamilies and treatment of the genera of Ponerinae. Zootaxa 1654, 21-40: 28-29, URL:http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2007f/zt01654p040.pdf
License | Public Domain |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation. |
Source | http://treatment.plazi.org/id/07D2283D4DD5BA20FD5F277FE2616F4B |
The Ponerinae are characterized by the following apomorphies (Bolton 2003):
- Torulus completely fused to frontal lobe
- Outer borders of frontal lobes form simple short semicircles or blunt triangles and in full-face view have a distinctly pinched-in appearance posteriorly
License | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Tree of Life web project |
Source | http://tolweb.org/Ponerinae/22215 |
Schmidt, CA, Shattuck, SO (2014) The Higher Classification of the Ant Subfamily Ponerinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with a Review of Ponerine Ecology and Behavior. Zootaxa 3817 (1): 001–242.
License | http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ |
Rights holder/Author | Katja Schulz, Katja Schulz |
Source | http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2014/3817%281%29.html |
Postpetiole separated from the third abdominal segment by a constriction which is more or less marked (except in the Odontomachini and in certain males of Ponerini), almost always as broad as the third segment (except in Myrmecia and a few others). Worker and female with a powerful sting. As a rule there is a stridulating organ on the basal surface of the tergite following the postpetiole; it consists of very fine transversal striae of the articulating surface. Median spur of the tibiae pectinate, when present, except on the middle tibiae of a few genera; lateral spur simple. Fore wing as a rule with two closed cubital cells; but there are many exceptions.
The dimorphism of the worker is feebly marked (except in Megaponera foetens , where it is very pronounced) and the female as a rule is not very different from the worker; ergatoid females exist in many genera. In a few cases the male has no constriction behind the postpetiole; such males can usually be recognized from male Dolichoderinae by the feeble development of the mandibles. Ergatoid males are known for certain Ponerini.
larvae with the mandibles powerfully developed for ant larvae; the anterior portion of the body long, slender and neck-like, folded over the swollen abdominal portion; the segments are either densely hairy all over or covered with rows of peculiar tubercles beset with more or less prominent bristles; the larvae of Megaponera and Bothroponera are hairless.
Nymphs enclosed in a resistant cocoon, which may be opened by the adult without intervention of the worker. The West African Discothyrea oculata Emery is the only case in which the nymphs are described as having no cocoon.
In the Ponerinae the larvae are nearly always fed with pieces of solid food, which is almost invariably animal matter. Arnold says that Euponera sennaarensis (Mayr) is possibly an exception to the rule: This ant preys unceasingly on termites, but its nest very often contains considerable accumulations of grass seeds, which may perhaps be used as food.1
The economic value of the Ponerinae in tropical countries can hardly be overestimated, for it may be safely asserted that at least 80 per cent, of their food consists of termites, and they thereby constitute one of the chief checks to these pests of the tropics. Certain species are exceptional, such as Plectroctena mandibularis , which feeds chiefly on millipedes and beetles, and Platythyrea arnoldi Forel , whose food consists entirely of small beetles, mostly Tenebrionidae.
The colonies are usually small in ponerine ants, but may be very numerous in some species, such as Paltothyreus tarsatus , Megaponera foetens , Euponera sennaarensis , many species of Leptogenys and Odontomachus haematoda .
The habit of foraging in files has been observed in several species of Ponerinae in different parts of the world. In our region this habit is displayed by Megaponera foetens , and to a slight extent by Paltothyreus tarsatus . The former marches in double file, and the striking disparity in size between the two forms composing the colony has a very singular appearance. Their prey consists entirely of termites, and when a suitable hunting-ground containing these animals has been found, the columns break up and pour into every hole and crack which leads to the invaded galleries. The method then adopted is as follows: each ant brings to the surface one or more termites, and then re-enters the galleries to bring up more victims. This is continued until each ant has retrieved about half a dozen termites, which, in a maimed condition, are left struggling feebly at the surface. The whole army reassembles again outside and each marauder picks up as many termites as it can conveniently carry, usually 3 or 4. The columns are then re-formed and march home. Less order is shown by P. tarsatus , but I have often seen this ant carrying termites, in short single files composed of about a dozen workers. (G. Arnold, op. cit., pp. 7-8).
License | |
Rights holder/Author | No known copyright restrictions |
Source | http://plazi.org:8080/dspace/handle/10199/17097 |