THE ANTS (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE) OF ALABAMA Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This thesis does not contain proprietary or classified information. ___________________________ Jason Allan Forster Certificate of Approval: ___________________________ ___________________________ Wayne E. Clark Michael L. Williams, Chair Professor Professor Entomology and Plant Pathology Entomology and Plant Pathology ___________________________ ___________________________ George Folkerts Stephen L. McFarlnd Profesor Dean Biological Science Graduate School THE ANTS (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE) OF ALABAMA Jason Allan Forster A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate Faculty of Auburn University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama August 8, 2003 iii THE ANTS (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE) OF ALABAMA Jason Allan Forster Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this thesis at its discretion upon request of individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. ___________________________ Jason Allan Forster ___________________________ Date iv VITA Jason Allan Forster was born August 23, 1975 in Anaheim, California to Edward and Sheila Forster. He graduated from Loara High School in 1993 and enlisted in the United States Navy. After serving four years in the Navy, Jason was honorably discharged and became a full time student, receiving a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology from the University of Alabama- Huntsville in April, 2002. After graduating, he spent a summer working as a field technician in Auburn University?s Department of Wildlife Biology. Jason was accepted into the Entomology and Plant Pathology Department as a graduate student in August, 2002. v THESIS ABSTRACT THE ANTS (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE) OF ALABAMA Jason Allan Forster Master of Science, August 8, 2005 (B.S., University of Alabama ? Huntsville, 2002) 242 Typed Pages Directed by: Michael L. Williams This thesis presents the first statewide survey of the ant fauna of Alabama in over seventy years. Since the first state survey by L.C. Murphree (in the 1930?s) to present, 154 species have been reported. Fifty-nine of the species presented are new records for the state. Specimens were collected from every county over a period of three years. Past collection records were also examined and incorporated into this thesis. Distribution data, natural history notes, and identification keys for all the species reported in Alabama are presented. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Michael L. Williams, for accepting me as his student and for his support and guidance over the years. I want to extend my gratitude to my committee members: Dr. Wayne E. Clark and Dr. George Folkerts. I would also like to thank my friends and associates for their help and friendship while here at Auburn including: Nicholas Sharp, Nathan Burkett, Andy Boring, Demian Kondo, Elly Maxwell, Shawn Dash, Dr. Charles Ray, Dr. Gary Mullen, Dr. Arthur Appel, and Joe MacGown. I would especially like to thank Joe MacGown for sharing his data, insights and knowledge on the subject of ants and for assisting me in my identification efforts. Finally, special thanks to my parents and family for their care and understanding over the years. vii Computer software used: Microsoft ? Word 2000 viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS ...?????????????????????xi LIST OF FIGURES ?????????????????????????...xviii INTRODUCTION ???????????????????????????..1 MATERIALS AND METHODS ??????????????????????3 GENERAL MORPHOLOGY OF ANTS ??????????????????...7 GENERAL TAXONOMY OF ANTS ????????????????????9 KEY TO THE SUBFAMILIES OF FORMICIDAE ??????????????12 SUBFAMILY AMBYLOPONINAE ???????????????????...14 Genus Amblyopone ???????????????????????...14 SUBFAMILY DOLICHODERINAE ???????????????????...15 Genus Dolichoderus ???????????????????????..17 Genus Dorymyrmex ???????????????????????..21 Genus Forelius ????????????????????????..?25 Genus Linepithema ??????????????????????..?.27 Genus Tapinoma ???????????????????????.?..29 SUBFAMILY ECITONINAE ??????????????????????..30 Genus Neivamyrmex ????????????????????...??..31 SUBFAMILY ECTATOMMINAE ????????????????..????34 Genus Gnamptogenys ??????????????????????.??.?.34 ix SUBFAMILY FORMICINAE ??????????????????????.35 Genus Brachymyrmex ??????????????????????...37 Genus Camponotus ??????????????????????...?41 Genus Formica ?????????????????????????..58 Genus Lasius ??????????????????????????.68 Genus Paratrechina ??????????????????????..?72 SUBFAMILY MYRMICINAE ??????????????????????84 Genus Aphaenogaster ???????.???????????????..89 Genus Crematogaster ????.???.??????????????...100 Genus Cyphomyrmex ???????.???????????????.107 Genus Monomorium ???????..???????????????..109 Genus Myrmecina ??????.?..???????????????....114 Genus Myrmica ?????????.??????????????..?115 Genus Pheidole ????????????????????????...119 Genus Pogonomyrmex ??????????????????????135 Genus Protomognathus ?????????????????????...137 Genus Pyramica ????????????????????????..138 Genus Solenopsis ????????????????????????155 Genus Stenamma ????????????????????????.170 Genus Strumigenys ???????????????????????..172 Genus Temnothorax ??????????????????????....173 Genus Tetramorium ??????????????????????....181 Genus Trachymyrmex ??????????????????????.184 x SUBFAMILY PONERINAE ??????????????????????..186 Genus Cryptopone ???????????????????????..189 Genus Hypoponera ???????????????????????.190 Genus Odontomachus ??????????????????????.194 Genus Ponera ????????????????????????..?196 SUBFAMILY PROCERATIINAE ????????????????????.199 Genus Discothyrea ???????????????????????..199 Genus Proceratium ???????????????????????.200 SUBFAMILY PSEUDOMYRMECINAE ????????????????.?204 Genus Pseudomyrmex ??????????????????????.205 RESULTS ????????????????????????????..?.209 DISCUSSION ????????????????????????????.210 REFERENCES ????????..??????????????????.?212 xi LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS Table 1. List of the ants of Alabama ???????????????????...?9 Map 1. County map of the state of Alabama ?????????????????10 Map 2. Amblyopone pallipes ??????????????????...????..15 Map 3. Dolichoderus plagiatus ???????????...??????????..19 Map 4. Dorymyrmex bureni ???????????????????????..22 Map 5. Dorymyrmex flavus ?????????????????????..??.23 Map 6. Dorymyrmex grandulus ??????????????????????24 Map 7. Dorymyrmex smithi ????????????????????...???25 Map 8. Forelius sp. ??????????????????????????...26 Map 9. Linepithema humile ????????????????..???????27 Map 10. Tapinoma sessile ??????????????????...????..?29 Map 11. Neivamyrmex carolinensis ????????????????.????.32 Map 11. Neivamyrmex nigrescens ????.????????.????.????.33 Map 12. Gnamptogenys triangularis ?????????????..?.?????.35 Map 13. Brachymyrmex depilis ??????????????????????39 Map 14. Brachymyrmex musculus ?????????????????????40 Map 15. Brachymyrmex sp. ???????????????????????..41 Map 16. Camponotus americanus ?????????????????????46 Map 17. Camponotus caryae ?????????????????..?????..47 xii Map 18. Camponotus castaneus ???????????.?????.?????.48 Map 19. Camponotus chromaiodes ????????..????????????49 Map 20. Camponotus decipiens ?????????...????????????.50 Map 21. Camponotus discolor ????????????..??????????50 Map 22. Camponotus floridanus ?????????????.????????.51 Map 23. Camponotus impressus ????????????..?????????.52 Map 24. Camponotus mississippiensis ??????????????...????..53 Map 25. Camponotus nearcticus ??????..???????????????53 Map 26. Camponotus pennsylvanicus ???????..??????.??????55 Map 27. Camponotus snellingi ?????????.????..????????.56 Map 28. Camponotus socius ?????????..????..?????????.57 Map 29. Camponotus subbarbatus ?????..????????.???????58 Map 30. Formica integra.. ????????????????????????62 Map 31. Formica new sp. ????????????????.????????63 Map 32. Formica pallidefulva ????????????.??????????.64 Map 33. Formica rubicunda ???????????????????????.65 Map 34. Formica schaufussi dolosa ????????????????????.66 Map 35. Formica subintegra ?????????????????..?????..67 Map 36. Formica subsericea ???????????????..???????..68 Map 37. Lasius alienus ?????????????????????????.70 Map 38. Lasius neoniger ???????????????..?????????.71 Map 39. Lasius umbratus ????????????????...???????..72 Map 40. Paratrechina arenivaga ?????????????????????..75 xiii Map 41. Paratrechina bourbonica ???????????????..?????.76 Map 42. Paratrechina faisonensis ?????????????????????77 Map 43. Paratrechina parvula ??????????????????????.79 Map 44. Paratrechina phantasma ????????...????????????.80 Map 45. Paratrechina vividula ??????????????????????.81 Map 46. Paratrechina wojciki ?????????????.?????????.82 Map 47. Prenolepis imparis ?????????????.??????.????83 Map 48. Aphaenogaster fulva ??????????????.?????..???93 Map 49. Aphaenogaster lamellidens ????????.????????????94 Map 50. Aphaenogaster miamiana ??????...??????????????95 Map 51. Aphaenogaster picea ????????????????.??????.96 Map 52. Aphaenogaster rudis ??????????????????????..97 Map 53. Aphaenogaster tennesseensis ???????????????????.97 Map 54. Aphaenogaster treatae ?????????????...????????.98 Map 55. Aphaenogaster sp. ??????????????????????.?.99 Map 56. Crematogaster ashmeadi ????????????????????..102 Map 57. Crematogaster lineolata ??????????????????..??.103 Map 58. Crematogaster minutissima ???????????????????..104 Map 59. Crematogaster missuriensis ???????????.????????105 Map 60. Crematogaster pilosa ????????????..?????????.106 Map 61. Crematogaster vermiculata ???????????????????.107 Map 62. Cyphomyrmex rimosus ?????????????????????108 Map 63. Monomorium minimum ???????????????.??????111 xiv Map 64. Monomorium pharaonis ??????????..??????????.112 Map 65. Monomorium viride ?????????????..?????????113 Map 66. Myrmecina americana ?????????????????????..114 Map 67. Myrmica americana ??????????????.????????.116 Map 68. Myrmica pinetorum ????????????????.??????.117 Map 69. Myrmica punctiventris ???????????.???????.???118 Map 70. Pheidole adrianoi ???????????????????????.123 Map 71. Pheidole bicarinata ?????????..?????????????124 Map 72. Pheidole crassicornis ????????...?????????????125 Map73. Pheidole dentigula ?????????...?????????????..126 Map 74. Pheidole dentata ???????????..????????????.127 Map 75. Pheidole floridana ???????????????...???????128 Map 76. Pheidole metallescens ??????????..???????????.129 Map 77. Pheidole moerens ???????????????????????.130 Map 78. Pheidole morrisi ??????????????...?????????131 Map 79. Pheidole obscurithorax ?????????????...???????..132 Map 80. Pheidole sp. ?????????????????????.????.133 Map 81. Pheidole tetra ????????????????????????..134 Map 82. Pheidole tysoni ????????????????.????????135 Map 83. Pogonomyrmex badius ?????????????????????.136 Map 84. Protomognathus americanus ???????????????????137 Map 85. Pyramica angulata ?????????????????...?????144 Map 86. Pyramica clypeata ????????????????.??.????..145 xv Map 87. Pyramica creightoni ?????????????????????.?146 Map 88. Pyramica dietrichi ???????.??????????..?????.146 Map 89. Pyramica laevinasis ?????????.?????????.????147 Map 90. Pyramica membranifera ???????.?????..???.?..???.148 Map 91. Pyramica metazytes ??????????.??????.??????149 Map 92. Pyramica ohioensis ??????????????..????????.149 Map 93. Pyramica ornata ???????????????.????????..150 Map 94. Pyramica pergandei ????????????.??????????151 Map 95. Pyramica pilinasis ?????????????..?????????..152 Map 96. Pyramica pulchella ??????????????????.????..152 Map 97. Pyramica reflexa ??????????????????.?????..153 Map 98. Pyramica rostrata ???????????????????????.154 Map 99. Pyramica talpa ???????????????????????.?154 Map 100. Solenopsis carolinensis ????????????????..????159 Map 101. Solenopsis geminata (distribution in the 1930?s) ????????..??.160 Map 102. Solenopsis globularia littoralis ????????????????.?.161 Map 103. Solenopsis invicta ???????????????????.???..163 Map 104. Solenopsis invicta x richteri ?????????????..???.??164 Map 105. Solenopsis molesta ??????????????????????..165 Map 106. Solenopsis pergandei ?????????????????????.166 Map 107. Solenopsis picta ???????????????????????..166 Map 108. Solenopsis richteri ??????????????????????..167 Map 109. Solenopsis tennesseensis ???????????..????.????..168 xvi Map 110. Solenopsis tonsa ?????????..?????????????...169 Map 111. Stenamma foveolocephalum ?????????????..?????.171 Map 112. Stenamma meridionale ???????????????.????..?172 Map 113. Strumigenys louisianae ?????????????...???????173 Map 114. Temnothorax bradleyi ?.????????...???????????176 Map 115. Temnothorax curvispinosus ???????????..???????..177 Map 116. Temnothorax longispinosus ???????????????????178 Map 117. Temnothorax pergandei ??????????.??????????.178 Map 118. Temnothorax schaumii ??????????????...??????179 Map 119. Temnothorax texanus ?????????????.????????.180 Map 120. Temnothorax tuscaloosae ??????????????...?????181 Map 121. Tetramorium caespitum ????????????.????????.183 Map 122. Tetramorium lanuginosum ?????????????.??????184 Map 123. Trachymyrmex septentrionalis ????????...?????????185 Map 124. Cryptopone gilva ????????.???????????..??.?189 Map 125. Hypoponera opaciceps ?????????????.???????..191 Map 126. Hypoponera opacior ?????????????.???????.?.192 Map 127. Odontomachus brunneus ?????????????.??????...195 Map 128. Odontomachus ruginodis ??.?????????..???????.?196 Map 129. Ponera exotica ?????????????????.??????...197 Map 130. Ponera pennsylvanicus ???????????.?????????.198 Map 131. Discothyrea testacea ????????????????????.?..200 Map 132. Proceratium chickasaw ????????????????????..201 xvii Map 133. Proceratium croceum ?????...???????????..????202 Map 134. Proceratium pergandei ????.????????????????..203 Map 135. Proceratium silaceum ?????????????????????.204 Map 136. Pseudomyrmex ejectus ??????????...??????????.206 Map 137. Pseudomyrmex pallidus ????????????????????..206 Map 138. Pseudomyrmex seminole ????????????????????.207 xviii LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1. Worker of Aphaenogaster tennesseensis????????????????8 Fig. 2.Terminal gastral segments of formicine ant with acidopore???????..?13 Fig. 3. Terminal gastral segments of dolichoderine ant with slit????????..?13 Fig. 4. Lateral view of Dorymyrmex sp. mesosoma and petiole??????????16 Fig .5. Lateral view of Crematogaster sp. petiole and gaster???????????85 Fig. 6. Lateral view of Cryptopone gilva head????????????????188 Fig. 7. Lateral view of Ponera sp. petiole ..?????????????????188 Fig. 8. Lateral view of Hypoponera sp. petiole ?..??????????????188 Fig. 9. Lateral view of Hypoponera opacior petiole ????????????..?191 Fig. 10. Lateral view of Hypoponera opaciceps petiole .????????????191 1 INTRODUCTION In the history of Alabama there has only been one statewide survey of ant species, L. C. Murphree accomplished this as his master?s thesis at Mississippi State College, now called Mississippi State University (Murphree 1947). Although the thesis was completed in 1947 the actual collection of ants for this study probably took place in the early to mid 1930?s as part of a United States Department of Agriculture survey of the range of the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile (Mayr), in which Murphree is credited by the leader of the survey for collecting specimens in Alabama (M.R. Smith 1936). Murphree reported 47 species, but estimated that there were at least 125 species present in Alabama. It is likely that the low number of species he collected was due to his focus on urban areas, which tend to have a less diverse fauna than relatively undisturbed areas. The only other published records come from a transect bait survey of the ants of Mobile County that was completed in 1976 (Glancey et al. 1976). In this study Glancey et al. collected 16 species of ants. Of the 40,211 specimens collected, 84.2% were red imported fire ants (RIFA), Solenopsis invicta Buren, and 13.1% were Argentine ants, L. humile, with the other 14 species ranking 1% or less of total specimens collected. This illustrates the foraging dominance of RIFA in highly infested areas. Perhaps the most interesting results of both the above mentioned surveys are that they illustrate how the ant fauna changed from the 1930?s to the 1970?s. In the1930?s 2 Murphree reported that imported fire ant mounds were found in only five localities within Mobile County. Most likely these ants were Solenopsis richteri Forel (the black imported fire ant or BIFA). The BIFA is thought to have been introduced in 1918 with the RIFA following some 20 to 25 years later (Buren et al. 1974). The dominant ants in the Mobile area during Murphree?s survey were documented as being Solenopsis xyloni McCook (the southern fire ant or SFA) and Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius) (the tropical fire ant or TFA). At that time S. xyloni was considered one of the most important economic pests in the southern states This is the first statewide effort in 70 years to document the ant fauna of Alabama. After discovering that Joe MacGown (Mississippi State University) was independently producing a list of Alabama ants, we decided to share data in order to make our collection data more comprehensive. Ants were collected from all 67 counties in as many different habitats as possible. Prior to this survey 47 species of ants were reported by Murphree with an additional 48 reported from literature sources including: Baroni-Urbani and de Andrade (2003), Bolton (2000), Creighton (1930,1950), Deyrup and Cover (2004), Dubois and Davis (1998), Johnson (1988b), MacKay (1993), Pass (1960), D.R. Smith (1979), M.R. Smith (1932, 1942), Snelling (1988, 1995), Trager (1984,1988), Trager et al. (2005), Umphrey (1996), Ward (1985), Watkins (1985) and Wilson (1950, 2003) All past literature records have been included as well as the more current collection data by personnel at both Auburn University and Mississippi State University. A total of 59 new state records are presented in this thesis bringing the total number of ant species recorded in Alabama to 154. 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS During this survey, I collected specimens over the course of 3 years. The most extensive periods of collection were the summers of 2003 and 2004. Collections were made in every county of the state at least once, usually twice from different sites when possible. Map 1 illustrates the county boundaries in Alabama and each species throughout this work is accompanied by a distribution map (for species that have the distribution data available). Data from Joe MacGown (Mississippi State University) were also incorporated into this list and it should be noted that he had been independently making trips to Alabama previous to my project. Upon becoming aware of each other?s activities we decided to share data to expand our knowledge base. Ants were captured using a variety of methods including: soil and leaf litter sifting, hand collecting, baiting, Berlese funnel soil sampling, blacklight trapping and pit fall trapping. By far the most common and productive method was soil sifting and hand collecting. Soil and leaf litter sampling was accomplished using a modified cat litter tray with ? inch wire mesh to separate soil and leaf litter dwelling arthropods from the substrate. Hand collecting consisted of active searching for foraging ants. Stumps and logs were dissected using a hatchet and stems and twigs were split while looking for nests. Ants were collected using an aspirator or ?pooter? (modified aspirator). Baiting consisted of leaving various food items on card stock or smeared on tree trunks in order to attract foraging ants. Baits utilized include: peanut butter, grape jelly, tuna fish and cookie crumbs. Crumbled pecan sandies (a short bread type cookie) had the 4 best results and is what most professional myrmecologists use. Baits were also used to follow workers back to nests, in order to collect reproductives. Berlese funnels were used to extract soil dwelling ants from their substrate. Leaf litter and top soil was collected in large bags and then placed in the funnels. The soil and litter is heated by a lamp causing arthropods in the soils to migrate down the funnel and into a collecting jar. Blacklight trapping involved using a blacklight hanging in front of a white sheet to attract night-flying ants. This was mainly useful in collecting males. Pitfall trapping utilized plastic cups buried in the soil and partially filled with propylene glycol (non-toxic engine coolant). These traps were left in the ground for 24 hours and then emptied and examined. In general pitfalls tend to collect the most abundant ants and arthropods in the vicinity and as such the use of these traps was limited in this survey. All collected ants were labeled and preserved in 100% ethanol. It is preferable to use high ethanol concentrations to preserve the ants to maintain their rigidity in order to make mounting easier. Specimens were later sorted and mounted on paper points using water-soluble hide glue. Representatives have been deposited at both the Auburn University Entomological Museum and the Mississippi State Entomological Museum. Specimens were also obtained from faculty, graduate students, and extension agents from Auburn University, Mississippi State University and other institutions. All specimens were identified using the latest keys from the literature and Ant Course 2003 (South West Research Station, AZ). Literature records have also been examined and are included where appropriate. 5 Abbreviations used in locality data: AL# = State route CR# = County road CG = Campground NF = National forest SP = State park NWR = National wildlife refuge WMA = Wildlife management area 6 Map 1. The State of Alabama, U.S.A. illustrating counties. (Courtesy of the Dept of Geography, University of Alabama) 7 GENERAL MORPHOLOGY OF ANTS As ants are usually identified to species using workers, it is usually helpful to collect workers whenever possible. Workers typically have a long first antennal segment, referred to as a scape, which is followed by the funiculus (usually with between 5 and 11 additional segments). Ants, like most hymenopterans, have the first abdominal segment fused to the thorax. This segment is referred to as the propodeum (or occasionally as the epinotum). The propodeum and the thorax together are referred to as the mesosoma (also called the alitrunk in older literature). Ants also have constrictions on the 2 nd and the 3 rd (depending on the subfamily) abdominal segment(s) forming the petiole (if the 3 rd is constricted it is labeled the postpetiole). The remaining unconstricted abdominal segments are referred to as the gaster. Figure 1 illustrates the general body regions of ants as well as morphological nomenclature. Winged ants are either queens or males. Queens usually have large eyes and ocelli in addition to an enlarged thoracic area and wing scars (if wings are absent). Males generally have shorter scapes and a reduced head with somewhat vestigial mandibles. They too have well developed eyes and ocelli. Standard measurement terms and abbreviations: CI: Cephalic index, HW x 100 divided by HL EL: Eye length, Eye length, in full-face view HL: Head length, length of head capsule excluding mandibles HW: Head width, maximum width of head in full-face view, excluding eyes MI: Mandibular index, ML x 100 divided by HL 8 ML: Mandibular length, maximum length of mandible, from base to tip REL: Relative eye length, EL/HL SI: Scape index, SL x 100 divided by HW SL: Scape length, maximum length of antennal scape Fig. 1. Worker of Aphaenogaster tennesseensis with general morphological features indicated 9 GENERAL TAXONOMY OF ANTS All ants belong to a single family, Formicidae, in the order Hymenoptera. There are a total of 21 extant subfamilies and 238 genera that are recognized (Bolton 2003). Nine subfamilies are represented in Alabama. Table 1 lists all species recorded in this work as well as the page number where that species is treated in the text. The most commonly encountered subfamilies are the Myrmicinae, Formicinae and Dolichoderinae. Ponerines and Pseudomyrmecines are less commonly found in Alabama unless they are actively sought out. Rarely encountered subfamilies include the Amblyoponinae, Ecitoninae, Proceratiinae, and Ectatomminae. The relationship between the subfamilies is unclear at the moment. Generally the Dolichoderinae and Formicinae are considered to be the most advanced and derived ants. Ponerines (including the Ectatommines, Amblyoponines, and Proceratinines) are considered to be primitive ants due to their predatory lifestyle and primitive behavior. Members of the family Formicidae all share the following synapomorphies: eusocial; worker caste composed of wingless (and usually sterile) workers; reproductives are winged and shed their wings after mating; metapleural gland is present; geniculate antennae; and abdominal segment 2 forming a petiole. Some of these traits have been lost secondarily, but most species retain them. Presented in the following taxonomic sections are keys to the subfamilies, genera, and species of the ants recorded in Alabama with notes on their taxonomy, life history, and distribution. 10 Table 1. Species list of the ants of Alabama with page references Subfamily Amblyoponinae, p. 14 Subfamily Formicinae (cont) Amblyopone pallipes (Haldeman), p. 15 Formica n. sp., p.63 Subfamiliy Dolichoderinae, p. 15 Formica pallidefulva Latreille, p. 63 Dolichoderus mariae Forel, p. 19 Formica rubicunda Emery, p.64 Dolichoderus plagiatus (Mayr), p. 19 Formica schaufussi dolosa Buren, p. 65 Dolichoderus pustulatus Mayr, p. 20 Formica subintegra Wheeler, p.66 Dolichoderus taschenbergi (Mayr), p. 20 Formica subsericea Say, p. 67 Dorymyrmex bureni (Trager), p. 22 Lasius alienus (Foerster), p. 69 Dorymyrmex flavus McCook, p. 23 Lasius flavus (Fabricius), p. 70 Dorymyrmex grandulus (Forel), p. 24 Lasius neoniger Emery, p. 71 Dorymyrmex smithi Cole, p. 25 Lasius umbratus (Nylander), p. 72 Forelius sp., p. 26 Paratrechina arenivaga (Wheeler), p.75 Linepithema humile (Mayr), p. 27 Paratrechina bourbonica (Forel), p.76 Tapinoma sessile (Say), p. 29 Paratrechina concinna Trager, p. 77 Subfamily Ecitoninae, p. 30 Paratrechina faisonensis (Forel), p. 77 Neivamyrmex carolinensis (Emery), p. 32 Paratrechina longicornis (Latreille), p. 78 Neivamyrmex nigrescens (Cresson), p. 33 Paratrechina parvula (Mayr), p.79 Neivamyrmex opacithorax (Emery), p.34 Paratrechina phantasma Trager, p. 80 Subfamily Ectatomminae, p.34 Paratrechina vividula (Nylander), p. 80 Gnamptogenys triangularis (Mayr), p. 35 Paratrechina wojciki Trager, p.81 Subfamily Formicinae, p. 35 Prenolepis imparis (Say), p. 83 Brachymyrmex depilis Emery, p. 39 Subfamily Myrmicinae, p. 84 Brachymyrmex musculus Forel, p. 40 Aphaenogaster floridana Smith, p. 92 Brachymyrmex n. sp., p. 41 Aphaenogaster fulva Roger, p. 93 Camponotus americanus Mayr, p.45 Aphaenogaster lamellidens Mayr, p. 94 Camponotus caryae (Fitch), p.46 Aphaenogaster miamiana Wheeler, p. 95 Camponotus castaneus (Latreille), p. 47 Aphaenogaster picea (Wheeler), p. 96 Camponotus chromaiodes Bolton, p.48 Aphaenogaster rudis Enzmann, p. 96 Camponotus decipiens Emery, p.49 Aphaenogaster tennesseensis (Mayr), p. 97 Camponotus discolor (Buckley), p. 50 Aphaenogaster treatae Forel, p. 98 Camponotus floridanus (Buckley), p. 51 Aphaenogaster( f-t-r comp.) sp., p. 99 Camponotus impressus (Roger), p.52 Crematogaster ashmeadi Mayr, p. 102 Camponotus mississippiensis Smith, p. 52 Crematogaster atkinsoni Wheeler, p. 103 Camponotus nearcticus Emery, p. 53 Crematogaster lineolata (Say), p. 103 Camponotus pennsylvanicus(DeGeer), p.54 Crematogaster minutissima Mayr, p. 104 Camponotus obliquus Smith, p. 55 Crematogaster missuriensis Emery, p. 105 Camponotus snellingi Bolton, p. 56 Crematogaster pilosa Emery, p. 106 Camponotus socius Roger, p. 57 Crematogaster vermiculata Emery, p. 107 Camponotus subbarbatus Emery, p. 57 Cyphomyrmex rimosus (Spinola), p. 108 Formica archboldi Smith, p. 61 Monomorium floricola (Jerdon), p. 110 Formica integra Nylander, p. 62 Monomorium minimum (Buckley), p. 111 Monomorium pharaonis (L.), p. 112 11 Subfamily Myrmicinae (cont) Subfamily Myrmicinae (cont) Myrmecina americana Emery, p. 114 Solenopsis richteri Forel, p. 167 Myrmica americana Weber, p. 116 Solenopsis tennesseensis Smith, p. 168 Myrmica pinetorum Wheeler, p. 117 Solenopsis tonsa Thompson, p. 169 Myrmica punctiventris Roger, p. 118 Solenopsis xyloni McCook, p. 169 Pheidole adrianoi Naves, p. 123 Stenamma foveolocephalum Smith, p. 171 Pheidole bicarinata Mayr, p. 123 Stenamma meridionale Smith, p. 172 Pheidole crassicornis Emery, p. 124 Strumigenys louisianae Roger, p. 173 Pheidole davisi Wheeler, p. 125 Temnothorax bradleyi (Wheeler), p. 176 Pheidole dentigula M.R Smith, p. 126 Temnothorax curvispinosus (Mayr), p. 176 Pheidole dentata Mayr, p. 127 Temnothorax longispinosus (Roger), p. 177 Pheidole floridana Emery, p. 128 Temnothorax pergandei (Emery), p. 178 Pheidole metallescens Emery, p. 129 Temnothorax schaumii (Roger), p. 179 Pheidole moerens Wheeler, p. 130 Temnothorax smithi (Baroni-Urbani), p. 180 Pheidole morrisi Forel, p. 131 Temnothorax texanus (Wheeler), p. 180 Pheidole obscurithorax Naves, p. 132 Temnothorax tuscaloosae (Wilson), p. 181 Pheidole (crassicornis gp) n. sp., p. 133 Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander), p. 182 Pheidole tetra Creighton, p.134 Tetramorium caespitum (Linnaeus), p. 183 Pheidole tysoni Forel. Clay, p. 134 Tetramorium lanuginosum Mayr, p. 184 Pogonomyrmex badius (Lat.), p. 136 Trachymyrmex septentrionalis (McCook),p.185 Protomognathus americanus (Em.),p.137 Subfamily Ponerinae, p. 186 Pyramica angulata (Smith), p. 144 Cryptopone gilva (Roger), p. 189 Pyramica clypeata (Roger), p. 145 Hypoponera opaciceps (Mayr), p. 191 Pyramica creightoni (Smith), p. 145 Hypoponera opacior (Forel), p. 192 Pyramica dietrichi (Smith), p. 146 Odontomachus brunneus (Patton), p. 195 Pyramica laevinasis (Smith), p. 147 Odontomachus ruginodis Smith, p. 195 Pyramica margaritae (Forel), p. 147 Ponera exotica Smith. P. 197 Pyramica membranifera (Emery), p. 148 Ponera pennsylvanica Buckley, p. 198 Pyramica metazytes Bolton, p.149 Subfamily Proceratiinae, p. 199 P. ohioensis (Kennedy&Schramm), p.149 Discothyrea testacea Roger, p. 200 Pyramica ornata (Mayr), p. 150 Proceratium chickasaw de Andrade, p. 201 Pyramica pergandei (Emery), p. 151 Proceratium croceum (Roger), p. 202 Pyramica pilinasis (Forel), p.151 Proceratium pergandei (Emery), p. 203 Pyramica pulchella (Emery), p.152 Proceratium silaceum Roger, p. 203 Pyramica reflexa (Wesson), p.153 Subfamily Pseudomyrmecinae, p. 204 Pyramica rostrata (Emery), p.153 Pseudomyrmex ejectus (Smith), p. 206 Pyramica talpa (Weber), p.154 Pseudomyrmex pallidus (Smith), p. 206 Solenopsis carolinensis Forel, p. 159 Pseudomyrmex seminole Ward, p. 207 Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius), p. 160 S. globularia littoralis Creighton, p. 161 Solenopsis invicta Buren, p. 162 Solenopsis invicta X richter, p.164 Solenopsis molesta (Say), p. 164 Solenopsis pergandei Forel, p. 165 Solenopsis picta Emery, p. 166 12 KEY TO THE SUBFAMILIES OF FORMICIDAE (Modified from Creighton 1950, Holldobler and Wilson 1990 and MacGown 2005) 1 Body with single reduced or isolated segment (petiole) between mesosoma (thorax fused with abdominal segment 1) and gaster. First gastral segment (abdominal segment 2) either entirely confluent with second gastral segment. or separated by narrow girdling impression??????...????????.....2 1? Body with two reduced segments (petiole and post-petiole) between mesosoma and gaster; either both segments reduced or post-petiole somewhat larger then petiole; post-petiole distinctly smaller than 1 st gastral segment (abdominal segment 3) and separated by extensive deep girdling???????????..7 2(1) Gaster lacking girdling impression between first and second gastral segment; sting is absent or vestigial, never apparent without dissection ?????.??...??3 2? Gaster usually with distinct girdling impression between first and second gastral segment; sting present, usually conspicuous ?.??????..????.??..4 3(2) Acidopore present as semicircular to circular orifice at apex of gaster formed from hypopygium (last lower plate of the gaster), often projecting as nozzle and encircled with distinct fringe of hairs (fig. 2) .?????????.Formicinae 3? Acidopore absent, opening at apex of gaster horizontal and slit-like, if hairs present, not forming encircling fringe (fig.3) .??...???..?.Dolichoderinae 13 4(2?) Petiole broadly joined to gaster, separated dorsally and laterally by constriction only, petiole lacking free posterior face; helcium (articulation point between petiole and gastral segment 1) broad and attached high on gastral face (as seen in profile) ??????????.????..????????..Amblyoponinae 4? Petiole narrowly joined to gaster by thin junction, petiole usually with free posterior face; helcium narrow, attached near or below midpoint of gaster ???????????????????????????????..?5 5(4?) Horizontal frontal lobes absent or reduced as seen in full face view, revealing antennal sockets; promesonotal suture absent.??????.??..Proceratiinae 5? Horizontal frontal lobes present, concealing antennal sockets; promesonotal suture usually present ???????????????????.???..6 6(5?) Head and body covered with deep grooves or furrows; mandibles elongate, lacking teeth (one species, rare in Alabama)?????????..Ectatomminae 6? Head and body not covered by deep grooves; mandibles usually with teeth, at least apically (many common species)????????????.?.Ponerinae Fig. 2. Terminal gastral segments of formicine ant with acidopore Fig. 3. Terminal gastral segments of dolichoderine ant with slit 14 7(1?) Frontal carinae expanded laterally, partially or wholly covering antennal insertions when head viewed from above ?????...?????..Myrmicinae 7? Frontal carinae narrow and not expanded laterally, antennal insertions fully exposed when head viewed from above ??????????????.??8 8(7?) Eyes large, suboval or reniform, consisting of several hundred fine ommatidia; ocelli usually present ????..??????????.?..Pseudomyrmecinae 8? Eyes vestigial or absent, if present consisting of single ocellus-like structure; ocelli absent????????????????????..???Ecitoninae SUBFAMILY AMBLYOPONINAE This is a small subfamily composed of specialist predators that are closely related to the Ponerines. Only one species, Amblyopone pallipes (Haldeman), is found in Alabama. Members of this subfamily have a petiole that is broadly joined to the gaster, separated dorsally and laterally by a constriction only; the petiole does not have a free posterior face. The helcium (articulation point between the petiole and gastral segment 1) is broad and attached high on gastral face (as seen in profile). These ants can be found worldwide. Genus Amblyopone Erichson ? Saw toothed ants This genus can be found worldwide and is particularly diverse in Australia. Amblyopone ants are specialist predators of centipedes using their unique jaws to grip prey while stinging them. 15 Amblyopone species have long narrow mandibles with coarse teeth that appear to be double. These are fairly large ants, usually about 4mm in length. Members of this genus can be found worldwide, with 3 species occurring in the United States. Amblyopone pallipes (Haldeman) ? Common saw tooth ant This species is widely distributed throughout the US but is rarely collected. They prefer mesic areas and tend to forage in the leaf litter. A. pallipes has a sharp tooth or point on the side of the head near the mandibular insertion (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species is found in Quebec and south to Florida west through the central states to California (Deyrup et al. 2003) Amblyopone pallipes was collected in the following localities in Alabama: Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn SUBFAMILY DOLICHODERINAE Dolichoderine ants have many distinctive traits that separate them from the other subfamilies of ants. Instead of a sting they have a horizontal slit at the tip of the abdomen. Dolichoderines have a distinctive odor usually described as rancid butter, rotten coconut Map 2. Amblyopone pallipes 16 or even a blue cheese fragrance. A worker can be crushed in the field to rapidly determine if it is a member of this subfamily based on smell. This ?dolichoderine odor? is the result of noxious chemicals produced by the ants and used defensively. All members of this subfamily have one node on the petiole, like the Formicinae, but they can be separated from that subfamily by their lack of an acidopore (see the subfamily Formicinae). Members of this subfamily can be found worldwide. Most Dolichoderine ants tend honeydew-producing insects and scavenge for food. As a whole they tend to be referred to as ?sugar ants? due to their fondness for foraging for sweet food items when invading human structures. Key to the Alabama genera of Dolichoderinae (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Declivitous face of propodeum strongly concave; integument stiff and brittle; mesosoma usually covered in heavy sculpturing ????????Dolichoderus 1? Declivitous face of propodeum straight or nearly so; integument thin and flexible, smooth or at most finely sculptured ?????????...????????.2 2(1?) Propodeum with prominent, sharp, tooth-like protuberance projecting vertically at junction of basal and declivitous faces; third segment of maxillary palpus long, as long or longer than three succeeding segments together ...????..Dorymyrmex Fig. 4. Lateral view of Dorymyrmex sp. mesosoma and petiole 17 2? Junction between basal and declivitous faces of propodeum unarmed, rounded or angular; third segment of maxillary palpus not long and notably shorter than three succeeding segments together ????????????????????.3 3(2?) Scale (node) of petiole vestigial and 1 st antennal segment after scape is about twice as long as 2 nd segment; mesosoma lacking fine erect hairs (best seen on dry specimens against a black background) ..???.????...?..Tapinoma sessile 3? Scale (node) of petiole present (may be covered by overhanging gaster); mesosoma with or without erect hairs .....????????..?????...?..4 4(3?) Mesosoma lacking erect hairs; scale of petiole long, tip projecting beyond overhanging anterior face of gaster ?...?????.???Linepithema humile 4? Mesosoma with several erect hairs; scale of petiole small, short and largely concealed by overhanging anterior face of gaster ?????????...Forelius Genus Dolichoderus Lund These ants have small to large colonies and usually nest in the soil or in carton (composed of rough woven plant fibers) near plants. Plant roots or stems usually penetrate their nest chambers and serve as shelves for their brood. Members of this genus feed on honeydew and are generalist scavengers. Dolichoderus ants have a distinctively concave propodeum (on the declivitous face ). Also their integument is stiff and brittle with the mesosoma usually covered in heavy sculpturing. This genus can be found in the Neotropical, Nearctic, Palearctic, Australasian, Oriental and Indo-Australian regions. In the United States this genus is confined to the eastern half of the country. 18 Key to the genus Dolichoderus (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Cephalic foveolae coarse, deep and close-set, surface between them forms reticulo-rugose pattern; antennal scapes with numerous short erect hairs on anterior surfaces ????????...???????...Dolichoderus plagiatus 1? Cephalic foveolae shallow, often replaced on front and vertex by small punctures, foveolae well separated, surface between them delicately shagreened and never forming reticulo-rugose pattern; antennal scapes usually without erect hairs, rarely one or two present ??.??????????????????..????2 2(1?) Propodeum, seen from above, subquadrate, slightly or not longer than broad; color uniform brownish black or piceous ?????..Dolichoderus taschenbergi 2? Propodeum, seen from above, distinctly longer than broad; color varies but rarely uniform brownish-black or piceous, often bicolored or at least with mesosoma lighter than gaster ????????????????????????....3 3(2?) Dorsum of propodeum and mesonotum with coarse, deep, close-set foveolae forming reticulo-rugose pattern; mesopleurae smooth and shining ?????????????.????????...?Dolichoderus pustulatus 3? Dorsum of propodeum and mesonotum granulose or densely shagreened; foveolae, when present, shallow and obscure; mesopleurae in large part or entirely shagreened, subopaque or dull ???????.???.?..Dolichoderus mariae 19 Dolichoderus mariae Forel This species has large colonies with thousands of adults. D. mariae seems to prefer sandy soil and nests near clumps of grass. The dorsum of the propodeum and mesonotum is granulose or densely shagreened and foveolae, when present, are shallow and obscure . The mesopleuron is partly or entirely shagreened and subopaque or dull. Dolichoderus mariae is found in southern New England south to Gulf States and west to Illinois and Oklahoma (Creighton 1950). This species was reported in Alabama by MacKay (1993). Dolichoderus plagiatus (Mayr) This species forms small colonies in the soil, in hollow stems or in rolled leaves (Creighton 1950). D. plagiatus has cephalic foveolae that are coarse, deep and close-set so that the surface between them forms a reticulo-rugose pattern. Their antennal scapes have numerous short erect hairs on their anterior surfaces. Dolichoderus plagiatus is found in southern Ontario and New Brunswick south to Georgia and west to North Dakota, with most specimens collected in the Appalachian Mountains (Creighton 1950). Map 3. Dolichoderus plagiatus 20 This species was collected in the following locality in Alabama: DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP. Dolichoderus pustulatus Mayr Nests of this species are small and formed above ground from woven plant fibers (carton), usually in a clump of vegetation. The dorsum of the propodeum and mesonotum of this species has coarse, deep, close-set foveolae that form a reticulo-rugose pattern. The mesopleuron is smooth and shining. Dolichoderus pustulatus is found in southern Nova Scotia south to Florida and west to Texas and Illinois (Creighton 1950). This species was reported in Alabama by MacKay (1993). Dolichoderus taschenbergi (Mayr) This species has large colonies and prefers to nest in sandy soils. It is rare in the southern extent of its ranges. Dolichoderus taschenbergi has a propodeum that, seen from above, is subquadrate, and slightly or not at all longer than broad. The body of this ant is uniform brownish black or piceous. This species can be found from Nova Scotia west to Manitoba and south to the Gulf States (Creighton 1950) and was reported in Alabama by MacKay (1993). 21 Genus Dorymyrmex Mayr? Pyramid ants This genus is only found in the New World and is most diverse in South America. Dorymyrmex ants typically prefer open sunny areas and nest in the soil. Colonies are generally large and their nests are marked by small mounds of excavated soil. Workers will forage during the hottest periods of the day moving rapidly across the substrate collecting dead insects, honeydew and scavenged material. These ants do not seem bothered by other ants and will nest in the close vicinity of other aggressive species like Pogonomyrmex spp. (Creighton 1950) and Solenopsis invicta (personal observation). It should be noted that Murphree (1947) refers to Dorymyrmex pyramicus Roger that was most likely D. bureni although this is uncertain without material to examine. Dorymyrmex ants have a distinctive tooth-like protuberance projecting vertically at the junction of the basal and declivitous faces. Also the third segment of the maxillary palpus is long (as long or longer than the three succeeding segments together). Members of this genus can be found in the Nearctic and Neotropical regions. Key to the genus Dorymyrmex (modified from Snelling 1995, MacKay 2005) 1 Mesonotal profile, in all or nearly all nest-mates, evenly convex or flat to weakly concave; color yellow or reddish yellow; propodeal tubercle blunt ..?????????????????????....??.Dorymyrmex bureni 1? Mesonotal profile, in all or nearly all nest-mates, with distinct dorsal and posterior faces that meet in a more or less well-defined angle; color varies from yellowish to blackish; propodeal tubercle sharp or blunt ?..????????.????.2 22 2(1?) Head relatively broad (CI over 90); vertex margin distinctly concave in frontal view, rarely straight; eye relatively small; color black to dark brown ????????????????????????Dorymyrmex smithi 2? Head relatively narrow (CI usually less than 88, rarely 90); vertex margin straight or slightly convex; eye relatively large ??????????????..??.3 3(2?) Propodeal tubercle relatively prominent; color yellowish to reddish-yellow ?????????????????????...???.Dorymyrmex flavus 3? Propodeal tubercle relatively short, color brownish to yellowish ???????????????????????.Dorymyrmex grandulus Dorymyrmex bureni (Trager) This species is extremely common in Alabama. These ants are found in open sunny areas and tend to be dominant in dry environments. They are aggressive when disturbed and will climb grass and shrubs to attack large intruders, however they are fairly harmless as they lack a sting and are too small to inflict a painful bite. Dorymyrmex bureni nests may be found in close proximity to S. invicta mounds (within a meter or less). The author has observed D. bureni nests with rings of dead S.invicta outside of the nest, possibly Map 4. Dorymyrmex bureni 23 indicating conflict or scavenging activity of these ants. The relationship between these two species is unknown. This species has a smooth mesonotal profile that is evenly convex or flat to weakly concave. D. bureni is yellow or reddish yellow and has a blunt propodeal tubercle. The range of this ant extends from Maryland south to Florida and west to Texas (Snelling 1995). Dorymyrmex bureni was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. Pondville, Blount Co. Oneonta, Clarke Co. Grove Hill, Coffee Co. Hwy 51, 2mi N of Enterprise, Covington Co. Conecuh NF: Conecuh Trail, Dallas Co. 2mi W of Orville, Escambia Co. 2mi E of Flomaton, Geneva Co. Hacoda, Hale Co. Lake Payne CG, Houston Co. Dothan, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Woodruff Lake, Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Monroe Co., Perry Co. 1mi. N of Heidberger, Russell Co. CR22 and AL51, Sumter Co. Coatopa, Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lurleen SP, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Dorymyrmex flavus McCook This species nests in soil with its entrances marked by small mounds of soil. D. flavus has a relatively narrow head (CI usually Map 5. Dorymyrmex flavus 24 less than 88, rarely 90) and vertex margin is straight or slightly convex. The eye is relatively large and the propodeal tubercle is relatively prominent. The body is yellowish to reddish-yellow Dorymyrmex flavus is found in Alabama, Florida, Texas and California (Snelling 1995) probably across the southern US. This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, Conecuh Co. Conecuh NF, Mobile Co. Mobile Dorymyrmex grandulus (Forel) This is a typical soil dwelling Dorymyrmex ant that is apparently rare within its range. It was not collected during this survey. D. grandulus has a relatively narrow head (CI usually less than 88, rarely 90) and the vertex margin is straight or slightly convex. The eye is relatively large while the propodeal tubercle is relatively short. Color is brownish to yellowish. This species is found in Georgia (Isper et al. 2004), Florida (Deyrup 2003) and Alabama. Dorymyrmex grandulus was reported in Mobile Co. by Trager (1988). Map 6. Dorymyrmex grandulus 25 Dorymyrmex smithi Cole This species is a temporary parasite of D. bureni and possibly other Dorymyrmex species. Foundling nests with mixed workers are rare but the author found a colony with about 50/50 enslaved workers in a dirt parking lot close to Funchess Hall (Auburn University, Auburn, AL). All other collections came from pure D. smithi colonies. Dorymyrmex smithi has a relatively broad head (CI over 90) with the vertex margin distinctly concave in frontal view, rarely straight. The eye relatively small and the propodeal spine is typically well developed. This species is black to dark brown. This ant is found in North Carolina south to Florida and west to North Dakota and Texas (Snelling 1995). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Geneva Co. 2mi E of Hartford, Lee Co. Auburn University, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Mobile Co. Mobile Genus Forelius - Emery This is a small New World genus with only a few species in North America. These ants are typically found in xeric areas and will forage during high temperatures. They mainly feed on honeydew and scavenged material. Map 7. Dorymyrmex smithi 26 These ants look similar to L. humile but can be separated by examining the mesosoma that has several fine erect hairs. Also the scale of the petiole is small, short and largely concealed by the overhanging anterior face of the gaster. Color ranges from dark brown to deep orange. This genus is found throughout the Nearctic and Neotropical regions. Forelius sp. This species is most likely F. pruinosus (Roger) and potentially another species or complex of species that cannot be reliably distinguished at this point (this seems to be the species Murphree refers to as Iridomyrmex pruinosus analis Andre in his 1947 thesis). These ants show a great deal of variability in color which indicates that this might be a complex, but that has not been answered and this species has not been studied to any satisfactory degree. Only after this genus is revised will positive identification be possible. This genus is in disarray; it is difficult to identify precisely what species this is. Representatives of this species (or species complex) are found across the United States This Forelius sp. was collected in the following Alabama counties: Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Blount Co. Oneonta, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Map 8. Forelius sp. 27 Clay Co. Taladega NF, Chinnabee trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, Dallas Co. Carlowville, Fayette Co. Wolfcreek WMA, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lawrence Co. Bankhead NF, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. Gipsey, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Morgan Co. Wheeler NWR, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Russell Co. CR22 and AL51, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA, Walker Co. Townley, Winston Co. Smith Lake CG Genus Linepithema Mayr This genus is from South America but members are found worldwide especially in subtropical and tropical regions. These ants are generalists but prefer sweet food items. Linepithema humile (Mayr) ? Argentine ant This is a major pest ant in the United States that was first noticed in New Orleans in 1881 (Foster 1908). It is a native of Argentina (hence the common name) and has since spread throughout the southern US, stretching from Florida to California with isolated introductions to greenhouses and other human structures around the country. L. humile generally prefers moist, warm areas and will nest in virtually any Map 9. Linepithema humile 28 habitat including in the soil, in piles of wood or debris, in leaf litter, or in potted plants. This species will also readily move indoors and nest under flooring or in wall voids. Colonies can be massive with 11,000 to 64,000 adults (Holldobler and Wilson 1990) and L. humile is extremely aggressive towards other ant species, effectively displacing all but the smallest species in highly infested areas (Ward 1987). This species however is highly gregarious to conspecifics and will generally adopt other L. humile ants from other colonies. New colonies are founded by ?budding?: Instead of engaging in mating flights the queens mate in the nest and then leave with a group of workers to found a new nest. All colonies are polygynous usually with several to hundreds of queens. These ants form long extensive trails and go through great lengths to reach food items, when disturbed they have a tendency to swarm all over the intruder, but due to their small size they can inflict no harm to humans. However, it is fairly unsettling to have large numbers of Argentine ants rapidly crawling about your skin. Linepithema humile has a mesosoma that lacks erect hairs and the scale of the petiole is long with the tip projecting beyond the overhanging anterior face of the gaster. This species is concolorous blackish brown to grayish. This species is found worldwide throughout the tropics and subtropics. In the US this species is found throughout the south, from Georgia to southern California, with isolated introduction throughout the US. Linepithema humile was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. 2mi. S of Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Coffee Co. 1mi. N of Enterprise, Conecuh Co. Evergreen, Covington Co. 3mi S of 29 Andalusia, Dallas Co. 2mi W of Selma, Greene Co. Boligee, Lowndes Co. Prairie Greek CG, Marengo Co. Fosque Creek CG, Mobile Co. Saraland, Monroe Co. Claibourne Lake, Shelby Co. Birmingham, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Walker Co. Townley, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG, Winston Co. Smith Lake Genus Tapinoma Foerster This is a large genus of ants with only three members (one introduced) in North America. These ants are fond of sweet substances and will nest in a variety of environments. Members of this genus can be found worldwide. Tapinoma sessile (Say) ?Odorous house ant This species is a fairly successful native ant that was probably much more common before the introduction of the Argentine ant (L. humile). It prefers similar habitats to that invasive ant however; T. sessile has a much larger range in North America ranging from southern Canada to northern Mexico. Colonies are polygynous and typically have several thousand members with a large colony containing 10,000 adults. This species will commonly invade houses in search of food. Map 10. Tapinoma sessile 30 Tapinoma sessile superficially looks similar to L.humile but can be separated by the following characters: the scale (node) of petiole is vestigial and 1 st antennal segment after scape is about twice as long as 2 nd segment. This species is found in southern Canada south to northern Mexico, and throughout the US. Tapinoma sessile was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Etowah Co. Gadsden, Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Limestone Co. 1mi. N of Decatur, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Huntsville, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA SUBFAMILY ECITONINAE ? New World army ants The army ants are an interesting group that typically forage in columns and consume prey that they encounter on their ?raids?. In Alabama this subfamily is represented by one genus, Neivamyrmex, which preys on the brood of other ants. North American army ants are much more cryptic then their African and South America cousins. They are smaller and usually only active at night, often overlooked but fairly widespread. These ants have exposed antennal insertions (full face view) and their eyes are vestigial or absent, if present consisting of a single ocellus-like structure, ocelli are also absent. Members of this subfamily are found in the Nearctic and Neotropical regions. 31 Genus Neivamyrmex Borgmeier This genus has the typical nomadic army ant behavior and members are active nocturnally, nesting under stones or other objects during the day. These ants specialize on the brood of other ants. Workers can be identified by the traits of the subfamily since this is the only genus found in Alabama. Males (sometimes more commonly collected than the workers) are identified by their larger wasp-like appearance and their subgenital plate that has three apical teeth. Key to the genus Neivamyrmex (from Creighton 1950, Watkins1985, MacGown 2005) Key to workers: 1 Upper surface of head opaque, densely granulate ??..Neivamyrmex nigrescens 1? Head mostly shining and lacking granulate sculpture ??????????..2 2(1?) Petiolar node elongate, nearly twice as long as broad ...Neivamyrmex opacithorax 2? Petiolar node subquadrate, about as broad as long ?...Neivamyrmex carolinensis Key to males: 1 Mandibles sickle shaped, slender and gradually tapering apically ?????????????????????? Neivamyrmex carolinensis 1? Mandibles spatulate shaped, distal half as broad or broader than basal half ??..2 2(1?) Gaster black to blackish brown; setae on ventral side of petiole short (shorter than width of metatibia), white and directed posteroventrally; just above antennal fossa, prominent swelling is present ???.?????Neivamyrmex nigrescens 32 2? Gaster reddish brown, setae on ventral side of petiole long (hairs longer than width of metatibia), golden and erect; area above antennal fossa with transverse swelling only weakly developed or absent ?????.Neivamyrmex opacithorax Neivamyrmex carolinensis (Emery) This species nests in the soil or under stones and has large colonies of up to 50,000 adults (MacKay and MacKay 2002). Males can be collected during mating flights in May and June. Workers of this species have a petiolar node that is subquadrate, about as broad as long. Males have mandibles that are sickle shaped, slender and gradually tapering apically. Neivamyrmex carolinensis is found throughout the southeastern US west to Arizona and Kansas (MacKay and MacKay 2002). This species was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Chilton Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Choctaw Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Etowah Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Pickens Co. (M.R. Smith 1942) Map 11. Neivamyrmex carolinensis 33 Neivamyrmex nigrescens (Cresson) This is the most common army ant in the United States. N. nigrescens nests in the soil or under objects when bivouacking. Males can be collected at light traps from August to November (MacKay and MacKay 2002). Workers can be identified by the opaque, densely granulate upper surface of their heads. Males have black to blackish brown gasters and just above the antennal fossa, a prominent swelling is present. The setae on the ventral side of the petiole is short (shorter than width of metatibia), white and directed posteroventrally. This species is found in the southern half of the US, from Virginia west to California (MacKay and MacKay 2002). Neivamyrmex nigrescens was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Calhoun Co. Colwell, Cherokee Co. Little River Canyon, Clay Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Cullman Co. no locality given, Jefferson Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Madison Co. Huntsville, Mobile Co. (M.R. Smith 1942), Morgan Co. (M.R. Smith 1942) Map 11. Neivamyrmex nigrescens 34 Neivamyrmex opacithorax (Emery) This species has a wide distribution in the US, however collections in Alabama are rare with only one being reported by Watkins in 1985. Males can be found at blacklights between September and December (MacKay and MacKay 2002). Workers of this species have an elongate petiolar node that is nearly twice as long as broad. Males have a reddish brown gaster and the area above the antennal fossa has only a weakly developed swelling (or entirely absent). The setae on the ventral side of the petiole are longer than the width of metatibia, golden and erect. This species is found throughout most of the US according to MacKay and MacKay (2002) and was reported in Alabama by Watkins (1985). SUBFAMILY ECTATOMMINAE Members of this subfamily may be found worldwide but are typically more concentrated and diverse in the New World tropics and in Australia. Ectatommines range from omnivorous foragers to specialist predators. There is only one species of this subfamily found in Alabama, Gnamptogenys triangularis (Mayr) and it is exceedingly rare. These ants look similar to Ponerines but can be separated by the following traits: the head and body is covered with deep grooves or furrows and the mandibles are elongate and lack teeth. Genus Gnamptogenys Roger ? Grooved ants This is a large genus of ants that are mostly found in tropical regions except for Africa (Bolton 1995). Only two species are found in the US and they are relatively rare. 35 Gnamptogenys triangularis (Mayr) This species is thought to be a specialist predator on millipedes. It is highly resistant to cyanide (which is typically found in the defensive secretions of millipedes) (Deyrup et al. 2003). This is an introduced ant from Central America. Gnamptogenys triangularis has a heavily grooved body and head and is blackish brown. Workers are about 5mm in length and have small spines on the propodeum. In the US this ant has only been collected in Florida and Alabama, it is native to Panama and Bolivia (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species was collected in Mobile Co. Mobile by Lloyd Davis (pers. comm.). SUBFAMILY FORMICINAE The family Formicidae takes its name from the observation that certain ants produce formic acid (H 2 COOH). There is a common misconception that all ants produce formic acid, however only ants in the subfamily Formicinae are known to synthesize the acid for use in defense (Holldolber and Wilson 1990). Another unique character of the formicines is the replacement of the sting with an acidopore. This acidopore is a Map 12. Gnamptogenys triangularis 36 morphological structure at the tip of the abdomen that serves as a nozzle for expelling formic acid. Formicines nest in the soil, in logs or in plant cavities. Most Formicines are generalist predators and scavengers although several show a preference for sugary baits. This subfamily contains many members that are the most common and dominant ants in temperate areas. Ants in this subfamily all have a single node on the petiole. They also have an acidopore that is present as a semicircular to circular orifice at the apex of the gaster formed from the hypopygium (last lower plate of the gaster), this is most often projecting as a nozzle and encircled with a distinct fringe of hairs. Formicines can be found worldwide. Key to the Alabama genera of Formicinae (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Antenna 9-segmented, very small ants 1-2 mm in length ?.?.......Brachymyrmex 1? Antenna 12-segmented, small to large ants 3+ mm in length????????..2 2(1?) Profile of mesosoma continuous and evenly convex, propodeum not depressed below level of promesonotum and metanotal region at most slightly impressed (normally not impressed); antennal sockets situated well behind posterior clypeal margin ???????????.?????????????..Camponotus 2? Profile of mesosoma discontinuous and not evenly convex, with propodeum depressed below level of promesonotum and metanotal area moderately to strongly impressed; antennal sockets situated close to posterior margin of clypeus ????????????????????????????????..3 37 3(2?) Frontal carinae short but distinct, each carina a small ridge with moderately to sharply angulate summit; basal face of propodeum generally longer than declivitous face; mandibles with 7 or more teeth; ocelli present??.Formica 3? Frontal carinae indistinct or absent, if present, each carina small and ridge like with distinctly rounded summit; either declivitous face of propodeum is markedly longer than basal face and mandibles with 7+ teeth, or propodeum faces approximately equal in length and mandibles with 5-6 teeth; ocelli absent or indistinct ???...????????????????????????...4 4(3?) Mandibles with 7+ teeth; antennal scape exceeds occipital border by no more than 2-3 times maximum scape diameter, usually less; declivitous face of propodeum longer than basal face, both faces meeting in distinct upward facing peak....Lasius 4? Mandibles with 5-6 teeth; antennal scape passes occipital border by at least 4-5 times maximum scape diameter ???...???????????????...5 5(4?) Mesonotum, in dorsal view, severely constricted giving mesosoma distinctive ?hour-glass? shape; pilosity not coarse or bristle-like, erect hairs mostly slender and golden or brownish (generally collected during cool weather) ??Prenolepis 5? Mesonotum, in dorsal view, weakly constricted; mesosoma lacking ?hour-glass? appearance; erect hairs usually coarse, bristle-like and dark brown or black in color ?????????????????????...???..Paratrechina Genus Brachymyrmex Mayr ? Rover ants This genus is easy to recognize due to its small size and 9-segmented antenna. Identification to the species level is extremely difficult though and this genus is in 38 considerable disarray and in need of revision. Two species are recognized, but it is difficult to determine if these are proper species or complexes. I have included another record of a species that is most likely new (Joe MacGown, pers. comm.) These small ants are common in Alabama and can be found in just about any environment, usually nesting in the soil, under objects or in rotting wood or plant cavities. The main food item of these ants is thought to be honeydew from tended hemiptera. The generic name Brachymyrmex is derived from the word ?brachy? which is Greek for short, in other words these are the ?short ants?. Brachymyrmex ants are small (1-2mm in length) and have antennae with 9- segments. This genus can be found throughout the world. Key to the genus Brachymyrmex (modified from Wheeler and Wheeler 1978) 1 Concolorous yellow to reddish-yellow; no erect hairs on thoracic dorsum; pubescence on gaster dense; workers 1 ? -2mm long??...Brachymyrmex depilis 1? Concolorous dusky reddish-brown to blackish; thoracic dorsum with 6-8 stout hairs about 0.1mm long; pubescence on gaster not concealing shining surface; workers 1 ? -1 ? mm long ???????????...Brachymyrmex musculus 39 Brachymyrmex depilis Emery This species is thought to be native to North America; it is not commonly collected, probably due to its small size. Nests are typically found under stones or logs. B. depilis tends subterranean aphids and mealybugs for honey dew. This species is concolorous yellow to reddish-yellow and lacks erect hairs on the thoracic dorsum. The pubescence on the gaster is dense. Workers are 1 ? -2mm long. Brachymyrmex depilis is found throughout the continental United States. This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Eufala, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Clay Co. Chinnabee Lake, Dallas Co. Carlowville, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Escambia Co. 1mi E of Flomaton, Henry Co. 2mi N of Abbeville, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Mobile Co. (Murphree 1947), Pickens Co. Cochrane, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Winston Co. Smith Lake Map 13. Brachymyrmex depilis 40 Brachymyrmex musculus Forel This species (or complex) is common in southern Alabama. Occasionally these ants are accidentally brought into homes via potted plants and can become minor pests, although the species does not seem to fair well indoors. This is probably an introduced species but due to the state of this genus it is difficult to say with any certainty. Brachymyrmex musculus is concolorous dusky reddish-brown to blackish and the thoracic dorsum has 6-8 stout hairs about 0.1mm long. The pubescence on the gaster does not conceal the shining surface. Workers are 1 ? -1 ? mm long. This species is found in Costa Rica and Mexico. In the US it has been collected in Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana (Wheeler and Wheeler 1978). This ant was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Baldwin Co. 1mi S of Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Eufala,, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Choctaw Co. Bolinger, Clarke Co. Grove Hill, Coffee Co. Enterprise, Conecuh Co. Evergreen, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Dale Co. Daleville, Dallas Co. Selma, Escambia Co. 2mi W of Flomaton, Geneva Co. 2mi W of Hacoda, Henry Co. 2mi N of Abbeville, Houston Co. Dothan, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Marion Co. Hamilton, Mobile Co. Saraland, Monroe Co. Map 14. Brachymyrmex musculus 41 Claiborne Lake Project, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Sumter Co. Livingston, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Washington Co. Chatom, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Brachymyrmex sp. This is a potentially new species that was collected by Joe MacGown in Alabama and Mississippi (Joe MacGown, pers.comm.). This species has not been described, but probably will be once more data are collected. Morphologically this ant is similar to B. depilis but with less erect hairs on mesosoma. This species was collected in Alabama in the following locality: Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lurleen. Genus Camponotus Mayr- Carpenter ants With approximately 1000 recognized members worldwide, this is one of the most diverse genera of ants in the world (Wilson 1976b). Representatives of the genus can be found nesting in virtually any habitat and are quite common. They can be of minor economic importance if they invade households due to wood damage that some species can cause. Some Camponotus species tunnel into wood, hence the common name of the Map 15. Brachymyrmex sp 42 carpenter ants. The scientific name of this genus is derived from the Greek terms of ?campo? meaning bent or flexible and ?notum? meaning back, this is in reference to the distinctively concave shape of the mesosoma of these ants. Camponotus species have a mesosoma that, in profile, is continuous and evenly convex, with the propodeum not depressed below the level of the promesonotum and with the metanotal region at most slightly impressed (normally not impressed at all). The antennal sockets are situated well behind the posterior clypeal margin. Camponotus ants are all strongly to weakly polymorphic. It should be noted that Camponotus (Colobopsis) pylartes fraxinicola was mentioned by Murphree (1947) as occurring in Alabama but is not included here due to questions of the validity of this species. Key to the genus Camponotus (modified from Creighton 1950, and Snelling 1988) 1 Head of major circular in cross section and distinctly truncated in front, truncated portion consisting of clypeus and adjacent parts of gena with mandibles forming ventral segment (subgenus Colobopsis) ???????????...???.?..2 1` Head of major not circular in cross section and not truncated in front ?.???..4 2(1) Length of major worker 3.75mm or less ????????Camponotus obliquus 2` Length of major worker 4.5mm or greater ???????????????..3 3(2?) Angle where side of head meets truncated anterior face is surmounted by narrow flange; sculpture of anterior face consisting of small shallow punctures and reticulation; area within flange notably concave ..?.Camponotus mississippiensis 43 3? Angle where side of head meets truncated anterior face is serrate or blunt but not surmounted by distinct flange; sculpture on anterior face consists of coarse punctures and deep reticulations ????????..??Camponotus impressus 4(1?) Scapes and legs with numerous, long, coarse, brownish or golden erect hair; head and mesosoma ferrugineous red, gaster black (subgenus Myrmothrix) ????..???????????????????Camponotus floridanus 4? Erect hairs on scapes and legs (when present) fine, short and usually whitish ......5 5(4?) Anterior border of clypeus feebly projecting, depressed in middle and with narrow median notch, behind which is short triangular impression; length of major workers 8mm or less (subgenus Myrmentoma) ???...?????????...6 5? Clypeus usually without a median notch, when notch present there is no triangular impression behind it; larger ants with majors usually 8mm or more in length ?.11 6(5) Area between eye and base of mandible with conspicuous suberect to erect short hairs arising from coarse oval foveae ??.???????????????7 6? Area between eye and base of mandible without suberect or erect short hairs (except some near base of mandibles) and conspicuously punctuate, but lacking coarse oval foveae ????????????.????????????..9 7(6) Clypeus with long erect hairs along and adjacent to margins (none as short as those between eye and mandible); few (1-3) to no hairs across central surface of clypeus ??????..????????????...Camponotus subbarbatus 7? Clypeus with long erect hairs along the margins and numerous shorter hairs across central surface ??????????????????????????.8 44 8(7?) Erect hairs of clypeus of varying lengths, shortest about as long as those between eye and mandible; integument light to dark brown ?.???.Camponotus caryae 8? Erect hairs of clypeus distinctly long and short, short hairs shorter than those between eye and mandible; head, mesosoma, petiole and appendages red, gaster blackish ?????.???????????????..Camponotus discolor 9(6?) Clypeus approximately as long as broad and with 2-4 long erect hairs along margin above tentorial pits; head, mesosoma, and appendages red to yellowish red; clypeus dull and densely tessellate, not roughened; occipital margin distinctly concave in front view ??????????????...Camponotus decipiens 9? Clypeus distinctly broader than long and with 4-10 (usually more than 6) erect hairs along margins above tentorial pits; color varies but if head and mesosoma reddish, at least gastral tergum 1 also reddish or yellowish or clypeus is distinctly roughened or occipital margin straight ?????????.???????10 10(9?) Head and mesosoma usually brownish to blackish, if somewhat reddish than gaster is wholly black; occipital margin straight to weakly concave ????????..??????????????.Camponotus nearcticus 10? Head, mesosoma appendages and first 1-2 gastral terga yellowish to yellowish red; occipital margin slightly to moderately concave ???Camponotus snellingi 11(5?) Clypeus with relatively smooth face, not carinate; antennal fossae deep; head of major worker (excluding mandibles) usually broader than long (subgenus Camponotus) ????????????.??????.???????...12 45 11? Clypeus with a central ridge (carina); antennal fossae shallow; head of major worker (excluding mandibles) usually longer than broad (subgenus Tanamyrmex) ????????????????????????????????14 12(11) Cheeks (near base of mandibles) with numerous (6-10) erect hairs; Gaster with sparse fine appressed hairs; mesosoma and gaster typically brownish orange to brown, head is dark brown ?????..?????..?Camponotus americanus 12? Cheeks without erect hairs or few (1-3) present; gaster densely covered with coarse golden appressed hairs; coloration is completely black or black with brownish-red to red ???????...????????????????13 13(12?)Appressed gastral pubescence extends less than half length of hair past edge of tergite; body concolorous black ?...????.??..Camponotus pennsylvanicus 13? Appressed gastral pubescence extends more than half length of hair past edge of tergite; body usually black with brownish red to red aspects (varies but red coloration can be found on the tergum 1, mesosoma, and appendages) ??????????????????????..Camponotus chromaiodes 14(11?)Occipital corners with numerous erect hairs; dorsum of gaster completely opaque usually with dark transverse stripes ??????????...Camponotus socius 14? Occipital corners without erect hairs; dorsum of gaster feebly to strongly shining usually without dark transverse stripes ????????Camponotus castaneus Camponotus (Camponotus) americanus Mayr This common carpenter ant nests in the soil. This species closely resembles C. castaneus but distinguished by the erect hairs on the cheek. 46 This species is typically brownish-orange to brown while the head is dark brown. The cheeks (near base of mandibles) have numerous (6-10) erect hairs and the gaster has sparse fine appressed pubescence. Camponotus americanus is found in southern Ontario south to Georgia and west to Texas (Creighton 1950) and Kansas (Dubois 1994). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Calhoun Co. Colwell, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Coffee Co. 2mi N of Enterprise, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin, Winston Co. Smith Lake Camponotus (Myrmetoma) caryae (Fitch) This species nests under bark of trees, logs and stumps. Rarely, these ants invade wooden structures and cause damage. They are considered nocturnal and are thought to feed mainly on honeydew and nectar. It is speculated that C. caryae is associated with hickory trees (Creighton 1950) although little is truly known of the habits of these ants. Although they seem to have a wide range they are not commonly collected and the only record of them in Alabama is from Murphree (1947). Map 16. Camponotus americanus 47 Camponotus caryae has erect hairs on the clypeus that are of varying lengths and the shortest is about as long as those found between the eye and the mandible. This species is concolorous light to dark brown. This species is found from New York (Snelling 1988) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Kansas (Dubois 1994). This species was collected in Alabama in Jefferson Co. Birmingham (Murphree 1947). Camponotus (Tanaemyrmex) castaneus (Latreille) This ant nests in the soil or in rotting wood. It is generally not considered a pest but it may occur in houses while foraging for food and may potentially damage structures with wood that is starting to rot. This species lacks erect hairs on the occipital corners and the dorsum of the gaster is feebly to strongly shining, usually without dark transverse stripes. C. castaneus is concolorous red to reddish-brown. Map 17. Camponotus caryae 48 Camponotus castaneus is found in southern New England south to Florida and west to Texas (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co.1mi N of Decatur, Lowndes Co. Woodruff Lake, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Mobile Co. Mobile, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Camponotus (Camponotus) chromaiodes Bolton ? Red carpenter ant This species may nest in the soil or in rotten logs. Occasionally C. chromaiodes may nest in wood structures or in rotting trees. This ant is common in Alabama and similar in its life history to C. pennsylvanicus. Camponotus chromaiodes can look similar to C. pennsylvanicus but can be separated by examining the appressed gastral pubescence which extends more than half of the length of the hair past the edge of the tergite. These ants are usually black with reddish coloration on its mesosoma and appendages. Map 18. Camponotus castaneus 49 This species is found in the northeastern US west to Illinois and south to Alabama and Mississippi. Camponotus chromaiodes was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Butler Co. Pine Apple, Calhoun Co. Colwell, Clarke Co. Carlton, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Dallas Co. Selma, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Huntsville, Marion Co. Hamilton, Monroe Co. Hybart, Sumter Co. Livingston, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Camponotus (Myrmentoma) decipiens Emery This species may be found nesting in rotting stumps or logs. C. decipiens is similar to C. caryae and little is known about its habits. In this species, the clypeus is approximately as long as broad and with 2-4 long erect hairs along the margin above the level of the tentorial pits. The head, mesosoma, and appendages are red to yellowish red while the gaster is black. The clypeus is dull and densely tessellate but not roughened. The occipital margin is distinctly concave in front view. Map 19. Camponotus chromaiodes 50 Camponotus decipiens is found in northern Florida west to Texas and north to North Dakota (Snelling 1988). This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Clay Co. Talladega NF, Fayette Co. Wolfcreek WMA, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. 1mi N of Decatur, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Madison Co. Huntsville, Marengo Co. Demopolis Camponotus (Myrmentoma) discolor (Buckley) Nests of this species are found in plant cavities, under bark, in logs or in stumps. C. discolor seems to be associated with hickory, willow, and cottonwood (Snelling 1988). This species has erect hairs on the clypeus that are distinctly long and short, the short hairs are shorter than those between the eye and the mandible. The head, mesosoma, petiole and appendages are red Map 20. Camponotus decipiens Map 21. Camponotus discolor 51 while the gaster is blackish. Camponotus discolor is found in Texas east to South Carolina and north to North Dakota. This species was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Pickens Co. Cochrane, Baldwin Co. Fairhope (Murphree 1947). Camponotus (Myrmothrix) floridanus (Buckley) ?Florida carpenter ant This species nests in trees, stumps or logs, usually soft rotting wood is preferred. If their nest is disturbed these ants will tenaciously attack the aggressor by biting and spraying formic acid. The Florida carpenter ant rarely nests in man-made structures but it may become a pest by foraging indoors. This ant is much hairier than most species of Camponotus. The scape and legs have numerous, long, coarse, brownish or golden erect hairs. The gaster is black while the rest of the body is ferrugineous red. Camponotus floridanus is found in coastal North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west through southern Alabama, and Mississippi. This species was collected in the following counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Geneva Co. Hartford, Mobile Co. Mobile, Tallapoosa Co. Eumuckfa Creek Map 22. Camponotus floridanus 52 Camponotus (Colobopsis) impressus (Roger) This species nests in twigs, stems or galls. The majors have a truncated phragmatic head that they utilize to block the entrances to their nests and the angle between the side of the head and the truncate anterior face is sharp and serrate. The punctures on the head of the major are deep and coarse. In all castes the head and thorax is reddish brown, while the gaster is piceous brown Camponotus impressus is found in Florida north to South Carolina (Van Peft and Gentry 1985) and west to Kansas (Dubois 1994) and Texas. It is also found in the Bahamas (Deyrup 1998). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Lee Co. Auburn Camponotus(Colobopsis) mississippiensis M. R. Smith This species nests in twigs or galls and is similar to C. impressus in appearance and life history. The majors have phragmatic heads and there is a flange or rim where the side of head meets the truncated anterior face and the area within the flange is notably concave. There is also sculpture on the anterior face consisting of small shallow punctures and fine reticulation. Map 23. Camponotus impressus 53 Camponotus mississippiensis is found in North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Alabama through Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960) and north to Illinois (Dubois and LaBerge 1988) This species was found in the following counties in Alabama: Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG Camponotus (Myrmentoma) nearcticus Emery These ants nest arboreally in plant cavities and also in stumps and logs. Little is known about their life history. The head and mesosoma of this species is usually brownish to blackish, but if somewhat reddish than the gaster is wholly black. The occipital margin straight to weakly concave Camponotus nearcticus is found throughout Quebec and Ontario and the United States, it is most common in northeastern US (Snelling 1988). Map 24. Camponotus mississippiensis Map 25. Camponotus nearcticus 54 This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Coosa Co. Kellyton, Lauderdale Co.1mi S of Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Shelby Co. Childersburg Camponotus (Camponotus) pennsylvanicus (DeGeer) ? Black carpenter ant Nests of this ant may be found in dead or living trees as well as wooden structures ranging from telephone poles to buildings. Mature colonies can be large with 2000-2500 adults (Holldobler and Wilson 1990). The black carpenter ant tends honeydew producers and scavenges for dead insects and plant material. These ants usually forage during the day but will shift to nocturnal foraging when the weather becomes too hot (Klotz 1984). This species is extremely common throughout the eastern US and can be found throughout Alabama. Camponotus pennsylvanicus can be a major pest due to damage caused to buildings and by foraging in homes. This species may bite but generally avoids confrontation. This species is concolorous black with distinctive golden hairs covering its gaster. The appressed gastral pubescence extends less than half of the length of the hair past the edge of the tergite. Camponotus pennsylvanicus is found in New Brunswick and Quebec south into the eastern United States, the western border is New Mexico (MacKay and MacKay 2002) 55 This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. 1 mi S of Pondville, Blount Co. Oneonta, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Dallas Co. Selma, Escambia Co. 2mi E of Flomaton, Greene Co. Epes, Hale Co. Payne Lake CG, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. Gipsey, Lowndes Co. Lowndesboro, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Mobile Co. (Glancey et al. 1976), Morgan Co. Wheeler NWR, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Tuscaloosa Co. Uni. of Ala.- Tuscaloosa, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Camponotus (Colobopsis) obliquus M. R. Smith This small carpenter ant has majors with phragmatic (truncated) heads and is similar to C. impressus in habits and morphology. The majors of this species are small (Length of 3.75mm or less). This ant is only known from Alabama and Mississippi. This species was reported in Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Map 26. Camponotus pennsylvanicus 56 Camponotus (Myrmentoma) snellingi Bolton These are common ants that will nest in living or dead trees as well as stumps and logs. This species looks similar to C. nearcticus but can be separated based on color. This species? head, mesosoma appendages and first 1-2 gastral terga are yellowish to yellowish-red. The occipital margin is slightly to moderately concave Camponotus snellingi is found in Florida west to Texas and north to Tennessee and North Carolina (Snelling 1988) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lawrence Co. Bankhead NF, Lee Co. Auburn, Hale Co. Payne Lake CG, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Monroe Co. Hybart, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Tuscaloosa Co. Uni. of Ala.- Tuscaloosa, Walker Co. Townley Map 27. Camponotus snellingi 57 Camponotus (Tanaemyrmex) socius Roger These ants nest in trees, stumps or logs especially in sandy coastal habitats. It is possible that C. socius is an invasive ant. The most distinctive characteristic of this species is the dorsum of the gaster that is completely opaque and usually has dark transverse stripes. Also the occipital corners have numerous erect hairs. Camponotus socius is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) north to North Carolina (Carter 1962) and west to Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960), this species has also been collected from Brazil (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Mobile Co. Mobile Camponotus (Myrmentoma) subbarbatus Emery This species is common in the eastern United States that nests in plant cavities, logs and stumps. Like other species in the subgenus Mymentoma, little is known of its habits. Map 28. Camponotus socius 58 The clypeus of this ant has long erect hairs along and adjacent to margins (none as short as those between the eye and mandible) and a few (1-3) to no hairs across the central surface of the clypeus. Camponotus subbarbatus is found in the New England states south to Georgia and west to Ohio (Snelling 1988). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. 1 mi S of Pondville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA Genus Formica Linnaeus ? Field ants Formica is the most diverse genus of ants in North America. These ants tend to be dominant in cool temperate regions. Species of Formica are found throughout Alabama with the greatest abundance in the Appalachian mountain region. Some species in North America and Europe produce large earthen mound nests but all of our Alabama species nest in the ground or occasionally in or under rotting stumps or logs. These ants are generalist predators and scavengers that also consume honeydew and nectar. A few species in this genus are known to enslave other species of Formica and regularly raid neighboring nests. Like all formicines this genus lacks a Map 29. Camponotus subbarbatus 59 functional sting but several species are aggressive biters that will spray bite wounds with formic acid. Formica are most commonly confused with Camponotus ants. Both are medium to large and occur in similar habitats. Formica, however, do not have the distinctively convex mesosomal profile and usually have 3 obvious and distinct ocelli on the dorsum of their head. Also their frontal carinae is short but distinct, each carina is a small ridge with a moderately to sharply angulate summit. The basal face of the propodeum is generally longer than the declivitous face and their mandibles have 7 or more teeth. Members of this genus are found in the Nearctic, Neotropical, Palaearctic, Oriental and Indo-Australian regions. Key to the genus Formica (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Anterior margin of clypeus with median, concave impression which may be narrow and notch-like or broad and shallow; facultative slave-makers, often found in mixed colonies with other Formica sp. slaves (subgenus Sanguinea) ...???2 1? Anterior margin of clypeus lacking median concave impression, margin is evenly convex or angularly projecting in middle ?????.??????????..3 2(1) Dorsum of thorax entirely devoid of erect hairs or with few fine, short, inconspicuous erect hairs on pronotum only; scale of petiole with blunt crest ?????????????????????????Formica subintegra 2? Dorsum of pronotum and mesonotum with conspicuous erect hairs (usually on epinotum also); scale of petiole with sharp crest ...?????Formica rubicunda 60 3(1?) Antennal scape short, less than 1 ? length of head (including clypeus); epinotum distinctly angular and not rounded from above (subgenus Formica) ?????.4 3? Antennal scape long, more than 1 ? length of head (including clypeus); epinotum rounded from above with angle between basal and declivitous faces poorly marked (subgenus Pallidefulva) .???????????????????5 4(3) Bicolored with ferrugineous head, thorax and appendages and black gaster; frontal area usually shining (Rufa group) ?...????????Formica integra 4? Concolorous black or blackish-brown; frontal area usually opaque (Fusca group) ???????????????????.?????..Formica subsericea 5(3?) Gaster shiny with sparse, short appressed pubescence; mesosoma dorsum without erect hairs or with small cluster on the mesonotum and/or few erect hairs elsewhere; color highly variable, ranging from bright tawny or coppery yellow (south) to dark brown ?????????????.??.Formica pallidefulva 5? First gastral tergite with appressed pubescence of medium to high density, average distance between individual appressed hairs approximately equaling average length of hair to much less; mesosoma dorsum with several to many erect hairs on pronotum, mesonotum and propodeum (often most numerous on latter) ??..??????????????????????????????6 6(5?) Gaster less densely pubescent; first gastral tergite with appressed setae separated by about ? -1 times average length; mesosoma and gastral integument somewhat shining, with diffuse sculpture; mesosoma dorsal integument more shining to quite smooth; color bright reddish-yellow or with gaster little darker (gaster of this species sometimes stains black in mounted specimens); erect hairs of gastral 61 dorsal surface curved and tapering, length of longest 0.20 ? 0.30 mm ????????????????????????.Formica new species 6? Gaster with dense pubescence, first gastral tergite with appressed hairs separated by about ? or less than average length; mesosoma dorsum feebly or not all shining propodeum often with conspicuous pubescence; mesosoma and gastral integument dulled by fine, but notable sculpture?????????????.7 7(6?) Reddish-brown to light reddish; mesosoma and gastral integument dulled or velvety with dense pubescence, in larger workers appearing matte in dorsal or oblique dorsal view; numerous erect hairs on all dorsal surfaces, those on first tergite usually long, tapering and typically curved??...Formia schaufussi dolosa 7? Dark brown to blackish brown; with fine coriaceous sculpture on mesosoma and foveolae on gastral dorsal surface; erect hairs shorter and fewer, at least on mesosoma, erect hairs may be blunt-tipped and without notable curvature, even on first gastral tergite ????????????????..Formica archboldi Formica archboldi M. R. Smith (pallidefulva group) This species may be found in sand hills with nests usually at the bases of grass clumps. F. archboldi is most common in peninsular Florida. It was not collected in Alabama during this survey and is probably relatively rare in the state. This ant is dark brown to blackish brown, with fine coriaceous sculpture on the mesosoma and foveolae on gastral dorsal surface. Erect hairs are short and sparse, at least on mesosoma. The erect hairs may be blunt-tipped and without notable curvature, even on first gastral tergite. 62 Formica archboldi is found in Georgia (Ipser et al. 2004) and Florida (Deyrup 2003). This species was reported in Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Formica integra Nylander (rufa group) This species nests in the soil or in rotten stumps or logs. It may be found in open areas or at the edges of forests. This ant can be found throughout Alabama except on the coastal plain. Formica integra is bicolored with a ferrugineous head, thorax and appendages and a black gaster. The frontal area is usually shiny. This ant is found in Nova Scotia south to northern Georgia and Alabama and west to South Dakota (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Blount Co. Locust Fork, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Franklin Co. Dismal Canyon, Lee Co. Auburn, Morgan Co. Hartselle Randolph Co. Wedowee Map 30. Formica integra 63 Formica new species (pallidefulva group) This species has been described by Trager et al. (2005, in press). This ant has the gaster not densely pubescent, the first gastral tergite with appressed setae separated by ? -1 times their average length. The erect hairs of the gastral dorsal surface curved and tapering, the longest are 0.20 ? 0.30 mm in length. The mesosoma and gastral integument are somewhat shiny, with diffuse sculpture while the mesosoma dorsal integument slightly shinier to smooth. This ant is bright reddish-yellow with the gaster darker. This species has been collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Formica pallidefulva Latreille (pallidefulva group) This species is common in the north portion of Alabama. Nests are cryptic and difficult to find but they can be located under the bark of logs or in rotting wood or in the soil. Colonies are small and the ants are timid and will abandon their nest and brood when disturbed, although they usually attempt to sneak back later (Creighton 1950). The gaster of this ant is shiny with sparse, short appressed pubescence while the mesosoma dorsum completely lacks erect hairs or has a small cluster on the mesonotum Map 31. Formica new sp. 64 and/or a few erect hairs elsewhere. The color of this species ranges from bright tawny or coppery yellow (south) to dark brown in the northern extent of its range in the US. Formica pallidefulva is found in Florida west to Texas north to New York (Creighton 1950). This species was collected from the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA , DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Fayette Co. Clear Creek, Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Oak Grove, Limestone Co. 1mi N of Decatur, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Marion Co. Hamilton, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa. Formica rubicunda Emery (sanguinea group) This species nests in the soil usually under or near large rotting logs. Formica rubicunda is a slave-raiding species of Formica. These ants will raid colonies of Formica altipetens Wheeler, F. bradleyi Wheeler, F. fossaceps Buren, F. fusca L., F. lasioides Emery, F. lepida Wheeler, F. montana Emery, F. neoclara Emery, F. neogagates Emery, F. neorufibarbis Emery, F. obscuriventris clivia Creighton, F. pallidefulva nitidiventris Emery, F. schaufussi Mayr, F. subsericea Say (D.R. Smith 1979). Map 32. Formica pallidefulva 65 Formica rubicunda queens found their colonies by forcing their way into new or young host nests and driving off the workers. The queen than eats some of the host brood and allows others to emerge as adults that accept her as queen. She also starts laying her own workers who will raid other nests when more slaves are needed. This species is similar to F. subintegra but the dorsum of the pronotum and the mesonotum has conspicuous erect hairs (usually on the epinotum too) and the scale of petiole has a sharp crest as seen in profile. This species is found in southern Ontario south into New England and west to Colorado and south throughout the Appalachians (Creighton 1950). In Alabama this ant was only collected in DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP. Formica schaufussi dolosa Buren (pallidefulva group) This ant form nests in the soil or under objects, usually in open fields. Like most species in the pallidefulva group this ant is extremely timid. This species is reddish- brown to light reddish. The mesosoma and gastral integument is dull or velvety with dense pubescence, in larger workers this appears matte in dorsal or oblique dorsal view. There are numerous erect hairs on all dorsal surfaces, those on first tergite usually long, tapering and typically curved. Map 33. Formica rubicunda 66 Formica schaufussi dolosa is found in Florida west to Texas and north to southern Virginia (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Blount Co. Highland Lake, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Mobile Co. (Glancey et al. 1976), Sumter Co. Livingston Formica subintegra Wheeler (sanguinea group) This is a slave-raiding species similar to F. rubicunda. I found a column of these ants raiding a mature colony of F. subsericea near a trail in the Talladega National Forest in June. The workers of F. subsericea were vigorously defending their nest but had little impact on the raiding ants. Many female alates evacuated the nest but there was no sign of brood being removed or of workers fleeing. Upon following the raiding column to the parent nest it was found to go up the side of a hill and down the other side to a nest under a rotten log. The column was over 200 feet long and the returning raiding ants were mainly carrying pupae with the occasional larvae. Formica subintegra have been observed raiding the nests of F. subsericea, F. fusca, F. montana, F. neogagates, F. schaufussi, and F. pallidefulva nitidiventris. Map 34. Formica schaufussi dolosa 67 The dorsum of the thorax of this species is entirely devoid of erect hairs or a few fine, short, inconspicuous erect hairs are present on the pronotum only. In profile the scale of petiole has a blunt crest. Formica subintegra is found in eastern Canada south to New England and throughout the Appalachian Mountains and west to Wisconsin (Creighton 1950). This species was only collected in Alabama in Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail. Formica subsericea Say (fusca group) These ants can be found in woodlands nesting in the soil. F. subsericea are timid, typically do not defend their nest against aggressors or slave making ants and are commonly enslaved by other species of Formica. This species is concolorous black or blackish-brown; and the frontal area usually opaque. Map 35. Formica subintegra 68 Formica subsericea is found in Quebec, Ontario, and New Brunswick south into eastern US as far west as Utah (Allred 1982). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Cherokee Co. Little River Canyon, Coosa Co. Kellyton, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG , Madison Co. Huntsville, Shelby Co. 1mi S of Birmingham Genus Lasius Fabricius Ants of this genus are common and widespread throughout the United States. These ants nest in the soil or in rotting wood and are generalist scavengers that have close relationships with many honeydew-producing insects, most are thought to tend subterranean root scales and aphids. The declivitous face of the propodeum of these ants is distinctly longer than the basal face, both faces meet in a distinct upward facing peak The mandibles have 7 or more teeth and the antennal scape is relatively short (exceeding the occipital border by no more than 2-3 times the maximum diameter of the scape, usually less). This genus can be found in the Nearctic, Palaearctic, Neotropical, Oriental and Indo-Australian regions. Map 36. Formica subsericea 69 Key to the genus Lasius (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Maxillary palpus long, at least last three segments subequal in length; eyes large with approximately 200 facets; brownish to blackish in color .???????..2 1? Maxillary palpus short, the last three segments successively decreasing in length; eyes small with 100 facets or less, usually many less; yellow in color ..????3 2(1) Antennal scapes without erect or suberect hairs; promesonotal suture unimpressed or faintly impressed, dorsum of promesonotum forming single even convexity ???...???????????????????.????Lasius alienus 2? Antennal scapes with numerous erect or suberect hairs; promesonotal suture slightly but distinctly impressed, dorsum of promesonotum not forming single even convexity ???????????...????????..Lasius neoniger 3(1?) Eyes with six or less facets in greatest diameter; queens more than twice as long as workers ?????????????..?????????.Lasius flavus 3? Eyes with 10-12 facets in greatest diameter; queens less than twice as long as workers ??????????????????????..Lasius umbratus Lasius alienus (Foerster) ?Cornfield ant This species is common in or near wooded areas. L. alienus are known to collect the eggs of the corn root aphid, Anuraphis maidiradicis (Forbes), and store them throughout the winter. During the spring the ants place the aphids on plants and tend them for honeydew (Forbes 1908). This species is mainly attracted to sweets but is also predacious on other insects. This ant is more common in the northwestern extent of its range where it commonly invades homes and is considered a major pest species. 70 Brood occur in the nests between May and August with reproductives occurring June to September (MacKay and MacKay 2002) and with mating flights between August and September (Forbes 1908). This species looks similar to L. neoniger but can be separated by the following characters: the antennal scapes lack erect or suberect hairs and the promesonotal suture is unimpressed or faintly impressed with the dorsum of promesonotum forming a single even convexity. Lasius alienus is found in southern Canada throughout the entire US. Not found in xeric regions. This species was found in the following counties of Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs CG, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Butler Co. 1mi N of Greenville, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Uni. of Ala. Tuscaloosa, Marion Co. Hamilton, Monroe Co. Claiborne Lake CG, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Wheeler NWR Lasius flavus (Fabricius) ?Yellow meadow ant This species typically nests under stones or in the soil. L. flavus is almost entirely subterranean and tends aphids that feed on the roots of grasses. This ant was not collected during this survey and is probably rare, but common throughout much of the US and Map 37. Lasius alienus 71 Europe. L. flavus has small eyes with six or fewer facets in its greatest diameter. The queens are more than twice as long as workers. This ant is found in southern Canada and all of the US except Florida; also found in Europe and Asia. It was reported in Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Lasius neoniger Emery This species occurs in open areas, such as lawns, agricultural fields and prairies. Nests are found in the soil with crater like entrances. These ants are similar to (and often confused with) L. alienus. Both occur throughout the US and both can be household pests. In Alabama L. neoniger is not commonly collected, and probably has a scattered distribution around urban areas. Lasius neoniger has numerous erect or suberect hairs on its antennal scapes. The promesonotal suture is slightly but distinctly impressed, with the dorsum of the promesonotum not forming a single even convexity. This ant is found in southern Alaska along the coast into southern Canada and throughout the US. This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Limestone Co.1mi N of Decatur, Madison Co. Uni of Ala. Huntsville Map 38. Lasius neoniger 72 Lasius umbratus (Nylander) These ants are social parasites that may parasitize L. alienus, L. neoniger, and L. niger colonies when new queens are founding colonies (MacKay and MacKay 2002). This species nests under stones and logs and tends aphids. This species is yellow and has eye with 10-12 facets in greatest diameter and queens that are less than twice as long as workers. Lasius umbratus is found in southern Canada and the entire US; also throughout Europe and Asia. This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF Genus Paratrechina Motschoulsky This genus is common and widely distributed throughout the US and the world. These ants are generalist scavengers that will tend honeydew-producing insects. Several members of Paratrechina are tramp species that readily invade human buildings and can be extremely pestiferous. These are small to medium sized ants with scapes relatively long, passing the occipital border by at least 4-5 times the maximum diameter of the scape. Paratrechina Map 39. Lasius umbratus 73 resemble and are closely related to Prenolepis but can be separated by the following features: the mesonotum, in dorsal view, weakly constricted and mesosoma lacks ?hour- glass? appearance, while erect hairs are usually coarse and bristle-like and dark brown or black in color. Key to the genus Paratrechina (modified from Trager 1984 and MacGown 2005) 1 Scapes at least twice as long as head; legs are also long relative to body size; body weakly shining black or gray with bluish reflections; pubescence sparse, short and barely visible (most likely only found as a household pest in Alabama) ??????????????????????...Paratrechina longicornis 1? Scapes less than twice as long as head; legs of normal lengths; color varies but never with bluish reflections; shiny or dull, if dull then due to dense pubescence ????????????????????????????????..2 2(1?) Color yellow to pale whitish; nests found in sandy soil or sand dunes and surrounded by conspicuous crater in clearing between vegetation ????.??3 2? Color uniformly dark colored or bicolored; nests found in more mesic areas and usually less conspicuous, under logs, rocks, or leaf litter ..???????.??4 3(2) Color yellow with gaster infuscated posteriorly; erect hairs on thorax flexuous and dark brown (darker than body); scapes have 5-17 (usually 7-12) erect and suberect hairs; usually found in sandy areas ??????...??..Paratrechina arenivaga 3? Color yellow or whitish with gaster only slightly darker (if at all); thoracic pilosity nearly straight and same color as body or only slightly darker; scapes 74 have 0-4 (usually 1-3) erect and suberect hairs; found in sandy coastal areas ???????????.????.???.????.Paratrechina phantasma 4(2?) Scapes with 4 or less bristle-like erect or suberect hairs ?????.????...5 4? Scapes with 4 or more bristle-like erect or suberect hairs (usually at least 7) ?....6 5(4) Usually bicolored, thorax yellowish to reddish-brown, head and gaster darker, and middle and hind coxae pale (much lighter than fore coxae or rest of legs); scapes with 1-4 erect hairs; eyes either reaching sides of head or only failing to do so by 1-2 facets (in full face view) ???.????????..?Paratrechina wojciki 5? Usually uniform dark brown, at most weakly bicolored; appendages somewhat lighter or yellowish, middle and hind coxae not contrastingly pale compared with fore coxae; scapes lack erect hairs; eyes failing to reach sides of head by about ? eye width (in full face view) ?.??????????.....Paratrechina parvula 6(4?) Thorax and gaster covered with short stout pubescence; body is dull brown to blackish ????????????...??????.Paratrechina bourbonica 6? Thorax and gaster with pubescence greatly reduced, appearance shiny ?..??...7 7(6?) Body uniform dark brown, appendages only somewhat lighter; dense row of longitudinally aligned pubescence found on the anterior edge of propodeum; front of pronotum and mesonotum with some dilute pubescence; head with shallow hairy punctures and dense pubescence which is mostly aligned along long axis of head ?????????????????..????Paratrechina concinna 7? Middle and hind coxae and/or thorax and legs lighter than gaster and head; promesonotum with pubescence either lacking or sparse, propodeum often lacking pubescence as well; head smooth and shining or weakly and irregularly punctate 75 beneath pubescence; pubescence on head may or may not be dilute and is not parallel to long axis of head ???????????...????...????..8 8(7?) Pubescence of head dilute, in preoccipital area most spaces between pubescent setae (not larger bristle like erect hairs) as wide as length of setae or wider; anterior ? of head (except occasionally frons) lacking pubescence ???????????????????????....Paratrechina vividula 8? Pubescence of head is dense, in preoccipital area most spaces between pubescent setae are no wider than length of setae and usually less ????????????????????..??.Paratrechina faisonensis Paratrechina arenivaga (Wheeler) This ant nests in the soil, usually in well-drained sandy areas. A small crater of excavated soil typically surrounds the entrance. P. arenivaga is normally nocturnal and they will tend hemipterans and collect dead insects for food (MacKay and MacKay 2002). This species is yellow with the gaster infuscated posteriorly. The erect hairs on thorax are flexuous and dark brown while the scapes have 5-17 (usually 7-12) erect and suberect hairs. Map 40. Paratrechina arenivaga 76 Paratrechina arenivaga is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) west to Texas (Wheeler and Wheeler 1985) north to Kansas (Dubois 1994). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. no locality given, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Blount Co. Oneonta, Choctaw Co. Butler, Lee Co. Chewacla SP, Marion Co. Hamilton Paratrechina bourbonica (Forel) This is a tramp ant species probably native to Southeast Asia and introduced worldwide by commerce. This ant has scapes that have 4 or more erect or suberect hairs. The thorax and gaster is covered with short stout pubescence and the body is dull brown to blackish color. Paratrechina bourbonica can be found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) and possibly other localized introductions; also found throughout the world in tropical and subtropical areas. This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Bibb Co Brent, Mobile Co. (Trager 1984) Map 41. Paratrechina bourbonica 77 Paratrechina concinna Trager This species can be found in marshes, drainage ditches, rotting wood, cow dung and in pastures. Paratrechina concinna has a uniform dark brown body with appendages that are only somewhat lighter. A dense row of longitudinally aligned pubescence can be found on the anterior edge of the propodeum while the front of pronotum and the mesonotum has at least some dilute pubescence. The head has shallow hairy punctures and dense pubescence that is mostly aligned along the long axis of the head. This species is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) and was reported in Alabama by Trager (1984). Paratrechina faisonensis (Forel) This is a common collected species in Alabama. Colonies can be found in almost any wooded area, especially mesic areas. They nest in rotten wood or shallowly in soil under leaf litter. It is common to find partially sclerotized workers tending the brood in colonies of P. faisonensis, these nurse workers are pale white and can be quite numerous. The middle and hind coxae and/or the thorax and legs of this species are lighter than Map 42. Paratrechina faisonensis 78 the gaster and the head. The pubescence of the head is dense and in the preoccipital area most of the spaces between pubescent setae are no wider than the length of the setae and usually less. Paratrechina faisonensis is found in the southeastern US: New Jersey south to Arkansas and Florida (Trager 1984). This species was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. Pondville, Blount Co. Oneonta, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Calhoun Co. Jacksonville, Chilton Co. 1mi N of Mapleville, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Colbert Co. Bear Creek, Conecuh Co. Evergreen, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Dallas Co. Selma, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Escambia Co. 2 mi E of Flomaton, Greene Co. 1mi N of Epes, Henry Co. Abbeville, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Uni. of Ala. Huntsville, Mobile Co. Mobile, Perry Co. Heiberger, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Sumter, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG, Winston Co. Natural Bridge Paratrechina longicornis (Latreille) ?Crazy ant This species is a major pest in tropical regions of the world. P. longicornis was considered wide-spread in urban areas and collected in several localities in 1947 by Murphree. However, this ant does not seem to have established in Alabama. This species prefers to nest in the soil and is commonly transported (accidentally) in potted plants. 79 Paratrechina longicornis has unusually long scapes (at least twice as long as the head) and long slender legs. The body is also weakly shiny black or gray with bluish reflections and pubescence sparse, short and barely visible. This species is established in Florida, possibly found in scattered sites across the US; found worldwide in tropical regions. P. longicornis was reported in Alabama by Murphree (1947), however this ant has not been recorded since that survey. Paratrechina parvula (Mayr) This species can typically be found either in or near wooded areas nesting is logs, stumps, or in the soil (Trager 1984). P. parvula is usually uniform dark brown, or at most weakly bicolored. Its appendages are somewhat lighter or yellowish, but the middle and hind coxae are not contrastingly pale compared with the fore coxae. The scapes lack erect hairs and the eyes fail to reach the sides of the head by about ? of their width (in full face view). Paratrechina parvula is found in southern New York west to Iowa and Texas, and south to Florida (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. Brent, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Russell Co. Tobert Lake Map 43. Paratrechina parvula 80 Paratrechina phantasma Trager This species is similar in its habits to P. arenivaga except it seems limited to coastal areas of Florida, Alabama and possibly other Gulf states. This ant is highly tolerant of cold temperatures and will forage nocturnally year round (Trager 1984). This ant is yellow or whitish with its gaster only slightly darker (if at all). The thoracic pilosity is nearly straight and about the same color as the body or only slightly darker, and the scapes have 0-4 (usually 1-3) erect and suberect hairs. Paratrechina phantasma is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) and coastal Alabama. It has only been collected in Baldwin Co. Bon Secour NWR. Paratrechina vividula (Nylander) This is probably an introduced species (possibly from South America or the Caribbean) that can be found nesting in vacant lots, farm fields, parks, beaches, and other disturbed localities. This species is similar to P. faisonensis but can be separated by the following features. The pubescence on the head is dilute, in the preoccipital area most of the spaces between the pubescent setae (not the larger bristle like erect hairs) are as wide as the Map 44. Paratrechina phantasma 81 length of the setae or wider and the anterior ? of the head (except occasionally the frons) lacks pubescence. Paratrechina vividula is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) and Georgia (Ipser et al. 2004) west to Mississippi (MacGown 2005). It has possibly been introduced to other areas around the country. This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Calhoun Co. Colwell, Cherokee Co. Little River Canyon, Dallas Co. 1 mi W of Selma, Fayette Co. Wolf Creek WMA, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Hale Co. Payne Lake, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. Gipsey, Lowndes Co. Lowndesboro, Marion Co. Hamilton, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Sumter Co. Coatopa, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Paratrechina wojciki Trager This species may be found throughout Florida in a variety of habitats including rotting wood, under stones, or in grass clumps. In the north of its range it is typically found in xeric areas while in the south it is found in mesic habitats also (Trager 1984). Map 45. Paratrechina vividula 82 Paratrechina wojciki is usually bicolored, with the thorax yellowish to reddish- brown and the head and gaster darker. The middle and hind coxae are pale and much lighter than the fore coxae or the rest of the legs. The scapes have 1-4 erect hairs and the eyes either reach the sides of the or only fail to do so by 1-2 facets (in full face view). This species is only known from Florida and coastal Alabama. It was reported in Mobile Co. by Trager (1984). Genus Prenolepis Mayr This is a small genus with about 10 species worldwide and only one, Prenolepis imparis, found in North America. Typically these ants live in the soil and consume honeydew. In this genus the mesonotum, in dorsal view, is severely constricted giving the mesosoma a distinctive ?hour-glass? shape. Body pilosity is not coarse or bristle-like, erect hairs are mostly slender and golden or brownish. Members of this genus are found in the Nearctic, Palearctic, Neotropical, Oriental and Indo-Australian regions. Map 46. Paratrechina wojciki 83 Prenolepis imparis (Say) ? False honey pot ant This species is found throughout the US. It is adapted to cold weather and presumably avoids competition with other ant species by staying active during the cooler times of the year and aestivating through the warmer summer months. P. imparis can usually be found foraging in temperatures between 7 o -15 o C and reach peak activity in high humidity (80-100 %) (Talbot 1943). Colonies are large ranging from 560 to over 10,000 adults and contain multiple queens (Tschinkel 1987). Nests are found in soil and are 2.5-3.6 meters deep (Tschinkel 1987). The common name of this species is the false honey pot ant due to the distended gasters of some ants that remain in the nest. These ants act as repletes storing energy for periods of inactivity. Unlike other species that store energy as sugars in their repletes (hence the term ?honey pot?) this species stores energy in the form of fats. Prenolepis imparis was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Chambers Co. Chambers Co. Public Lake, Clay Co. Talladega NF:, Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lauderdale Co. 2mi S of Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Sumter Co. Coatopa , Talladega Co. Talladega NF, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin, Winston Co. Natural Bridge Map 47. Prenolepis imparis 84 SUBFAMILY MYRMICINAE The Myrmicinae is the most diverse subfamily of ants in Alabama with 16 genera containing 84 species, over half the total number of ant species found in the state. On the generic level there is a huge amount of variety in the morphology and behavior of these ants. This subfamily owes its name to the genus Myrmica, which refers to the Greek term for ant: ?myrmeco?. Many myrmicines are generalist predators or scavengers however there are several groups that are specialist predators that feed on collembola and other soil dwelling arthropods. Some species obtain nutrients from ?harvesting? seeds and are important in seed dispersal. Others tend fungal gardens as their sole source of food. Myrmicines have a well-developed postpetiole. They can be distinguished from other ants with developed postpetioles by their laterally expanded frontal carinae that partially or completely cover the antennal sockets. Myrmicines usually have a sting although in some genera this is absent or modified. This subfamily has a worldwide distribution. Representatives of the subfamily Myrmicinae can be found throughout the world on all continents except Antarctica. Key to the Alabama genera of Myrmicinae (modified from Holldobler and Wilson 1990, Bolton 1994) 1 Antenna with six segments?????????????????????..2 1? Antenna with ten or eleven??????????.???????????.3 1?? Antenna with twelve segments????????????????????9 85 2(1) Mandibles elongate and linear; apex of mandible with distinct fork of two inwardly directed spiniform teeth??????????????..Strumigenys 2? Mandibles triangular or subtriangular, with masticatory margin dentate and lacking apical fork of inward directed spiniform teeth ?????.??Pyramica 3(1?) Antenna with ten segments including distinct two segmented club; clypeus usually bicarinate with carinae diverging towards anterior clypeal margin and frequently terminating as teeth projecting beyond margin; propodeum always lacking spines or teeth ???..????????????????Solenopsis 3? Antenna with eleven segments, clypeus usually not bicarinate, propodeum with or without spines or teeth??????....???????????????.?4 4(3?) Postpetiole attached to anterior dorsal surface of first gastral segment (fig. 5); in dorsal view, gaster more or less heart-shaped and capable of being flexed so that it points forward over mesosoma; gastric dorsum, in profile, concave, flat or at most feebly convex, in contrast to the strongly convex ventral surface ??????????????????????????....Crematogaster 4? Postpetiole attached to anterior end of first gastric segment (not to anterior dorsal surface); gaster more or less oval or tear drop shaped in dorsal view and not capable of being flexed forward over mesosoma; gastric dorsal and ventral Fig. 5. Lateral view of Crematogaster sp. gaster and petiole 86 surfaces approximately equally convex when viewed in profile or ventral surface less convex than dorsal ??????...???????????????....5 5(4?) With head in profile, diagonal supraocular carina present, which runs forward from above eye and down toward mandible insertion; supraocular carina independent of and distinct from any other sculpture that may be present; head and body with spines or tubercles; antenna lacking distinct two or three jointed club ???????????????????...??????????6 5? With head in profile, supraocular carina absent; longitudinal components of sculpture may run above eye toward mandible insertion but none form sharply differentiated carina; head and body usually lacking tubercles but spines maybe be present ??..?????????????????????..????7 6(5) Promesonotum with blunt tubercles; frontal lobes expanded laterally covering side of head (as seen in full face view) and projecting forward, anteriorly reaching or over lapping anterior margins of clypeus; gaster without tubercles ???????.???????????????.. Cyphomyrmex rimosus 6? Promesonotum with spines and teeth; frontal lobes expanded laterally but not projecting forward to anterior margin of clypeus; gaster with tubercles ???...????..????????????..Trachymyrmex septentrionalis 7(5?) Frontal carinae short, not extending posteriorly past eye ?..Temnothorax (in part) 7? Frontal carinae long, extending posteriorly past eye and almost reaching vertex ??..??????????????????????????????8 8(7?) In dorsal view lateral portions of posterior clypeal border with distinctive, roughly semicircular emargination adjacent to each antennal insertion; emargination is 87 ridge-like and drops off sharply on posterior side to give image that antenna is inserted into a deep pit; mandibles with 6-7 teeth ?...??..Tetramorium (in part) 8? In dorsal view lateral portions of posterior clypeal border lacking distinctive, semicircular emargination adjacent to each antennal insertion; antennae do not appear to be inserted in deep pits (as above); mandibles with 4 teeth ?????????????????????.Protomognathus americanus 9(1??) In profile, petiole short and subcylindrical lacking anterior peduncle and with rudimentary node; humeri moderately to sharply angulate; propodeum armed with 2 pairs of spines ??????...??????????.Myrmecina americana 9? Petiole distinctly nodiform; humeri usually rounded; propodeum unarmed or armed with 1 pair of spines?????????????????????10 10(9?) Petiolar node set off sharply from long, distinctive anterior peduncle, node in side view roughly triangular; beard-like hairs (psammophore) present on the gula ???????????.????????????..Pogonomyrmex badius 10? Anterior peduncle sometimes long, often short or absent; node in side view varies in shape often roughly rectangular; true psammophore absent, although few scattered erect hairs may be present on gula ??..??????????...?11 11(10?)Dorsum of mesosoma flattened or convex, but without impression sutures (small transverse ridge may be present on propodeal dorsum) ????.????.......12 11? Dorsum of mesosoma variously shaped in profile, never forming continuous surface, outline always interrupted by one or more sutural impressions ..??....13 12(11) Frontal carinae long, extending rearward past eye and reaching or almost reaching vertex, and/or clypeus longitudinally rugulose; posterior lateral portions of 88 clypeus that borders antennal sockets forming thin, vertical ridge to create impression of a deep pit surrounding socket; antennae with 3 segmented apical club ?????????????????????.?Tetramorium (in part) 12? Frontal carinae short, not extending past eye and never nearly reaching vertex; clypeus not conspicuously longitudinally rugulose; posterior lateral portions of clypeus not forming ridge that gives impression of a pit surrounding antenna sockets ?????????..???????????.Temnothorax (in part) 13(11?)Mandibles with 3-4 teeth; clypeus usually with 2 longitudinal carinae (sometimes weak, rarely absent) that often end as teeth on anterior margin; antenna with 3 segmented apical club; propodeum unarmed .?????????.Monomorium 13? Mandibles with 5 or more teeth; apical antennal club absent or present; propodeum usually bearing teeth or spines .?????????..????....14 14(13?)Antenna with 3 or 4 segmented apical club ...?????????????...15 14? Antenna lacking distinct apical club, terminal segments enlarging towards apex ???????????????????????????????....17 15(14) Apical antennal club 4 segmented; clypeus usually with 2 longitudinal carinae that do not form teeth on anterior margin; workers monomorphic ?.?..Stennama 15? Apical antennal club 3 segmented, often distinct; workers monomorphic or dimorphic; clypeus always lacking 2 longitudinal carinae ????...????16 16(15?)Workers monomorphic; metanotal impression prominent, forming valley between promesonotum and propodeum, at about same elevation in profile; basal face of propodeum in profile convex; mandibles with 5 teeth or denticles ??????????????????????.....Temnothorax pergandai 89 16? Workers dimorphic; majors with large heads; minors with propodeum usually distinctly lower in elevation than pronotum, mesonotum often as high as pronotum and separated from propodeum by distinct step; basal face of propodeum in profile flat; mandibles with 6 or more teeth or denticles ????????????????????????????..Pheidole 17(14?)In profile, metanotal region weakly to moderately impressed; propodeum barely differentiated from remainder of mesosoma,at most slightly depressed below level of promesonotum in profile; antennal scapes often bent abruptly near base (up to 90 degrees) and bearing more or less obvious lamina at bend ?.Myrmica (in part) 17? Metanotal impression variable; propodeum usually strongly differentiated from rest of mesosoma and always depressed below level of pronotum (in profile) with mesonotum forming more or less gradual slope connecting the two; antennal scape not abruptly bent at base, rarely with lamina .???.???Aphaenogaster Genus Aphaenogaster Mayr Ants in the genus Aphaenogaster are common in the wooded areas of Alabama. Many of our species can be found nesting in rotten logs or stumps, although some are thought to be arboreal. A few species will form underground nests, however most southeastern species appear to nest either partially or entirely above ground. Colonies range in size from a few hundred adults to a few thousand (Holldobler and Wilson 1990). Many species vigorously defend their nests and exhibit stinging behavior but apparently cannot penetrate human skin. 90 Aphaenogaster species are mainly carnivorous and scavenge or hunt for insects, however most will supplement their diet with honeydew or nectar (Wheeler and Wheeler 1986, MacKay and MacKay 2002). Some species have shown mycophagous behavior and will consume fungus for food (Carroll et al. 1981). These ants are not considered a pest and are rarely found in domestic situations. Although they can be numerous in peridomestic areas they are harmless. The species of Aphaenogaster have a distinctive slender appearance with long appendages and a narrow body and head. They also have a 12-segmented antenna that lacks a distinct apical club (the last four segments tend to gradually enlarge but do not form an obvious club). The species of Aphaenogaster are distinguished from Myrmica species by their straight antennal scape and their propodeum that is strongly differentiated from the rest of the mesosoma and always depressed below the level of the pronotum. These ants are found throughout the worldwide except Africa and South America. Key to the genus Aphaenogaster (modified from Creighton 1950, MacGown 2005) 1 Antennal scape with conspicuous lobe, which extends rearward along basal fourth of scape, seen from side, thick with upper face forming obtusely projecting angle in middle ???????????...?????...??.Aphaenogaster treatae 1? Antennal scape without basal lobe or if small lobe present, it projects forward and does not involve basal fourth of scape ??????.??????????.2 2(1?) Outer face of frontal lobe bearing tooth-like flange which projects rearward ??...?????????????????.?.Aphaenogaster lamellidens 2? Outer face of frontal lobe without tooth-like flange ???..????..??..?.3 91 3(2?) Postpetiole broader than long and suboval in shape; propodeal spines longer than basal face of propodeum ???..??..??...??.Aphaenogaster tennesseensis 3? Postpetiole as long as broad or longer than broad, globular or truncated cone-like in shape; propodeal spines absent or shorter than basal face of propodeum ...?...4 4(3?) Propodeum unarmed, rounded or angular but without distinct teeth or spines ????????.??????????????..Aphaenogaster floridana 4? Propodeum armed with distinct teeth or spines (ants in following group are extremely difficult to identify and many of the characters given can be variable, possibly due to hybridization)(fulva-rudis-texana group) ?????????..5 5(4?) Anterior edge of mesonotum rising abruptly above adjacent portion of pronotum, transverse welt thus formed distinctly concave in middle (this can be seen by looking at ant in full face view); propodeal spines at least as long as declivous face of propodeum and strongly directed upwards; lateral striations usually present on fore coxae; queens with transverse stria on mesopleura ????????????????????????..Aphaenogaster fulva 5? Mesonotum not abruptly elevated above pronotum or if higher, anterior edge does not form transverse welt; propodeal spines rarely as long as declivous face of propodeum and usually directed backward; lateral striations not present on fore coxae; queens with smooth mesopleura ?????????.???????.6 6(5?) Head (excluding mandibles) of largest workers not more than one-sixth longer than broad; head of smallest workers not more than one-fifth longer than broad ..??????????????????????..???...?????.7 92 6? Head (excluding mandibles) of worker, regardless of size, approximately one- third long than broad ?????????????..??????????8 7(6) Largest workers are approximately 5.5 mm in length; queens are 7mm in length ???????????????????.???.?.Aphaenogaster texana 7? Largest workers are approximately 4.5 mm in length; queens are 5.5 mm in length ???????????????????.??..Aphaenogaster carolinensis 8(6?) Eyes with 13-15 facets in greatest diameter; propodeal spines slightly incurved when seen dorsally; basal face of propodeum with coarse transverse rugules ??????????????????.??...?..Aphaenogaster miamiana 8? Eyes with 10-11 facets in greatest diameter; propodeal spines divergent when seen dorsally; transverse rugae on basal face of propodeum feeble and often replaced by punctures ???????????????????????.9 9(8?) Area between eye and frontal lobe with reticulate rugae which are not obscured by interrugal sculpture; pronotum often crossed with transverse rugules ???...???????????????.?????..Aphaenogaster rudis 9? Area between eyes and frontal lobe densely punctuate with punctures largely obscuring or replacing rugae; pronotum evenly punctuate-granulose, without transverse rugules.???????????...?????.Aphaenogaster picea Aphaenogaster floridana M. R. Smith This species is found in northern Florida but was not collected during this project, although D.R. Smith recorded it here and in Georgia in 1979. It does not appear to be 93 common in Florida and is probably rare in Alabama. A. floridana lacks propodeal spines typical of other Aphaenogaster species. Aphaenogaster fulva Roger This ant belongs to the fulva-rudis- texana complex and is difficult to separate from other closely related species. Colonies can typically be found in rotten logs and stumps in mesic woodlands. This species can be identified (to a degree) by the transverse welt, formed by the anterior edge of the mesonotum rising abruptly above the adjacent portion of the pronotum, is distinctly concave in the middle (this can be seen by looking at the ant in full face view). This is generally a good character for A. fulva although it is variable. The queens usually have transverse stria on the mesopleuron. Aphaenogaster fulva is found in Louisiana (D.R.Smith 1979) and Florida (Deyrup 2003) north to Michigan (Wheeler et al. 1994) and Vermont (D.R. Smith 1979). This species was collected in the following Alabama counties: Bibb Co. Pondville, Clarke Co. Grove Hill, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Conecuh Co. Evergreen, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Greene Co. Epes, Hale Co. Lake Payne, Houston Co. Dothan, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lauderdale Co. 2mi S of Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Map 48. Aphaenogaster fulva 94 Bankhead NF, Marengo Co. Demopolis, Perry Co. Heiberger, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Walker Co. Townley, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Aphaenogaster lamellidens Mayr This ant typically nests in logs or stumps but has been found in dead limbs of living oaks (Trager 1997). In this study A. lamellidens was only collected in the northern half of Alabama, indicating a possible aversion to the costal plain environment. The specific name is derived from Greek referring to the dens (tooth) on the lamelli (plate like extension, in this case of the frontal lobe). The outer face of the frontal lobe of this species bears a distinct tooth-like flange that projects rearward. Aphaenogaster lamellidens is found in New York west to Illinois and Missouri, and south to Louisiana (D.R. Smith 1979) and Florida (Deyrup 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Blount Co. Oneonta, Chambers Co. Lafayette, Cherokee Co. Little River Canyon, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Fayette Co. Wolf Creek WMA, Lauderdale Co. 2mi S of Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Map 49. Aphaenogaster lamellidens 95 Aphaenogaster miamiana Wheeler This species was once a considered a subspecies of A. texana (Umphrey 1996) and is difficult to separate from others in the fulva-rudis-texana complex. Geographically, A. miamiana seems more prevalent in the coastal plain, however the difficulties in identifying this species leaves that in question. Aphaenogaster miamiana has eyes that are 13-15 facets in the greatest diameter and propodeal spines that curve inwards slightly when seen dorsally. The basal face of propodeum has coarse transverse rugules. These however, tend not to be reliable morphological features. This species is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) and Mississippi (MacGown 2005). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Butler Co. 1mi N of Spring Hill, Escambia Co. 1mi E of Flomaton, Geneva Co. Hartford, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Monroe Co. Claiborne Lake Project Map 50. Aphaenogaster miamiana 96 Aphaenogaster picea (Wheeler) This is another member of the fulva-rudis-texana complex that is difficult to identify. Like others in this complex it is nearly impossible to be sure of the actual range of this ant. This species can be tentatively identified by the area between the eyes and the frontal lobe appearing densely punctuate with the punctures largely obscuring or replacing the rugae; pronotum evenly punctuate-granulose, without transverse rugules Aphaenogaster picea is found from Nova Scotia south to North Carolina and west to Wisconsin and Iowa (D.R. Smith 1979) and also in Mississippi (M.R. Smith 1928). This species was collected in Alabama in Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail. Aphaenogaster rudis Enzmann This ant can be found in soil, rotten logs or stumps, under stones or under the bark of living trees. Like other species of Aphaenogaster it scavenges for dead insects but also consumes seed elaiosomes and is considered an important seed disperser (Ruhren and Dudash 1996). Map 51. Aphaenogaster picea 97 The area between the eye and the frontal lobe of this species has reticulate rugae that are not obscured by the interrugal sculpture; pronotum often crossed with transverse rugules. Aphaenogaster rudis is found from Massachusetts (D.R. Smith 1979) west to Wyoming (G.C. Wheeler and J. Wheeler 1988) to Kansas (Dubois 1994) south to Alabama and possible surrounding states. This species was reported in Alabama in Cleburne Co. by Umphrey (1996). Aphaenogaster tennesseensis (Mayr) Aphaenogaster tennesseensis is thought to be a temporary social parasite of other Aphaenogaster species, namely A. fulva, A. rudis and A. picea. Generally this species nests above ground in rotting wood but queens can be found in the ground nests of other species. This species has a postpetiole that is broader than long and suboval in shape. It Map 52. Aphaenogaster rudis Map 53. Aphaenogaster tennesseensis 98 also has distinctive propodeal spines that are longer than the basal face of the propodeum. Aphaenogaster tennesseensis is found in Ontario (D.R. Smith 1979) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Texas (G.C. Wheeler and J. Wheeler 1985). This species was collected in the following counties: Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Houston Co. Dothan Aphaenogaster treatae Forel This ant has a fairly large range and can be found throughout the eastern U.S. It can commonly be found foraging in leaf litter and nests in the soil. Colony size can range from 65 to 1,600 with an average of about 680 adults(Talbot 1954) Aphaenogaster treatae has a conspicuous lobe on the antennal scape, which extends rearward along the basal fourth of the scape, seen from side it is thick with the upper face forming a obtusely projecting angle in the middle. This species is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003), Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960) north to Michigan (Wheeler et al. 1994), into Ontario (D.R. Smith 1979). Map 54. Aphaenogaster treatae 99 Aphaenogaster treatae was collected in the following counties: Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Clay Co. Talladege NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lamar Co. Ferbank (Murphree 1947), Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF Aphaenogaster sp. (fulva-texana-rudis complex) This species is probably Aphaenogaster carolinensis Wheeler or Aphaenogaster n. sp. N19 (Umphrey 1996). This is a difficult complex with no reliable character to positively separate species. A. carolinensis can be separated from A. texana based on size: the largest workers are approximately 4.5 mm in length while the queens are 5.5 mm in length, although this is not always reliable. Aphaenogaster carolinensis is found in the eastern U.S., the true range is difficult to determine due to the problems of accurately identifying members of this complex. This species (or complex) was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Blount Co. Oneonta, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Sumter Co. Livingstong, Tuscaloosa Co. Sipsey WMA, Winston Co. Smith Lake Map 55. Aphaenogaster sp. 100 Genus Crematogaster Lund ?Acrobat ants These ants are called ?acrobat ants? because of the distinctive behavior that many Crematogaster species have of elevating their gaster up and over their heads when disturbed. The etymology of the generic name refers to this behavior (?crema? Greek for hang or suspend and ?gaster? referring to modified abdomen). These ants do not sting but instead exude noxious chemicals from their flattened modified sting (Forel 1928). This chemical defense is effective against ants but harmless to humans. Acrobat ants nest in a variety of areas including: living trees, soil, rotting logs or stumps, insect galls, acorns, and occasionally in woodwork. They tend to be omnivorous scavengers but are commonly found associated with honeydew producing insects. Acrobat ants are found throughout the world. Crematogaster species are easily recognized by their heart-shaped gaster (seen from above) that is attached to the post-petiole on the dorsal surface of the first gastral segment, in profile the dorsum of the gaster is relatively flat while the ventral surface is strongly convex. Their antenna is 11-segmented. Key to the genus Crematogaster (modified from Creighton 1950, Johnson 1988b, Buren 1968, MacGown 2005) 1 Postpetiole suboval and entire, without median sulcus, very small ants (1-2mm in length) ??????????????????????????.???2 1? Postpetiole divided by distinct median sulcus, medium sized ants (3+mm in length) ...????????????????????????????..3 101 2(1) Propodeal spines directed upward and about one-half as long as distance between their base; rugae on pronotum usually lateral in position; coloration dark yellow ???????????????????...??Crematogaster missuriensis 2? Propodeal spines directed more backward than upward and less than one-half distance which separate their bases; two prominent rugae near middle of pronotum; color light yellow ???..????..??Crematogaster minutissima 3(1?) Pronotal pleurae sculptured, roughened looking and opaque ??.??????4 3? Pronotal pleurae mostly unsculptured with large band having smooth, reflective or shiny surface ?.?????..????????????????...???.5 4(3) Pronotum with band of erect hairs occurring transversely and other erect hairs scattered randomly across mesonotum ??..????....Crematogaster lineolata 4? Pronotum with erect hairs confined to humeral shoulders; occasionally erect hairs occur on anterior margin of propodeum ????..?.Crematogaster vermiculata 5(3?) Propodeal spines short and in dorsal view, inner margins parallel to longitudinal body axis; dark brown body ???????????.Crematogaster ashmeadi 5? Propodeal spines long, in dorsal view spices diverge from longitudinal body axis ???????????????.???????????????...?..6 6(5?) Pubescence on head and thorax appressed, hairs on head fine and in orderly rows ???????????????????????Crematogaster atkinsoni 6? Pubescence on head and thorax suberect or erect (at least some) and hairs on head not lying in orderly rows ?????????????....Crematogaster pilosa 102 Crematogaster ashmeadi Mayr This is one of the most common species of tree nesting Crematogaster in Alabama. It nests arboreally in twigs or branches (Buren 1968). Colonies may be large and are found in pine or hardwoods. In a study of a pine forest of northern Florida (Tschinkel and Hess 1999) C. ashmeadi was found on approximately 50% of the trees examined (out of 4,766). These ants defend their territory and exclude other ant species from nesting in or utilizing their tree. This species has distinctly short propodeal spines that, in dorsal view, have inner margins that are parallel to the longitudinal body axis. C. ashmeadi is dark brown in color. Crematogaster ashmeadi is found in North Carolina (Nuhn 1977) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Texas (Wheeler and Wheeler 1985) and Kansas (Dubois 1994). It is also recorded in the Bahamas (Deyrup 1998) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Blount Co. Oneonta, Cherokee Co. Little River Canyon, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, Dallas Co. 1mi W of Selma, Fayette Co. Wolf Creek WMA, Henry Co. Abbeville (Murphree 1947), Houston Co. Dothan, Lauderdale Co. 2mi S of Rogersville, Map 56. Crematogaster ashmeadi 103 Lawrence Co. Bankhead NF, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. Gipsey, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Madison Co. Huntsville, Mobile Co. Mobile, Monroe, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Shelby Co. Childersburg, St. Clair Co. Whitney Junction (Murphree 1947), Tuscaloosa Co. Uni. of Ala. ? Tuscaloosa, Walker Co. Townley, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG, Winston Co. Smith Lake Crematogaster atkinsoni Wheeler These ants produce large carton nests in sedges or brushes usually in coastal salt marshes. The pubescence on the head and thorax of this species is appressed while the hairs on the head are fine and in orderly rows. Crematogaster atkinsoni can be found in North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Mississippi (MacGown 2005). This species was not collected during this survey however Johnson reported it here in 1988. Crematogaster lineolata (Say) This is another fairly common ant from the genus Crematogaster with a wide range in the United States. C. lineolata can be found nesting in ground in wooded areas or in logs or stumps. This species has a roughed pronotal pleurae and a band of erect hairs occurring Map 57. Crematogaster lineolata 104 transversely on the pronotum and other erect hairs scattered randomly across the mesonotum. Crematogaster lineolata is found in southeastern Canada and eastern US with a western limit of Utah (Rees and Grundmann 1940). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Blount Co. Oneonta, Choctaw Co. Choctaw NWR, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Talladega NF, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, Dale Co. Daleville, Dallas Co. Carlowville, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Escambia Co. 1miW of Flomaton, Henry Co. 1mi N of Abbeville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Limestone Co. 2mi N of Decatur, Lowndes Co. Collirene, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Wilcox Co. Camden, Winston Co. Center (Murphree 1947) Crematogaster minutissima Mayr This small yellow species of Crematogaster nests in the soil usually at the base of trees or stumps or logs. C. minutissima has also been found in potted plants in a backyard setting. These ants have propodeal spines that are directed more backward than upward and the length of the spines is less than one-half Map 58. Crematogaster minutissima 105 the distance that separates their bases. Two prominent rugae are present near the middle of the pronotum. This species is light yellow in color and smaller than C. missuriensis. Crematogaster minutissima is found in the southern US ranging from North Carolina and Arkansas south to northwestern Costa Rica (Longino 2005). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Mobile Co. Mobile, Pike Co. Troy (Murphree 1947), Talladega Co. Fayetteville (Murphree 1947) Crematogaster missuriensis Emery This species is similar to C. minutissima in behavior and morphology. Crematogaster missuriensis nests in either the soil or in deadwood. This ant has propodeal spines directed upward and about one-half as long as the distance between their bases. The rugae on pronotum is usually lateral in position. This species is dark yellow and slightly larger than C. minutissima. Crematogaster missuriensis is found in the southern US ranging from North Carolina and Arkansas south to northwestern Costa Rica (Longino 2005) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Map 59. Crematogaster missuriensis 106 Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Madison Co. Uni of Ala. - Huntsville, Morgan Co. Hartselle Crematogaster pilosa Emery This species commonly nest in logs or stumps in marshland or mesic habitats. C. pilosa obtains most of its food from honeydew but if found indoors it shows a preference for fatty or oily foods (Murphree 1947). The pubescence on the head and the thorax of this species is suberect or erect (at least some of them) and the hairs on the head do not lie in orderly rows Crematogaster pilosa is found in North Carolina (Powell 1937) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, Loxley, Calhoun Co. Wellington (Murphree 1947), Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Coffee Co. Clintonville, Conecuh Co. Repton (Murphree 1947),Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, Dale Co. Newton (Murphree 1947), Dallas Co. Selma, Escambia Co. 1mi W of Flomaton, Fayette Co. Bankston (Murphree 1947), Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Greene Co. Boligee (Murphree 1947), Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lauderdale Co. 2mi S of Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Map 60. Crematogaster pilosa 107 Co. Auburn, Monroe Co. Claiborne Lake CG, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Sumter Co. Coatopa, Tallapoosa Co. Thornton, Washington Co. Chatom Crematogaster vermiculata Emery This species is arboreal and are found in cypress swamps or in trees in the vicinity of wetlands (Johnson 1988b). Crematogaster vermiculata has roughened pronotal pleurae and erect hairs are confined to the humeral shoulders (there may be occasionally erect hairs on the anterior margin of the propodeum). This species is also distinctly rugoreticulate on the thoracic dorsum. This species is found in North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960). Crematogaster vermiculata was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP Genus Cyphomyrmex Mayr This is a primitive fungus-growing ant genus that utilizes caterpillar feces as a substrate for yeast that it consumes for food. There is a close-knit relationship between fungus growing ants and their cultivars that originated over 50 million years ago (Mueller et al. 1998). Cyphomyrmex rimosus is the only species of this genus that has been found Map 61. Crematogaster vermiculata 108 in Alabama and is not considered to be a native of this state. Four species of Cyphomyrmex are found in the southern regions North America. In Central and South America this genus is much more diverse. Cyphomyrmex rimosus (Spinola) Cyphomyrmex rimosus form small colonies of 200 adults or less and nest in the soil. They may be quite abundant in the coastal plain region of Alabama. I have observed this species carrying insect parts, caterpillar feces and occasionally dried plant matter. C. rimosus can be found in areas heavily infested other invasive ants but they seem to coexist with little problems (Storz and Tschinkel 2004). When disturbed these ants exhibit thanotosis (playing dead behavior). It is possible that this behavior and their thick armor-like integument protect them from the depredations of other ant species. This species has blunt tubercles on the mesosoma, with characteristically thick and rough integument. The frontal lobes are expanded laterally and cover much of the side of the head (as seen in full face view) and project forward, anteriorly reaching or over lapping the anterior margins of the clypeus. Map 62. Cyphomyrmex rimosus 109 Cyphomyrmex rimosus is found in the southern US, from Florida (Deyrup 2003) to California (MacKay and MacKay 2002); this range extends south through Latin America to Argentina (Longino 2005). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, Dale Co. Daleville, Escambia Co.1mi W of Flomaton, Henry Co. Abbeville, Houston Co. 1mi W of Dothan, Lowndes Co. Lowndesboro, Mobile Co. Saraland, Monroe Co. Claiborne Lake, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Genus Monomorium Mayr These ants are little and (usually) black. Monomorium ants are common ?tramp? species and are considered invasive pests in many areas. Most species are adaptable and can nest inside human dwellings. These ants are typical generalist omnivores but show a preference for sweet food items. Members of this genus are found worldwide. Monomorium species are small and have a 12-segmented antenna with a 3- segmented club. Their mandibles have 3-4 teeth and clypeus usually with 2 longitudinal carinae extending past the anterior border of the clypeus as teeth. Ants of this genus lack propodeal spines. Key to the genus Monomorium (modified from Creighton 1950, Dubois 1986) 1 Head and thorax densely punctuate, opaque or feebly shining; color clear reddish yellow ????????????????????.Monomorium pharaonis 110 1? Head and thorax mostly or entirely smooth, strongly shining with only scattered punctures; color not reddish yellow???????.??????.???..?.2 2(1?) Teeth which terminate clypeal carinae indistinct or absent, clypeal edge between carina straight or feebly impressed, not sulcate behind; head and gaster brownish, thorax, petiolar node and appendages dirty yellow .???.Monomorium floricola 2? Teeth which terminate clypeal carinae distinct, clypeal edge between them bearing marked concave impression, often carried back between carinae as triangular sulcus; color not as above ??????.???????????..3 3(2?) Node of petiole, in profile, somewhat higher than base is long with anterior peduncle as long as base of node; mesopleuron and base of propodeum rugulose or delicately striate; color ferruginous to black, may have bluish or greenish reflections ?????????...????????...?Monomorium viridum 3? Node of petiole, in profile, approximately as high as long with anterior peduncle notably shorter than base of node; mesopleuron and base of propodeum smooth and shining; color concolorous black ....???????..Monomorium minimum Monomorium floricola (Jerdon)-Bicolored trailing ant Monomorium floricola is an invasive from the Old World, most likely Asia, and can be found in warmer tropical regions of the world (Wilson and Taylor 1967). It was not collected during this survey but it is reasonable to assume that this ant could be found in the extreme south of Alabama or in domestic settings. This ant is a common household pest in Florida. 111 This species completely lacks or has indistinct clypeal teeth. The head and gaster is brownish, while the thorax, petiolar node and appendages are dirty yellow. Monomorium floricola is found in Florida and tropics of the world (Smith 1979). It was reported in Alabama by D.R Smith (1979). Monomorium minimum (Buckley) - Little black ant As the common name implies M. minimum is, literally, a little black ant. This ant is extremely abundant and successful in Alabama, it may be found through out the state in just about any environment and is found throughout the U.S., although it is most common in the southeast. This species typically nests in soil or close to the ground. M. minimum can invade buildings and is extremely difficult to eradicate. In profile, the node of the petiole of this species is approximately as high as it is long. The mesopleuron and the base of the propodeum for the most part smooth and shining. This ant is concolorous black with no greenish reflections. Monomorium minimum was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Blount Co. Oneonta, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Escambia Co. 2mi E of Map 63. Monomorium minimum 112 Flomaton, Fayette Co. Wolf Creek WMA, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Hale Co. Payne Lake, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lauderdale Co. Rogersville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. 1mi N of Decatur, Lowndes Co. Collirene, Madison Co. Huntsville, Marengo Co. Foscue Creek CG, Marion Co. Bear Creek, Mobile Co. Saraland, Monroe Co. Hybart, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin, Tuscaloosa Co. Uni. of Ala. - Tuscaloosa Monomorium pharaonis (Linnaeus) - Pharaoh ant The Pharaoh Ant is an introduced ant, probably from Africa or Asia. This ant forms polygynous colonies that are difficult to eliminate once established inside a building due to the colonies ?budding? (queens scatter and form new colonies) when disturbed. M. pharaonis can be problematic in hospital situations where it has been implicated in spreading diseases (Chadee and LeMaitre1990). Unlike other species of Monomorium, M. pharaonis has dense punctures on the head and thorax giving the ant an opaque or feebly shining appearance. Color is clear reddish-yellow. Map 64. Monomorium pharaonis 113 This species is found worldwide, either in tropic regions or as a domestic pest. Monomorium pharaonis was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Lee Co. Auburn, Mobile Co. Mobile; Widespread, according to Murphree (1947). Monomorium viride Brown This ant is native to Florida and can be found throughout that state. M. viride prefers to nest in sandy soil and is thought to be polygynous (DuBois 1986). The specific name refers to the greenish metallic reflections on some specimens (?viridis? is Latin for green). In profile, the node of the petiole of this species is somewhat higher than its base is long. The mesopleuron and the base of the propodeum is rugulose or delicately striate. The color of this ant is ferruginous to black, may have bluish or greenish reflections. This ant was only collected by Glancey et al. in 1976 Monomorium viride is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) with other isolated populations in New Jersey (D.R.Smith 1979) and Texas (Wheeler and Wheeler 1985). This species was reported in Alabama in Mobile Co. by Glancey et al. (1976). Map 65. Monomorium viride 114 Genus Myrmecina Curtis Ants of the genus Myrmecina are specialist predators of mites (Masuko 1995). There is only one described species found in North America: Myrmecina americana Emery. There is possibly another rare species found in Florida but it has not been described yet (Deyrup 2003). The genus Myrmecina can be found world wide except for Africa and Antarctica This genus is easily recognized by its propodeum that is armed with 2 pairs of spines. In profile, the petiole is short and subcylindrical lacking an anterior peduncle and with a rudimentary node. The humerus is moderately to sharply angulate. Myrmecina americana Emery This species forms small cryptic colonies in the soil of wooded areas and is commonly collected in leaf litter where it apparently forages. M. americana has a large range through out the U.S. and Canada ranging from Quebec south to Florida, west to Iowa, Colorado and California, northern Mexico, but it is more common in regions with moist wooded areas. Myrmecina americana was collected in the following Alabama counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Chilton Co. 3mi N of Mapleville, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Dallas Co. 2 Map 66. Myrmecina americana 115 mi W of Orville, Henry Co. Abbeville, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lauderdale Co. Florence, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Chewacla SP, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Marion Co. Hamilton, Shelby Co. Childersburg Genus Myrmica Latreille Ants in the genus Myrmica generally prefer cooler climates and can be abundant in the northern U.S. and Canada. Most species are adapted to living in mesic woodlands of moderate to high elevation. This genus is most diverse in Europe and Asia. Myrmica ants are all generalist predators and scavengers although some will feed on honeydew or nectar. Ants in the genus Myrmica have pectinate mid and hind tibia, which will separate them from all other genera except Pogonomyrmex. They are easily separated from Pogonomyrmex by the lack of a psammophore and the smaller size of Myrmica ants. Key to the genus Myrmica (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Antennal scape suddenly bent at base, upper surface forming right angle; lamina always present, of varying shapes but never absent from upper surface; scape of male as long following four or five segments ??..????Myrmica americana 1? Antennal scape gradually and evenly bent at base, upper surface never forming right angle at bend; lamina, if present, forming low and inconspicuous ridge at side of bend and never prolonged onto upper surface of scape ?.?????.?2 116 2(1?) Antennal scapes surpassing occipital margin by amount equal to their greatest thickness; propodeal spines about 1.5x as long as distance between bases and slightly deflected downward; color piceous brown; length 4.0-4.7mm; antennal scape of male as long as the following six segments taken together ???????????????????????...Myrmica punctiventris 2? Antennal scapes barely surpassing occipital margin; propodeal spines only slightly longer than distance separating bases and not deflected downwards; color brownish yellow; length 3.5-4.0mm; antennal scape of male as long as following two segments taken together ?????????..??...?Myrmica pinetorum Myrmica americana Weber Myrmica americana typically nests in the soil or under stones or wood. Unlike most Myrmica, this species is often found in open areas. It is also aggressive and can inflict a painful sting. Alates can be found in nests between August and November with mating flights in August and September (MacKay and MacKay 2002). In the workers of this species, the antennal scape is suddenly bent at the base, the upper surface forming a right angle. Lamina are always present and of varying shapes but never absent from the upper surface. Males Map 67. Myrmica americana 117 are identified by their scape which is as long the following four or five segments when taken together. Myrmica americana is found throughout the U.S and north to Quebec. In Alabama it was collected in Jackson Co. US Route 72 X Paint Rock River (the specimen was collected under the under over pass on the Paint Rock River). Myrmica pinetorum Wheeler. These ants may be found nesting in the soil or under objects in open areas or pine forests (Carter 1962). M. pinetorum seems to have a fairly disjunct distribution in Alabama this could be due to the rather cryptic nature of this species though. In workers, the antennal scapes barely surpass the occipital margin and propodeal spines are only slightly longer than the distance that separates their bases and not deflected downwards. M. pinetorum is brownish yellow and about 3.5-4.0mm in length. In males the antennal scape is as long as the following two segments taken together. Myrmica pinetorum is found in southeastern Canada south to the southeastern U.S., Michigan (Wheeler and Wheeler 1994), North Carolina (Carter 1962). Map 68. Myrmica pinetorum 118 This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Winston Co. Smith Lake Myrmica punctiventris Roger Nests of these ants may be found in the soil or rotten logs in wooded areas. This was the most commonly collected Myrmica species in Alabama and it can be quite abundant in higher elevation areas of the state. In workers of this species, the antennal scapes surpass the occipital margin by an amount equal to their greatest thickness. Their propodeal spines are about 1.5x as long as the distance between the bases and slightly deflected downward. M. punctiventris has a piceous brown color and is approximately 4.0-4.7mm in length. In males the antennal scape is as long as the following six segments taken together Myrmica punctiventris has been reported in Michigan (Wheeler and Wheeler 1994) south to Georgia (Ipser et al. 2004) and east to Kansas (Dubois 1994). Rare in Florida (Deyrup 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Map 69. Myrmica punctiventris 119 DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF Genus Pheidole Westwood - Big headed ants With approximately 900 recognized species, this genus is one of the most diverse in the world. These ants are found worldwide but are most diverse in the New World tropics. Typically Pheidole are granivorous and carnivorous, obtaining food from scavenging and collecting seeds. Most Pheidole are dimorphic but there are a few species that are polymorphic with a caste of medians as well as majors and minors. The majors usually have a greatly enlarged heads with powerful mandibles that are used for crushing seeds. Although these large majors are sometimes referred to as ?soldiers? they rarely defend the nest and usually are the first to escape when disturbed. All of the Alabama species of Pheidole have workers that are dimorphic, with slender normal size workers and more robust large headed majors. Both majors and minors have a 12-segmented antenna and a 3-segmented apical club. Minors can be distinguished by their propodeum, which is usually distinctly lower in elevation than the pronotum; the mesonotum is often as high as the pronotum and separated from the propodeum by a distinct step Key to the genus Pheidole (modified from Wilson 2003) 1 Hypostomal border (ventral anterior rim of head capsule, beneath mandibular insertions) of major bearing 0-3 teeth (one on each side of ventral midline of head and one or none on midline or none at all) (pilifera group) ????????....2 120 1? Hypostomal border of major bearing 4-5 (two on each side of ventral midline of head and one or none on midline) ???...??????????????....4 2(1) Major: at least mesopleuron and usually entire side of pronotum free of carinulae ??????????...???????????.???Pheidole bicarinata 2? Major: entire side of mesosoma (pronotum, mesopleuron and propodeum) covered by parallel longitudinal carinulae ???...???????????...3 3(2?) Major: pronotal dorsum covered by transverse carinulae and mesonotal dorsum by longitudinal carinulae on surface made opaque by foveolae; hypostoma with 3 teeth; Minor: pronotum foveolate and opaque ??????.??Pheidole davisi 3? Major: promesonotal dorsum smooth and shiny; hypostoma lacking teeth completely; Minor: pronotum smooth and shiny ???..?...?Pheidole adrianoi 4(1?) Major: Scape conspicuously flattened near base, width greater at basal segment than at distal segment; head strongly heart shaped with deep mid-occipital cleft and round sides in full face view; petiolar peduncle and node thick; Minor: broad occiput in frontal view, nuchal collar absent (crassicornis group) ?..????...5 4? Major: Scape narrower at basal segment than at distal segment; head quadrate or rectangular, with relatively shallow occiput cleft and straight to weakly convex sides in full face view; petiolar peduncle usually slender; Minor: narrowed occiput, nuchal collar present ????.????????????????7 5(4) Major: First gastral tergite in profile devoid of pilosity or nearly so, at most 1-2 hairs projecting above margin; Minor: head completely foveolate and opaque in full face view??????..??????.??????Pheidole crassicornis 121 5? Major: First gastral tergite in profile with abundant hairs; Minor: head foveolate and opaque only on sides, median strip down face devoid foveolae and not opaque ??????????.??????????????????????.6 6(5?) In profile, hairs on first gastral tergite mostly as long or longer than maximum length of eye; erect hairs present on occiput; color dark brown ??Pheidole tetra 6? In profile, hairs on first gastral tergite mostly shorter than eye length; no erect hairs on occiput; color reddish brown ?????????..??.....Pheidole sp. 7(4?) Major: medium to very small (head width of 1.2 mm or less); robust body form; mesonotal convexity in side view absent or at most vestigial, profile of promesonotum continuous and descends to metanotal groove either in slow curve or abruptly through obtuse angle; antennal club thick compared with other segments of funiculus; antennal scape short, extending at most slightly beyond midpoint between eye and occipital corner; Minor: scape at most extends only 2x its maximum width past occipital corner (flavens group) ??..???????8 7? Major: mesonotal convexity usually strongly developed, rarely low and weak and never absent, with clearly defined anterior and posterior faces; antennal scape usually reaches well beyond midpoint between eye and occipital corner; minor: scape extends by 4x or more its maximum width beyond occipital corner (fallax group) ??????????..????????????????.??.12 8(7) Major: in full face view, rugoreticulum present on occiput ?.???????...9 8? Major: in full face view, no rugoreticulum present on or near occiput or anywhere on posterior fifth of dorsal surface of head ????????..??????.10 122 9(8) Major: inner pair of hypostomal teeth reduced to denticles, much smaller than outer pair; Minor: posterior dorsal half of head lacks carinulae; body blackish brown with metallic blue reflections ?????????.Pheidole metallescens 9? Major: inner pair of hypostomal teeth strongly developed, as long as outer pair; Minor: longitudinal carinulae cover posterior dorsal half of head; head and mesosoma light reddish to reddish brown, waist and gaster dark yellow with no metallic reflections anywhere ?????????...??..?Pheidole dentigula 10(8?) Anterior half of pronotal dorsum covered with transverse carinulae ?????????????????????..??.??Pheidole moerens 10? Anterior half of pronotal dorsum entirely free of carinulae ????.?...??..11 11(10?)Major: in side view, mesosoma variably carinate but completely devoid of foveolae or with small patch along upper metanotal groove, its surface uniformly smooth and shiny ????????.??????????.?Pheidole tysoni 11? Major: in side view, mesosoma with extensive foveolae, surface opaque ???????????????????????.??Pheidole floridana 12(7?) Major: seen in full face view, entire dorsal surface of head including occipital lobes covered by rugoreticulum ????????...?...Pheidole obscurithorax 12? Major: seen in full face view, most or all of dorsal surface of head free of sculpture ?..??????????????????????????..13 13(12?)Major: no rugoreticulum on head, only parallel longitudinal carinulae ...???????????????????????..??Pheidole morrisi 13? Major: rugoreticulum present between eye and antennal fossa and often elsewhere on head ?????????????????...??....??Pheidole dentata 123 Pheidole adrianoi Naves (pilifera group) Pheidole adrianoi is found in the coastal regions of Florida, Georgia and Alabama where it usually nests in sandy soil in clearings within forests (Wilson 2003). This species is similar to Pheidole davisi but is distinguished by the following features: the major?s promesonotal dorsum is smooth and shiny and lacks hypostoma lacking teeth completely, while the minor has a pronotum that smooth and shiny. This ant is more common in Florida (Deyrup 2003) but has also been collected in coastal Georgia (Ipser et al. 2004). In Alabama this species was collected in Baldwin Co. Weeks Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Pheidole bicarinata Mayr (pilifera group) This species has a large range in the U.S. and may be found throughout Alabama. Like most Pheidole it will harvest seeds but it seems to be an able scavenger too. Pheidole bicarinata will nest in rotten logs, in soil, or under rocks or refuse. These ants seem to favor disturbed areas in Alabama. Map 70. Pheidole adrianoi 124 There are a number of Pheidole species that look similar to P. bicarinata but none of these are found in Alabama. It is also possible that P. bicarinata represents a complex of species but this question has yet to be answered. The Pheidole bicarinata major has two hypostomal teeth and the mesopleuron and usually most of the rest of the side of the pronotum is free of carinulae. Color is generally brownish yellow to dark brown but this varies over its range to a clear yellow in the west. Pheidole bicarinata is found in New Jersey south to northern Florida and west through Nebraska, Colorado and Texas to Utah and Nevada (Wilson 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Blount Co. Oneonta, Dallas Co. Selma, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Geneva Co. 2mi W of Hacoda, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Loachapoka, Marion Co. Hamilton, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Winston Co. Smith Lake Pheidole crassicornis Emery (crassicornis group) Pheidole crassicornis nest in the soil and lack the characteristic crater-like mounds of excavated soil at the entrances to their tunnels. Naves (1985) reported that their nests were at least 60cm deep and that foragers were seen carrying live termites and Map 71. Pheidole bicarinata 125 dead arthropods. In Alabama, these ants have been collected on the coastal plain and Cumberland Plateau regions indicating that they probably have a statewide distribution. Pheidole crassicornis majors are distinguished by the scape that is thickened basally and curved towards the insertion. Majors also lack hairs on the first gastral tergite (at most 1-2 hairs projecting above the margin). Minors have foveolate heads that are opaque in full-face view. This species is found in North Carolina south to northern Florida and west to western Texas (Wilson 2003). Pheidole crassicornis was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Butler Co. Chapmen (Murphree 1947), DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF. Pheidole davisi Wheeler (pilifera group) This species forms crater like nests in open sunny areas, usually in pine barrens. P. davisi has been observed harvesting seeds (Wilson 2003). This ant would most likely be found in valleys of northeastern Alabama but it was not collected during this survey. Majors of this species are identified by the absence of the metanotal groove making the basal face of the propodeum contiguous with the metanotum (in profile). The Map 72. Pheidole crassicornis 126 mesonotal dorsum, mesopleuron and side of propodeum are opaque and covered with longitudinal carinulae and foveolae. Minors have longitudinal carinulae on their mesopleuron and side of propodeum. Their mesosoma is foveolate and opaque. Pheidole davisi has been reported in New York south to North Carolina, specimens have also been collected from northeastern Mexico: Monterrey, Nuevo Leon (Wilson 2003). This species was reported in north Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Pheidole dentigula M.R Smith (flavens group) Pheidole dentigula may be found in mesic habitats nesting in the soil or in moist, rotting stumps or logs. In dry environments it will nest in moist microhabitats like rotting wood or in under dampened leaf litter (Wilson 2003). This ant most likely has a statewide distribution but seems more common in the moist lowlands of south Alabama. The majors of P. dentigula closely resemble the majors of P. metallescens, however those of P. dentigula have inner hypostomal teeth that are as long and as developed as the outer pair. Minors can be distinguished by the longitudinal carinulae on the posterior dorsal half of the head. The minor?s head and mesosoma is light reddish to reddish brown, while the waist and gaster is dark yellow with no metallic reflections anywhere. Map73. Pheidole dentigula 127 Pheidole dentigula is found in Tennessee and North Carolina south to the Florida Keys and west to eastern Texas (Wilson 2003) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Eufala, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Calhoun Co. Jacksonville, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Henry Co. Abbeville, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Pheidole dentata Mayr (fallax group) Pheidole dentata is an abundant and successful ant that is common in throughout its range. There appear to be at least two color morphs: a lighter form that nests in open ground and a darker form that nests in shaded forests. The darker form is more common in the southeastern U.S. and forms monogynous colonies of a few hundred workers while the lighter form is more common in the northern extant of its range and produces polygynous colonies of over 5,000 workers (Wilson 2003). According to Wilson, these ants are excellent for laboratory use. They survive quite nicely on dead insects and sugar water and have been utilized in a number of his studies (Wilson 1975, Wilson 1976a, Johnston and Wilson 1985). Map 74. Pheidole dentata 128 On the major of this species rugoreticulum is present next to the antennal fossa, the carinulae found on the frontal lobes is limited to the margins and extends posteriorly only slightly (less than 1 eye length) past the level of the eye (in full face view). Short propodeal teeth distinguish minors. Color varies between light yellowish to dark brown. Pheidole dentata is found in Maryland south to the Florida Keys, west to Illinois, Kansas and Texas, south to northern Mexico (Monterrey, Nuevo Leon) (Wilson 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Eufala, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, Colbert Co. Freedom Hills, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Covington Co. Yellow River, Cullman Co. Cullman, Escambia Co. 2mi W of Flomaton, Geneva Co. Hacoda, Hale Co. Payne Lake, Houston Co. Dothan, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Limestone Co. 2mi N of Decatur, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee, Marion Co. Hamilton, Mobile Co. Saraland, Perry Co. Heiberger, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lurleen SP, Washington Co. Chatom Pheidole floridana Emery (flavens group) These ants occur in wooded areas and typically nest in rotten logs or stumps or in the soil. Alates have been recorded in nest between September and October. P. floridana is an Map 75. Pheidole floridana 129 omnivore like most Pheidole, but it does not been appear to collect seeds for food. Majors of this species have fine fovea on the dorsum of their head. In minors the antennal scape is relatively short, just reaching or barely surpassing the occipital corner. Majors and minors both have smooth and shiny first gastral tergites. Pheidole floridana is found in North Carolina south to Florida Keys and west to central Texas, south into Mexico (Wilson 2003). In Alabama this species has been collected in: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette; Mobile Co. Mobile (Wilson 2003). Pheidole metallescens Emery (flavens group) This species nests in shaded areas, in the soil or in rotting logs. Colonies are monogynous and will collect seeds and dead insects for food. The minor workers of this species can be quite striking when viewed under a microscope with a bluish metallic sheen. Majors of this species are red-brown and are distinguished from P. dentigula by their poorly developed inner hypostomal teeth. Minors are distinctly blackish, most with blue metallic reflections. Their mesosoma is usually foveolate and opaque. Pheidole metallescens is found in Florida west though the Gulf States to Oklahoma and southern Texas (Wilson 2003). Map 76. Pheidole metallescens 130 This species has been collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Mobile Co. Mobile, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG Pheidole moerens Wheeler (flavens group) This ant is an introduced species from the West Indies. P. moerens is widespread in the southeastern US and has been introduced to California and Hawaii, probably via nursery plants (Grunner et al 2003). Even though this species is invasive it does not seem to be of economic importance and has been largely ignored. Majors of this species are reddish brown. Their occiput is smooth and shiny but the rest of the head is carinulate with a small patch of rugoreticulum behind the antennal fossa. Minors are medium to dark brown with their head and mesosoma covered in foveae. They have some rugoreticulum present around their each eye. Pheidole moerens is found in the southeastern U.S., California (Martinez 1997), Hawaii (Grunner et al 2003), and possibly introduced to other tropical regions. Map 77. Pheidole moerens 131 This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Coffee Co. Elba, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Dale Co. Daleville, Geneva Co. Hacoda, Houston Co. Dothan, Lee Co. Auburn, Mobile Co. Mobile Pheidole morrisi Forel (fallax group) These ants form large colonies and obtain food by scavenging and occasionally harvesting seeds (Naves 1985). P. morrisi prefers to nest in sandy areas where it builds small crater mounds of excavated sand. This species tends to be polygynous and monodomous in the northern extent of its range and monogynous and polydomous in the southern extent of its range (Johnson 1988a, Wilson 2003). Majors of this species have long antennal scapes (approaching the occiput to within 2x the width of the antenna) and lack rugoreticulum on the head. They are also densely hairy, with many hairs longer than the eye length. Minors have an occiput that is narrowed slight and a thin nuchal crest. Both majors and minors are yellow with propodeal spines that are reduced to denticles or virtually absent. Pheidole morrisi is found in New York south to Florida and west to Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas (Wilson 2003). Map 78. Pheidole morrisi 132 This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, Escambia Co. 2mi E of Flomaton, Madison Co. Huntsville Pheidole obscurithorax Naves (fallax group) This exotic ant has the largest major caste of Pheidole in the southeast. The large robust majors typically do not forage, but linger around the nest entrance. These ants prefer sandy soil have u-shaped mounds of excavated soil at the entrances. P. obscurithorax was most likely introduced into Mobile, Alabama from northern Argentina during the 1950?s (Wilson 2003). This ant shows a great deal of tolerance to other aggressive ants and has been found with nests close to those of Solenopsis invicta, the Red Imported Fire Ant. Majors of this species are the largest of all the Pheidole in Alabama with a head width of 1.7-1.8mm. They have relatively short antenna scapes and a heavily rugoreticulate head. Minors have petiolar and postpetiolar nodes that foveolate and opaque dorsally. Both major and minor are reddish brown to dark brown, usually with appendages and heads being a lighter shade than the rest of the body. Map 79. Pheidole obscurithorax 133 Pheidole obscurithorax is found in northern Argentina, Paraguay. In the U.S it can be found in Alabama and Florida panhandle (Wilson 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Escambia Co. 2mi E of Flomaton, Mobile Co. Mobile Pheidole sp. (crassicornis group) This Pheidole species was left out of Wilson?s 2003 work and will probably be described by Stephan Cover or Joe MacGown (Joe MacGown, pers. comm.) This species is similar to P. tetra except that it has shorter hairs on the first gastral tergite mostly much (shorter than eye length) and had no erect hairs on the occiput. Color reddish brown. This ant was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Dallas Co. Orville, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Marion Co. Hamilton, Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lurleen SP Map 80. Pheidole species 134 Pheidole tetra Creighton (crassicornis group) This species nests in open soil or under logs or stones. P. tetra has been found at altitudes ranging from 100 to 1600 m above sea level (here in Alabama it was collected at about 160 m). This ant can be found in scrublands, grasslands and urban areas according to MacKay and MacKay (2002). During this survey foragers were collected in an oak-pine forest lakeside at the Lewis Smith Lake. Majors of this species look similar to P. crassicornis but can be separated by their abundant pilosity. Both majors and minors are light to dark brown in color. Pheidole tetra is known from Durango, Mexico (Rojas-Fernandez and Fragosa. 1994), isolated localities in Arizona and Texas (MacKay and MacKay 2002), and Missouri (Wilson 2003). This species was collected in Alabama in Winston Co. Smith Lake. Pheidole tysoni Forel (flavens group) These ants are found in a variety of habitats ranging from urban settings to woodlands. They invariably nest in soil and excavated mounds of soil can present or absent at the entrances to their tunnels. P. tysoni is known to tend aphids and collect floral nectar and it has been found with seeds in its nest (Wilson 2003). Map 81. Pheidole tetra 135 Majors and minors of this species are both yellow and lack sculpturing on their head, except for some longitudinal carinulae on the anterior portion of the head. They both have relatively unsculptured bodies as well. Pheidole tysoni is found in New York south to north Georgia to Tennessee and Kentucky, with populations in west Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Juarez, Mexico (Wilson 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Pickens Co. Cochrane Genus Pogonomyrmex Mayr ? Harvester ants These ants are known as harvester ants due to the large number of seeds that most species collect and store for food. Members of this genus always nest in the soil and have colonies ranging from a few hundred to several thousand adults. The genus Pogonomyrmex is very diverse in xeric regions, especially the southwestern U.S. East of the Mississippi river however there is only one species, Pogonomyrmex badius. The generic name of this species is derived from the Greek word ?pogono? for beard and ?myrmex? for ant; this is referring to the psammophore, or sand beard, that all Pogonomyrmex species have. This genus is found exclusively in the New World. Map 82. Pheidole tysoni 136 Pogonomyrmex species have a petiolar node that is set off sharply from the long, distinctive anterior peduncle, the node in side view roughly triangular. The most distinctive feature is the cluster of beard-like hairs (psammophore) present on the gula. They also have pectinate middle and hind tibial spurs. Pogonomyrmex badius (Latreille) ? Florida harvester ant The nests of this ant can be found in drier areas in the southeastern U.S., usually in open sandy areas or in pine forests. Nests are marked by a circular disc of trimmed vegetation (if in a grassy area) and occasionally with small bits of charcoal that the ants deposit around their nest. Unlike most Pogonomyrmex species, P. badius workers are dimorphic. Larger majors make up about 7% of the colony population, with the average colony containing at least 2500 adults. The majors generally do not forage but will aggressively defend the nest when disturbed. This ant can inflect an extremely painful sting. In Florida, reproductives are produced early in spring (Tschinkel 1999). Map 83. Pogonomyrmex badius 137 Pogonomyrmex badius is dimorphic and larger than other Pogonomyrmex ants and it is the only species found east of the Mississippi River. This species is found in North Carolina south to Florida and east to the Mississippi River. Pogonomyrmex badius was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, Barbour Co. Eufala (Murphree 1947), Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Lee Co. Beauregard, Mobile Co. Mobile Genus Protomognathus Forel Protomognathus ants are obligate slave makers that parasitize colonies of Temnothorax species of ants, particularly T. longispinosus and T. curvispinosus. There is only one species in this genus, Protomognathus americanus, and it is found in the northern U.S and Canada. Protomognathus americanus (Emery) These ants live in stems, rotting wood or large nuts (such as acorns) that have been hollowed out by insects. Studies have shown that P. americanus has little effect on colonies that are raided (Alloway 1979, Hare and Alloway 2001). This species look similar to Temnothorax but are easily separated by their much longer frontal carinae. Map 84. Protomognathus americanus 138 These ants have been collected in Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota and Ontario, Canada. Northern Alabama is the farthest south that they have been collected but these ants are probably widespread but uncommonly collected due to their cryptic lifestyle. Protomognathus americanus was collected in Alabama in Madison Co. Huntsville, this colony was collected in a backyard in the city of Huntsville in the dried stem of a dead plant. T. curvispinosus slaves were present. Genus Pyramica Roger Pyramica ants are widespread and fairly common but rarely collected. These small ants move slowly and are typically found in leaf litter. They are specialized predators of collembolans and other small arthropods. These ants hunt by snapping their jaws back and releasing them when sensory hairs along the clypeus are contacted by prey (much in the same way as the Ponerine ants in the genus Odontomachus). Pyramica species wait until prey items contact them rather than chasing down prey. There are usually spatulate or clavate hairs present on the clypeus and it is though that this might act as a lure to prey. Some species smear their bodies with soil and detritus, possibly to disguise their odor from other arthropods (Masuko 1985). Pyramica may be found in the nests of other ants (particularly fungus growing ants) preying on fungivorous collembolans. In Alabama there are 16 species of Pyramica making this the most diverse genus in the state. This genus is found worldwide. These ants have 6 antennal segments and could only possibly be confused with Sturmigenys species of ants. They are distinguished by their triangular or subtriangular 139 mandibles that have a dentate masticatory margin and lack an apical fork of inward directed spiniform teeth. Key to the genus Pyramica (modified from Bolton 2000) 1 Mandibles narrow and elongate, sublinear to linear in full-face view, at full closure mandibles meet at apical third or less of their length (MI 25-67) ?.??.2 1? Mandibles triangular to elongate-triangular in full face view, at full closure mandibles meet through apical half or more of their length, at most with basal gap (MI 11-25) ???????????????????????..????.3 2(1) Basal and two succeeding teeth on mandible triangular and acute, second tooth longer than basal; disc of postpetiole without posteriorly curved spatulate hairs; dorsum of mesonotum with pair of erect simple hairs; anterior and lateral margins of clypeus meet in angular corners in full face view; scape relatively short (SI 65- 69) ..???????..???????????????..Pyramica angulata 2? Basal and third tooth on mandible triangular and acute, second tooth broad and bluntly rounded, basal tooth longer than second or third teeth; disc of postpetiole with posteriorly curved spatulate hairs; dorsum of mesonotum without erect simple hairs; anterior and lateral margins of clypeus meet through rounded curves in full face view; scape relatively long (SI 79-84) ???...?Pyramica pergandei 3(1?) Petiole ventrally lacking spongiform tissue; pleurae, side of propodeum and disc of postpetiole reticulate-punctate; first gastral tergite finely and densely striolate- punctulate; first gastral sternite finely shagreenate or punctulate at least basally and laterally ???????????????????Pyramica margaritae 140 3? Petiole ventrally with conspicuous spongiform crest or curtain; pleurae, side of propodeum and disc of postpetiole smooth; first gastral tergite smooth behind basigastral costulae, usually entirely smooth, rarely with some sculpture near apex; first gastral sternite unsculptured or sculpture only near apex ???..??4 4(3?) Clypeus in anterior view with apicodorsal series of 4-6 stout standing long hairs, radiating from apex like ribs of fan; in profile clypeal dorsum with pair of long wire-like hairs arising at about midlength, each hair is inclined posteriorly from above its base, then curves smoothly upwards so that apical half of shaft directed vertically or nearly so ?????????????????????..??5 4? Clypeus in anterior view without apicodorsal series of stout standing hairs radiating like ribs of fan; in profile clypeal dorsum without long wire-like hairs arising at about midlength; without hairs that incline posteriorly from just above their base then curve vertically ???...????????????????6 5(4) Long hairs that radiate apicodorsally from clypeus strongly bulbous at apices, in profile bulbous-tipped hairs distinctly curved posteriorly .???Pyramica ornata 5? Long hairs that radiate apicodorsally from clypeus simple at apices, in profile hairs not obviously curved posteriorly ?????????....Pyramica dietrichi 6(4?) With head in full-face view and mandibles closed masticatory margin without distinct gap basally; if basal lamella concealed by clypeus, gap between basal tooth and anterior margin of clypeus is shorter than length of basal tooth; if basal lamella exposed at full closure then gap between basal tooth and basal lamella absent or distinctly shorter than length of basal tooth ???????????7 141 6? With head in full-face view and mandibles closed masticatory margin with distinct gap basally; if basal lamella concealed by clypeus then gap between basal tooth and anterior margin of clypeus greater than length of basal tooth; if basal lamella exposed at full closure then gap between basal tooth and basal lamella distinctly longer than length of basal tooth ??????.???..???..?..12 7(6) Dorsal surface of fully closed mandible basally with distinct sharp transverse edge or rim running across width of blade parallel to and in front of anterior clypeal margin; pronotum sharply marginate dorsolaterally, dorsum transversely flattened and unsculptured; first gastral tergite without standing hairs of any from ?????????????????????..?..Pyramica membranifera 7? Dorsal surface of fully closed mandible basally without transverse edge or rim running across width of blade parallel to anterior clypeal margin; pronotum not marginate dorsolaterally, dorsum transversely convex and sculptured; first gastral tergite with standing hairs of some form present ?????????...???.8 8(7?) With head in full-face view, hairs that project from lateral clypeal margin fine and conspicuously J-shaped, curved posteriorly ???.????.Pyramica ohioensis 8? With head in full-face view, hairs that project from lateral clypeal margin variable in form, curved or inclined anteriorly but not J-shaped .???????.???9 9(8?) Leading edge of scape with row of conspicuous projecting curved hairs, one or more distal to subbasal bend, distinctly curves toward base of scape ?????????????????????????..Pyramica rostrata 9? Leading edge of scape with all projecting hairs curved toward apex of scape, entirely lacking hairs that curve toward base of the scape ???...???.??10 142 10(9?) Dorsum of clypeus with dense short broadly oval-spatulate; in profile these hairs reclinate to appressed; in full-face view hairs that project from lateral clypeal outline broadly spatulate and strongly curved anteriorly ??????????????????...???Pyramica clypeata (in part) 10? Dorsum of clypeus with elongate narrow hairs, simple, somewhat flattened or narrowly linear-spatulate; in profile, these hairs not appressed, either elevated and inclined anteriorly or curving anteriorly in their apical halves; in full-face view hairs that project from lateral clypeal outline either fine and simple or narrow and linear-spatulate, inclined anteriorly, only weakly curved or more or less straight ????????..???????????????????????..11 11(10?)Clypeal pilosity everywhere fine and filiform, acute apically; in full-face view hairs projecting from lateral margin of clypeus same shape and about same length as those arising mid-dorsally; in profile hairs on clypeal mid-dorsum elevated and inclined anteriorly ??????????.?????..?..Pyramica laevinasis 11? Clypeal pilosity everywhere narrowly linear-spatulate or flattened and spatulate in apical half and truncated apically; in full-face view hairs projecting from lateral margin of clypeus of different shape and longer than those arising mid-dorsally; in profile hairs on clypeal mid-dorsum curved or archer anteriorly ?????????????????????????.Pyramica pilinasis 12(6?) Principal basal dental row of mandible with 5 teeth followed distally by 2 smaller teeth; counting from base tooth, third tooth is longest ?????????????????.?..???Pyramica clypeata (in part) 143 12? Principal basal dental row of mandible with 4 teeth followed distally by 2 smaller teeth; counting from base tooth third tooth is not longest ????..????..13 13(12?)Leading edge of scape with all hairs curved or inclined towards apex of scape ??..?????????????????????...??..Pyramica talpa 13? Leading edge of scape with two or more of principal hairs curved or inclined toward base of scape ??...??????????????????..??14 14(13?)In full-face view hairs on lateral clypeal margin curved anteriorly and hairs on anterior clypeal margin either curved toward midline or directed anteriorly; entirety of clypeal margin without any hairs curved away from midline, inclined or curved outwards or curved posterolaterally ?????????????..15 14? In full-face view hairs on lateral clypeal margin curved anteriorly and hairs on anterior clypeal margin either curved toward midline or directed anteriorly; entirety of clypeal margin without any hairs curved away from midline, inclined or curved outwards or curved posterolaterally ???????.??????.16 15(14) Pronotal humeral hair absent; with head in full-face view upper scrobe margin without laterally projecting elongate filiform hair ?.???..Pyramica creightoni 15? Pronotal humeral filiform or flagellate hair present; with head in full-face view upper scrobe margin usually with laterally projecting filiform or flagellate hair just behind level of eye or close to apex of scrobe ??..??.Pyramica metazytes 16(14?)With clypeus in full-face view laterally or posteriorly curved marginal hairs restricted to 1?2 pairs situated on anterior margin above mandibles; hairs on lateral margins not all curved posteriorly ?????..??...Pyramica pulchella 144 16? With clypeus in full-face view laterally or posteriorly curved marginal hairs present on anterior margin above mandibles; all hairs posteriorly curved on lateral margins ????.?????????????????...Pyramica reflexa Pyramica angulata (M. R. Smith) This species is found in rotten wood or leaf litter. P. angulata has been reported in the nests of Strumigenys louisianae Roger (Brown 1953) The basal and two succeeding teeth on the mandible are triangular and acute, the second tooth is longer than the basal. The disc of postpetiole without posteriorly curved spatulate hairs. The dorsum of mesonotum has a pair of erect simple hairs. Anterior and lateral margins of the clypeus meet in angular corners in full face view. The scape of this ant is relatively short (SI 65-69). Pyramica angulata is found from Maryland south to Florida and west Missouri and Texas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Hale Co. Moundville (Bolton 2000), Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Marshall Co. Union Groove (Bolton 2000), Tuscaloosa Co. Moody Swamp (Bolton 2000). Map 85. Pyramica angulata 145 Pyramica clypeata (Roger) This ant nests in soil, rotten wood, leaf litter or under stones (Brown 1953). In full-face view this species has an anterior broadly rounded and glossy clypeus, without bimargification. Dorsally the clypeus has small appressed spatulate hairs and laterally has larger spatulate hairs that project as an anteriorly curved fringe. Pyramica clypeata is found from New York south to Florida and west to Texas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP (Bolton 2000),Marshall Co. Union Grove (Bolton 2000) Morgan Co. Hartselle, Tuscaloosa Co. Buhl (Bolton 2000). Pyramica creightoni (M. R. Smith) This species is found in leaf litter samples (Brown 1953). P. creightoni lacks standing pronotal humeral hair. The head, in full-face view, has an upper scrobe margin with no laterally projecting elongate filiform hair. Map 86. Pyramica clypeata 146 Pyramica creightoni is found in the District of Columbia south to Florida and west to Mississippi (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in Alabama in Mobile Co. Spring Hill. Pyramica dietrichi (M. R. Smith) This species will nest in soil, leaf litter or under stones. It has also been collected in the nests of other ants (Brown 1953). Pyramica dietrichi has long distinctive hairs that radiate apicodorsally from the clypeus. These hairs are simple at their apices and in profile these hairs not obviously curved posteriorly This species is found in Maryland south to Florida and west to Louisiana (Bolton 2000). In Alabama this ant was collected in the following counties: Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP; Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP (Bolton 2000), Mobile Co. Mobile, Tuscaloosa Co. Bryce Lake (Bolton 2000). Map 88. Pyramica dietrichi Map 87. Pyramica creightoni 147 Pyramica laevinasis (M. R. Smith) This ant has been found in rotten logs and prey on collembolans (D.R. Smith 1979). P. laevinasis has fine filiform hairs covering its clypeus. The hairs that project from the lateral margin of the clypeus are the same shape and same length as those arising mid-dorsally. In profile, the hairs on the clypeal mid-dorsum elevated and inclined anteriorly. This species is found in North Carolina south to Florida and west to Texas (Bolton 2000). In Alabama this species was collected in the following counties: Lee Co Auburn. MarshallCo. Guntersville (Bolton 2000), Mobile Co. Dauphin Island (Bolton 2000). Pyramica margaritae (Forel) This species was reported as being found in the soil in Alabama (D.R. Smith 1979). It is an invasive species probably from Central America. P. margaritae This species lacks spongiform tissue ventrally on the petiole and the pleurae, side of propodeum and disc of postpetiole are reticulate-punctate. The first gastral tergite is finely and densely striolate-punctulate everywhere while the first gastral sternite is finely shagreenate or punctulate at least basally and laterally Map 89. Pyramica laevinasis 148 Pyramica margaritae is found in Georgia and Florida west to Texas and south through Central America and into Colombia, it also found on many Caribbean islands (Bolton 2000). This species was reported in Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Pyramica membranifera (Emery) Like most Pyramica species this ant will nest in a variety of moist habitats including soil, leaf litter, and rotting wood. This ant has a transverse edge running across the width of the dorsal mandible blade surface parallel to and in front of the anterior clypeal margin. The pronotum is sharply marginate dorsolaterally with the dorsum transversely flattened and unsculptured. The first gastral tergite lacks standing hairs of any from. Pyramica membranifera is found in Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas (Bolton 2000); this species is invasive to the US and can be found in many localities around the world including Europe, Africa, Asia Indonesia and many island in the Pacific and Caribbean. This species has been collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF Map 90. Pyramica membranifera 149 Pyramica metazytes Bolton This ant appears to relatively rare or cryptic and has only been collected from a few southern US states. This species has a pronotal humeral hair that is long and flagellate. With head in full-face view the upper scrobe margin usually with a laterally projecting filiform or flagellate hair just behind the level of eye or close to apex of scrobe. Pyramica metazytes is only recorded from Kentucky and Tennessee (Bolton 2003). In Alabama this species was collected in Monroe Co. Haines Island Reserve. Pyramica ohioensis (Kennedy & Schramm) This species is commonly found under objects such as stones or logs (Brown 1953). With head in full-face view, P. ohioensis has hairs that project from the lateral clypeal margin that are fine and conspicuously J-shaped and curved posteriorly. Pyramica ohioensis is found in Ohio and Map 92. Pyramica ohioensis Map 91. Pyramica metazytes 150 Maryland south to Georgia and west Texas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Monroe Co. Haines Island Reserve, Sumter Co. Hwy 17xNoxubee River Pyramica ornata (Mayr) This species is relatively common through out its range and can be collected in leaf litter samples (Brown 1953). This ant has long distinct hairs that radiate apicodorsally from the clypeus. These hairs are strongly bulbous at their apices, in profile they are distinctly curved posteriorly Pyramica ornata is found in Maryland south to Florida and west to Texas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in Alabama ing the following counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette , Bibb Co. Glades Preserve , Chilton Co. Mapleville, Conecuh Co. no locality given, Henry Co. Abbeville, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Chewacla SP, Marion Co no locality given., Marshall Co. Union Grove (Bolton 2000). Sumter Co. Livingston, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Map 93. Pyramica ornata 151 Pyramica pergandei (Emery) These ants have unusually large colonies (~300 adults) for Pyramica species. P. pergandei is commonly found in the nests of other ants, preying on collembolans. This species seems to have a preference for colder climates and can be found north into Canada. On the mandible of this species, the basal and third teeth are triangular and acute; the second tooth broad and bluntly rounded while the basal tooth is longer than the second or third tooth. The disc of the postpetiole has posteriorly curved spatulate hairs while the dorsum of the mesonotum without erect simple hairs. The anterior and lateral margins of the clypeus meet through rounded curves in the full-face view. The antennal scape relatively long (SI 79-84) Pyramica pergandei is found in Ontario, Canada south into New England and Gulf Coast states, western border of range is Kansas (Bolton 2003). This species was collected in Alabama in DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP. Pyramica pilinasis (Forel) These ants are typically found under stones, in soil or in leaf litter (Brown 1953). This species closely resembles P. laevinasis but it is distinguished by these traits: P. pilinasis has clypeal pilosity everywhere that is narrowly linear-spatulate or flattened and spatulate in the apical half and truncated apically. In full-face view, the hairs that project Map 94. Pyramica pergandei 152 from the lateral margin of the clypeus are of a different shape and longer than those arising mid- dorsally; in profile the hairs on the clypeal mid- dorsum curved or archer anteriorly. Pyramica pilinasis is found in Illinois south into the Florida and west to Louisiana (Bolton 2000). I n Alabama this species was collected in Tuscaloosa Co. Bryce Lake (Bolton 2000). Pyramica pulchella (Emery) This species nests in the ground or in rotting stumps or logs (Brown 1953). With clypeus in full-face view, laterally or posteriorly curved marginal hairs are restricted to 1?2 pairs situated on the anterior margin above the mandibles. The hairs on lateral margins of the clypeus are not all curved posteriorly. Pyramica pulchella is found in Michigan south to Florida and west to Louisiana and Kansas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Bibb Co. Glades Preserve , Conecuh Co. no locality given; Marshall Co. Map 96. Pyramica pulchella Map 95. Pyramica pilinasis 153 Union Grove (Bolton 2000), Mobile Co. Mobile (Bolton 2000), Morgan Co. Decatur (Bolton 2000) Pyramica reflexa (Wesson & Wesson) These are typical Pyramica ants that dwell in the soil or under leaf litter and prey upon collembolans. With clypeus in full- face view laterally or posteriorly curved marginal hairs are present on the anterior margin above the mandibles. All the hairs on the lateral margin are posteriorly curved. Pyramica reflexa is found in Illinois south to Florida and west to Texas (Bolton 2000). In Alabama this species was collected in the following counties: Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP; Franklin Co. Dismal Canyon(Bolton 2000). Pyramica rostrata (Emery) This is another species with large colonies (+200 adults) for a Pyramica species; it is also thought that this species is polygynous. It seems to specialize in collembolans from the families Entomobryidae and Isotomidae (Brown 1953) Map 97. Pyramica reflexa 154 On the leading edge of scape these ants have a row of conspicuous projecting curved hairs of which one or more, distal to the subbasal bend, distinctly curve toward the base of the scape. Pyramica rostrata is found in Illinois to east to New York south to Florida and west to Texas (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette (Bolton 2000), Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Franklin Co. Dismal Canyon (Bolton 2000), Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Sumter Co. Livingston, Tuscaloosa Co. Elrod (Bolton 2000). Pyramica talpa (Weber) These ants live in leaf litter and soil. The leading edge of the scape of this species has all hairs curved or inclined towards the apex of the scape. The dorso-lateral margin of the head has a single freely projecting long flagellate hair. Map 98. Pyramica rostrata Map 99. Pyramica talpa 155 The anteriorly curved hairs on the fringe of the lateral clypeus margins are strong and linearly spatulate to weakly spoon shaped, while the hairs on the clypeal dorsum are strongly spatulate. Pyramica talpa is found in Illinois and Ohio south to Florida and Louisiana (Bolton 2000). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette , Bibb Co. Glades Preserve ; Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP (Bolton 2000), Mobile Co. Spring Hill (Bolton 2000). Genus Solenopsis Westwood - Fire ants and thief ants This is diverse genus with ants ranging in size from medium to very small. Several infamous ants that readily invade tropical and sub tropical regions are in this genus including: S. invicta, S. richteri and S. geminata. These species have been introduced by human commerce and established themselves in foreign habitats. All of Solenopsis ants can sting although only the larger species can penetrate human skin. The effect is usually described as a match being pressed against the skin, hence the common name ?fire ants?. The smaller members of this genus are known as thief ants because they are thought to engage in lestobiotic behavior (stealing of food or brood from other ants). Solenopsis species are found worldwide. Under close examination these ants are hard to confuse with any other genera. Solenopsis ants have a distinct 10-segmented antenna with a 2-segmented apical club, and the lack propodeal spines. Larger species tend to be polymorphic while smaller species are monomorphic and (usually) yellow in color. 156 Key to the genus Solenopsis (Modified from Creighton 1950, Thompson 1989, Trager 1991, MacKay and MacKey 2005, MacGown 2005) 1 Second and usually third segment of funiculus at least 1.5x as long as broad (geminata species complex) ????????.????????????..2 1? Second and at least third segment of funiculus only slight longer than broad, often broader than long?????????????????????????.5 2(1) Clypeus, in full-face view, lacking median tooth, or at most with small blunt protuberance????????????????????.???????3 2? Clypeus, in full-face view, with conspicuous, median tooth ..????????4 3(2) Sides of head distinctly divergent toward occiput; occipital furrow shallower, not rugose; propodeal carinae lacking or at most developed only at junction of dorsal and posterior propodeal faces (rarely lobe- or tooth-like flange at junction of dorsal and posterior faces of propodeum); petiolar ventral process developed as ventral flange or lobe on larger specimens ??????.??.Solenopsis xyloni 3? Sides of head subparallel; emargination of posterior border of head deep extending toward frons as median rugose furrow; distinct propodeal carinae originating near junction of propodeal dorsum and declivity and extending forward toward anterior edge of propodeum; petiolar ventral process small, rarely flange-like ??.??..???????..??????...?Solenopsis geminata 4(2?) Head, scapes and thorax reddish brown distinctly lighter than gaster; conspicuous, elongate triangular dark brown to black mark on frons; spot on first tergite lacking, or if present, spot dusky reddish and grading indistinctly into dark posterior band; head ovate to weakly heart-shaped and relatively broad in frontal 157 view, CI 95-100 in largest majors; humeral bosses lacking or indistinct, anterior portion of pronotum evenly rounded when viewed dorsally ..?Solenopsis invicta 4? Head and scapes brownish black, as dark as gaster or only slightly lighter; elongate triangular mark on frons barely or not at all visible; yellowish spot on first tergite usually present and with definite posterior border; head subelliptical to weakly ovate and narrow in frontal view, CI 90-96 in largest majors; pronotal dorsum medially concave; pronotum with humeral bosses ?....Solenopsis richteri 4?? Intermediate in some of the characters of 4 and 4?; most often with basic color pattern of ?washed out? S. richteri, head and thorax more brownish or mottled than gaster; gaster spot dusky with posterior margin in distinct; elongate triangular streak on frons visible, and head ovate to weakly heart shaped (due to variable morphological characters, this hybrid can only be accurately identified by using cuticular hydrocarbons) ????...????...Solenopsis richteri x invicta 5(1?) Postpetiole greatly dilated and expanded, more than half as wide as gaster; propodeum finely and densely sculptured; eyes of workers with at least 12 ommatidia (globularia species complex) ??...?.Solenopsis globularia littoralis 5? Postpetiole not dilated and barely more than one-third as wide as gaster; propodeum smooth and without sculpture; eyes of workers with fewer than 12 ommatidia, usually less than 6 (?thief ant? complexes) ....??..??????...6 6(5?) Eye tiny and difficult to see, with little or no pigmentation; head elongate and usually coarsely punctate; in frontal view, head with median strip free of punctures and hairs and forming weakly impressed longitudinal furrow; in dorsal view, postpetiole circular in shape ??????.?????..??????...7 158 6? Eyes small but easily seen, usually consisting of about 4 ommatidia with black pigmentation; head not overly elongate, punctures either coarse or not; in front view, head without median strip free of punctures and hairs; in dorsal view, postpetiole usually oval in shape (except in S. pergandei) ?????????.8 7(6) Erect hairs on pronotum of various lengths and not as dense as on head; erect hairs on gaster sparse and of various lengths; head narrow, elongate, and flat; small species (head and thorax length 0.61-0.69 mm) ...?Solenopsis tennesseenis 7? Pronotum and gaster with erect hairs all of approximately same length; medium sized species (head and thorax length 0.76-0.83 mm); head thick in profile, densely covered with hairs ????.???????????Solenopsis tonsa 8(6?) Length of antennal segments 3-8 (antennal segments excluding scape, pedicel and apical 2-segmented club) together longer than distance between frontal carinae (length greater than 0.1mm and usually greater than 0.12mm) ????..?....?9 8? Length of antennal segments 3-8 together shorter or about equal to distance between frontal carinae (length less than 0.1mm, rarely longer) ???.??.?10 9(8) Punctures on head small and not much greater in diameter than hairs which arise from them; postpetiole, as seen from above, somewhat oval shaped; color clear golden yellow to light brownish yellow; queens yellowish-orange, head and gaster slightly darker brownish orange, shiny in appearance; queens average sized (TL about 3.2-3.5 mm) ????????????.?????.Solenopsis molesta 9? Punctures on head coarse and larger than diameter of hairs which arise from them; postpetiole, as seen from above, circular in shape; color pale yellow to milky 159 white; queens yellowish-orange, opaque in appearance; queens much larger (TL greater than 5 mm) ?????????.??.?????Solenopsis pergandei 10(8?) Node of petiole placed anterior to petiolar-postpetiolar juncture giving petiole distinct slender posterior peduncle; color dark brown with ighter reddish brown head and/or thorax to black; metanotal groove deeply impressed distinctly setting off the promesonotum from propodeum; arboreal species (nest in twigs) ??????????????????.????????Solenopsis picta 10? Node of petiole placed near petiolar-postpetiolar juncture; color of body usually pale yellow; metanotal groove not usually impressed; not arboreal ?????????????????????.??.Solenopsis carolinensis Solenopsis carolinensis Forel This small thief ant nests in the soil close to other ant species. Most likely S. carolinesis obtains most of its food by stealing stored food or brood from other ant species. Solenopsis carolinensis has the node of its petiole placed near the petiolar-postpetiolar juncture. Body color is pale yellow and the metanotal groove is not usually deeply impressed. Most of the hairs on the hind tibia are erect or suberect. Queens are yellow and have large eyes Map 100. Solenopsis carolinensis 160 that cover half of the head (0.25mm). This species is found in Kentucky (Cockfield and Potter 1984), North Carolina (Powell 1937), and Florida (Deyrup 2003). Solenopsis carolinensis was collected in the following counties of Alabama: Cleburne Co. Talladega NF, Colbert Co. Bear Creek, Covington Co. Solon Dixon Center, Henry Co. Abbeville, Lee co. Chewacla SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Uni. of Ala. -Huntsville, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius) ? Tropical fire ant This fire ant was collected in the southern regions of Alabama during the survey by Murphree (1947) but it has not been reported since that time. S. geminata is still quite common in some areas of Florida and coastal Texas but has been displaced by invasions of S. richteri and S. invicta in most of its range. It is unknown if this species is native to the US or simply the result of an early introduction. This ant is similar in habits to S. xyloni but S. geminata prefers coastal regions. This species is more granivorous then other North American Solenopsis ants but it still obtains much of its food from honeydew and predation (Holldobler and Wilson 1990) Map 101. Solenopsis geminata (distribution in the 1930?s) 161 The sides of this ant?s head are subparallel and the emargination of posterior border is deep extending toward frons as median rugose furrow. Distinct propodeal carinae are present that originate near the junction of propodeal dorsum and declivity and extending forward toward anterior edge of propodeum. The petiolar ventral process is usually small, rarely flange-like Solenopsis geminata is found in Central America, Gulf Coast of the United States, particularly Florida and Texas, introduced to various tropical regions of the world. This species was collected by Murphree (1947) in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Batesville, Louisville, Coffee Co. Enterprise, Covington Co. Florala, Crenshaw Co. Patsburg, Dale Co. Asbury, Newton, Dallas Co. Brantley, Escambia Co. Flomaton, Geneva Co. Hartford, Samson, Houston Co. Columbia, Pike Co. Troy Solenopsis globularia littoralis Creighton This species is typically found on the coast but can be collected inland. Colonies are small to medium and can be found in rotting logs or stumps. It is likely that their main food comes from honeydew and scavenging (Murphree 1947). The postpetiole of this species is greatly dilated and expanded, more than half as wide as the gaster; the propodeum is finely and densely Map 102. Solenopsis globularia littoralis 162 sculptured; eyes of workers with at least 12 ommatidia. This ant is found in North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. (Creighton 1930); Russell Co. Cottonton (Murphree 1947), Mobile Co. Mobile Solenopsis invicta Buren ? Red imported fire ant (RIFA) This is one of the most common and most recognized ants in Alabama. S. invicta was first reported in Daphne, Alabama in 1945 and it is thought that this species was introduced to Mobile from Brazil sometime between 1940 and 1945 (Buren et al. 1974). Solenopsis invicta forms large mound nests usually in open or disturbed areas. Colonies can be polygynous or monogynous. This ant is a generalist that will scavenge for dead animal material or prey on other insects. They will also consume seeds and will readily tend honeydew producers. The red imported fire ant is considered a major economic pest due to its painful sting, aggressive manner and unsightly mounds. Without a doubt S. invicta has had a major impact on all the ecosystems that it invades. It has been shown to reduce ground nesting bird population (Vinson and Sorenson 1986,Allen et al. 1995) and can also have a negative impact on agriculture (Banks et al. 1990). However there is some indication that RIFA can exert a positive influence on crops by eliminating leaf chewing insect herbivores (Kaplan and Eubanks 2002) and that they can drastically reduce tick populations (Fleetwood et al. 1984), thereby indirectly decreasing the spread of tick borne diseases. 163 Efforts to control S. invicta have largely failed and this ant continues to be the number one ant pest in the southeastern United States. It should be noted that this species can hybridize with S. richteri and the hybrid is difficult to distinguish from pure S. invicta without the use of a cuticular hydrocarbon analysis. The head, scapes and thorax of S. invicta are reddish brown and distinctly lighter than gaster. There is a conspicuous, elongate triangular dark brown to black mark on frons. Usually there is no spot on first tergite but if present it is dusky reddish and grading indistinctly into dark posterior band. The head is ovate to weakly heart-shaped and relatively broad in frontal view, CI 95-100 in largest majors and humeral bosses lacking or indistinct, with the anterior portion of pronotum evenly rounded when viewed dorsally. The red imported fire ant is found in the southern US from North Carolina west to California. In Alabama this species was collected in the following counties:Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Mobile Co. Dauphin Island. This species is widespread, especially in southern two thirds of the state, the dividing line being Pickens Co, to Shelby Co. to Randolph Co. (L.C. Graham pers. comm.) Map 103. Solenopsis invicta 164 Solenopsis invicta X richteri ?Imported fire ant hybrid This is a hybrid of S. invicta and S. richteri . It is almost identical to S. invicta in its habits and appearance but it tends to be slightly less aggressive. RIFA and BIFA do not hybridize in their native range of Brazil possibly due to environmental barriers but they readily interbreed in areas where they come into contact in the southeastern US. Solenopsis invicta X richteri can share intermediate traits from both species of ants. This hybrid can only be accurately identified by surface hydrocarbon analysis. This hybrid is found in northern Georgia to northeastern Mississippi. In Alabama it is found north of the Pickens-Shelby-Randolph Co. line described under S. invicta (L.C. Graham pers.comm.). Solenopsis molesta (Say) This species is common throughout its range. This ant is omnivorous and will consume dead insects, seeds or honeydew. Like other thief ants this species will steal food and brood from other ants. It will typically nest in the soil or under stones usually near other ant nests but it can also invade homes and become a minor household pest. Map 104. Solenopsis invicta x richteri 165 The punctures on the head of S. molesta are small and not much greater in diameter than the hairs that arise from them. The postpetiole, as seen from above, is somewhat oval shaped. The color of this ant is clear golden yellow to light brownish yellow. Queens are yellowish-orange with the head and gaster slightly darker brownish orange. They shiny in appearance and average sized (total length about 3.2-3.5 mm) Solenopsis molesta is found in eastern and central US north into southern Canada (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP, Eufala, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Hale Co. Lake Payne, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Lamar Co. Vernon, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee, Mobile Co. Mobile, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lureen SP Solenopsis pergandei Forel. This species nests in the soil generally next to other ant species, little else is know of its habits. The punctures on the head of S. pergandei are coarse and larger than the diameter of hairs which arise from them. The postpetiole, as seen from above, is circular Map 105. Solenopsis molesta 166 in shape. The color of this species is pale yellow to milky white. Queens are yellowish- orange, opaque in appearance and relatively large (total length greater than 5 mm). Solenopsis pergandei is found in Virginia south to Florida and west to Louisiana (Creighton 1950) possibly rare in Texas and New Mexico (MacKay and MacKay 2002). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Coosa Co. Equality (Murphree 1947), Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, Mobile Co. Mobile, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Solenopsis picta Emery. This ant is generally found in hollow twigs (Creighton 1950). The node of petiole of this ant is placed anterior to the petiolar- postpetiolar juncture giving the petiole a distinct slender posterior peduncle. This species is dark brown in color with a lighter reddish brown head and/or thorax to black. Map 106. Solenopsis pergandei Map 107. Solenopsis picta 167 The metanotal groove is deeply impressed distinctly setting off the promesonotum from the propodeum. Solenopsis picta can be found in Florida to west to Texas (Creighton 1950). In Alabama this species was collected in: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. 5mi S of Eufala, Montgomery Co.(no locality). Solenopsis richteri Forel ?Black imported fire ant (BIFA) Solenopsis richteri is similar in habits and appearance to S. invicta, however this species is less aggressive and more suited to cooler climates. S. richteri was probably introduced to Mobile, Alabama in 1918 in soil being used as ballast on commercial ships from South America (Buren et al. 1974). The head and scapes of this species are brownish black, as dark as the gaster or only slightly lighter. The elongate triangular mark on frons is barely or not at all visible while a yellowish spot on first tergite is usually present with a definite posterior border. The head is subelliptical to weakly ovate and narrow in frontal view (CI 90-96 in the largest majors). The pronotal dorsum is medially concave and the pronotum has humeral bosses. Map 108. Solenopsis richteri 168 In the US S. richteri is found in southern Tennessee and northeastern Mississippi. This species was reported in Baldwin Co. and Mobile Co. by Murphree (1947). At this time BIFA is only found in the extreme northwestern portion of Alabama in the counties of Lauderdale, Limestone and Lawrence (Graham pers. comm.). Solenopsis tennesseensis M. R. Smith This tiny ant is almost completely subterranean and only occasionally collected by soil sifting (MacKay and MacKay 2002). Little is known about this species, although it probably obtains food through predation and thievery from other ants. This species has erect hairs on the pronotum of various lengths that are not as dense as those found on the head. The erect hairs on the gaster are somewhat sparse and of various lengths. The head is narrow, elongate, and flat. This species is very small species (the head and thorax length 0.61-0.69 mm). Solenopsis tennesseensis is found from California east to Florida (MacKay and MacKay 2002, Deyrup 2003), northern limit is probably Kansas (Dubois 1994). In Alabama this species has been collected in Baldwin Co. Bay Minette. Map 109. Solenopsis tennesseensis 169 Solenopsis tonsa Thompson. This ant is found in northern Florida but little is known of it habits. Most likely it engages in lestobiosis like other thief ants. The pronotum and gaster of this species have erect hairs all of approximately the same length. This is a medium sized species (the head and thorax length 0.76-0.83 mm) with the head thick in profile and densely covered with hairs. Solenopsis tonsa is only known from north Florida and southern Alabama. In Alabama it has been collected in Baldwin Co. (no locality given). Solenopsis xyloni McCook ?Southern fire ant The southern fire ant is similar to S. invicta and builds mound nests, particularly in disturbed areas. However this ant is less aggressive than the RIFA and has a less painful sting that does not result in pustule. During the 1940?s this was considered a major economic pest and was common in Alabama. After the introduction of S. invicta this species has seemingly disappeared from this state and has not been collected since the 1960?s. The sides of the head of this species are distinctly divergent toward occiput with the occipital furrow shallow and not rugose. Propodeal carinae are lacking or at most Map 110. Solenopsis tonsa 170 developed only at the junction of dorsal and posterior propodeal faces (rarely a lobe- or tooth-like flange at junction of dorsal and posterior faces of propodeum). The petiolar ventral process is developed as ventral flange or lobe on larger specimens This species is found in California west to Florida, although this range is not uniform due to direct competition with S. invicta. It is also found in Mexico in Chihuahua, Sinaloa, Coahuila, and Nuevo Leon (MacKay and MacKay 2003). In the past this species was widespread throughout the southern U.S. and was reported as occurring in 154 communities in Alabama (Murphree 1947) and Murphree considered it as being found throughout the state. This species was not found during the course of recent collecting and is thought to have been forced out of the area by the introduced fire ants, S. invicta, S. richteri, and their hybrid. Genus Stenamma Westwood Members of this genus of relatively primitive ants are more diverse in the Nearctic and Palearctic regions but can also be found in the Neotropical, Oriental and Indo-Australia regions. These ants can be found foraging in shady areas often during the cooler times of the year. Little is know about the habits of these ants but it is thought that they are generalist predators of small arthropods. Nests may be located in wooded areas under stones, in leaf litter or in rotting wood, but are rarely found due to the cryptic nature of Stenamma species and the small size of their colonies, generally with a few dozen adults. These ants are slow moving and usually only collected in soil extractions or through leaf litter sifting. 171 These ants are difficult to distinguish from other genera. Members of this genus have antennae with 12 segments and with scapes not reaching the occipital border and with an apical antennal club of 4 segments. The clypeus usually has 2 longitudinal carinae that do not form teeth on the anterior margin. Workers are monomorphic and have small propodeal spines or teeth. Key to the genus Stenamma (modified from M.R. Smith 1957, Dubois and Davis 1998, and MacGown 2005) 1 Rugulae or rugulose-reticulate sculpturing of promesonotum transverse in direction ?????????????????.. Stenamma foveolocephalum 1? Rugulae or rugulose-reticulate sculpturing of promesonotum usually longitudinal in direction ??????????????????.. Stenamma meridionale Stenamma foveolocephalum M. R. Smith Little is known of S. foveolocephalum and only workers have been collected. This species nests in sandy soil and has been collected in January and February. This ant has transverse rugulae or the rugulose- reticulate sculpturing on the promesonotum. Stenamma foveolocephalum is only known from Alabama, Mississippi, Florida Map 111. Stenamma foveolocephalum 172 and North Carolina (Dubois and Davis 1998). In Alabama it was reported in Bibb Co. by Dubois and Davis (1998). Stenamma meridionale M. R. Smith. These ants have small colonies with an average of 15 adults (Talbot 1957) and can generally be found in wooded areas nesting in the soil. This species usually has longitudinal rugulae or rugulose-reticulate sculpturing on the promesonotum usually. Stenamma meridionale is found in Illinois (Dubois and LeBerge 1988) south to North Carolina (Nuhn 1977) and the Gulf states (excluding Florida). It is also recorded in Idaho (Yensen et al. 1977) and might have a wider range but this is difficult to tell due to the cryptic nature of this species. This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Monroe Co. Haines Island Reserve, Sumter Co. Hwy 17 x Noxubee River Genus Strumigenys F. Smith Ants in the genus Strumigenys are similar in their habits to those in the genus Pyramica. These ants are also collembolan predators that have small colonies and nest Map 112. Stenamma meridionale 173 and forage in leaf litter. There is only one species of Strumigenys found in Alabama, 4 other species can be found in southern Florida but are not likely to be found in Alabama. These ants have 6-segmented antenna like Pyramica but have elongate mandibles with a distinct apical fork of inwardly two directed spiniform teeth. This genus has a worldwide distribution but is most diverse in the Neotropics. Strumigenys louisianae Roger Small colonies of these ants can be found under stones, rotting wood or in leaf litter. S. louisianae are found in Florida north to North Carolina and west to Texas. This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Eufaula, Bibb Co. Red Eagle, Butler Co. Pine Apple, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Henry Co. Abbeville, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Morgan Co. Decatur (M.R. Smith 1932) Genus Temnothorax Mayr ? Creeper ants Members of this genus are found in a variety of environments worldwide. Many Temnothorax species nest in plant cavities such as hollowed out dried grass stems or Map 113. Strumigenys louisianae 174 twigs, some nest under tree bark or in the shells of empty nuts, and only a few nest in the soil. It is thought that Temnothorax species are generalist omnivores that will consume honeydew and nectar and also forage for dead insects and seeds. These ants are called ?creeper ants? due to their habit of walking with their body close to the substrate instead of high on their legs like many other ants (Deyrup pers. comm.). Until recently all of these ants were considered to be in the genus Leptothorax Mayr (Bolton 2003). These ants have 11-12 segmented antennae with poorly defined 3 segmented apical clubs. With the exception of T. pergandei all of these species lack a metanotal suture impression and have propodeal spines. These ants are typically small (1.5-3.5mm in length) with larger members generally dark brownish and smaller members yellowish in color. Hairs are usually blunt and stout. Key to the genus Temnothorax (modified from Deyrup and Cover 2004) 1 Mesosoma in lateral profile with conspicuous impression between mesonotum and propodeum (this keys out on generic key as well) .?.Temnothorax pergandei 1? Mesosoma in lateral profile not conspicuously impressed between mesonotum and propodeum ??????????????????????????2 2(1?) Propodeal spines in lateral view short and triangular, no longer than width of eye ????..???????????????????????????....3 2? Propodeal spines in lateral view slender, usually longer than width of eye ...??4 3(2) Head in frontal and lateral view with conspicuous, irregular, longitudinal carinae ???????????????..????????..Temnothorax bradleyi 175 3? Head in frontal and lateral view largely shining and lacking sculpture, with only few delicate carinae around eye and frontal ridges, or, in larger specimens, head mostly granulate, not shining, with delicate carinae almost hidden in granulate background ???...???????????????Temnothorax schaumii 4(2?) Dorsum of mesosoma mostly smooth and shining; color usually dark brown, legs and antennae pale yellow ...?????.??????.Temnothorax tuscaloosae 4? Dorsum of mesosoma either with obvious fine carinae, or not shining, or both ?5 5(4?) Head and body dark reddish brown; sides of head with conspicuous, irregular, closely spaced carinae ?????????????.?.?.Temnothorax smithi 5? Head and body not dark reddish brown; sides of head without closely spaced carinae ?????????????????????...???????..6 6(5?) Propodeal spines in lateral view shorter than basal face of petiole; sides of mesosoma with fine, irregular carinae that are not parallel; color blackish occasionally with dark red on mesosoma ???????..Temnothorax texanus 6? Propodeal spines in lateral view about as long as basal face of petiole; sides of mesosoma with strong subparallel carinae; color varies from blackish to yellow ????????????????...??.?????????????..7 7(6?) Blackish; head in frontal view with delicate, longitudinal ridges, but otherwise shining ...????????????????.?..Temnothorax longispinosus 7? Yellow to yellowish brown; head in frontal view not shining ?????????????????????...Temnothorax curvispinosus 176 Temnothorax bradleyi (Wheeler) Colonies of this species are typically found in the galleries under the bark of living pine trees, usually Pinus palustris (long leaf pine) and P.elliottii (slash pine) (MacKay 2000, Deyrup and Cover 2004). This species was not collected during this survey. The head of this species in frontal and lateral view has conspicuous, irregular, longitudinal carinae. Temnothorax bradleyi is found in northern Florida (Deyrup 2003), Georgia (Wheeler 1913) and it was reported in Jefferson Co. Birmingham Alabama by Murphree (1947). Temnothorax curvispinosus (Mayr) This species nests in twigs or grass stems usually close to the ground, but can also be found under the bark of living trees or in nutshells or galls. Colonies are generally small with 80-100 workers and are usually polygynous and polydomous (MacKay and MacKay 2002). T. curvispinosus consumes honeydew off of leaves but is not known to tend honeydew producers directly, these ants also collect seeds and dead insects. Reproductives can be found in nests from June to August with flights starting in early Map 114. Temnothorax bradleyi 177 July. T. curvispinosus can be a host for the slave making ant, Protomognathus americanus. This small yellow ant has 11- antennal segments with long inwardly curving propodeal spines. In frontal view the head of this species is non-shining. Temnothorax curvispinosus is found in the eastern US, with a western border of Texas (Wheeler and Wheeler 1985) and the Dakotas (Wheeler and Wheeler 1987); Collections have also been made in Arizona (Hunt and Snelling 1975) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Choccolocco WMA, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Etowah Co. Gadsden, Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lawrence Co. Bankhead NF, Lee Co. Auburn, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Madison Co. Huntsville, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Winston Co. Smith Lake Temnothorax longispinosus (Roger) This species is more common in northern regions of the US but is found in the south Appalachian Mountains. T. longispinosus nest in hollow twigs or the shells of nuts and occasionally under tree bark. Colonies on the average are composed of 47 adults with Map 115. Temnothorax curvispinosus 178 150 being a large colony (Holldobler and Wilson 1990). This ant can be a host of Protomognathus americanus. This species is small and blackish. The head in frontal view has delicate, longitudinal ridges, and is shiny. Temnothorax longispinosus is found in the New England States (Creighton 1950) west to Iowa (Buren 1944) and Missouri and south into the northern portions of Alabama and Mississippi This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP Temnothorax pergandei (Emery). This species generally nests in the twigs or nuts usually buried in leaf litter. Occasionally it will nest in the soil. Colonies contain 36 or more adults and are monogynous with reproductives appearing April through December (MacKay and Map 116. Temnothorax longispinosus Map 117. Temnothorax pergandei 179 MacKay 2002). This species has a pronounced impression between the mesonotum and the propodeum that can easily separate it from other Temnothorax species. Temnothorax pergandei is found in New Jersey south to Florida and west to Nebraska and Arizona (Deyrup and Cover 2004).This species was collected in the following states in Alabama: Cullman Co. 2mi N of Cullman, DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG Temnothorax schaumii (Roger) This species will nest in the branches or under the bark of live hardwoods. One nest dissected contained 143 workers, 35 larvae and one queen (MacKay and MacKay 2003). Temnothorax schaumii is usually dark brown but it can occasionally be partially or wholly yellowish. The head in frontal and lateral view is largely shining and lacking sculpture, with only a few delicate carinae around the eyes and frontal ridges. In larger specimens, the head is mostly granulate, not shining, with delicate carinae almost hidden in granulate background. Map 118. Temnothorax schaumii 180 This species is found in southern Maine south to central Florida and west to Texas (Deyrup and Cover 2004). In Alabama this species was collected in Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP Temnothorax smithi (Baroni Urbani) Nests of this species are typically found in standing dead trees in open areas. The head and body of this ant are dark reddish brown, with conspicuous, irregular, closely spaced carinae on the sides of the head. Temnothorax smithi is found in North Carolina (Carter 1962) south to Florida (Deyrup 2003) and west to Mississippi (MacGown 2005). It was reported in Alabama by D.R. Smith (1979). Temnothorax texanus (Wheeler) These ants are found in shallow nests in sandy or clay soil under trees. They generally forage under a thin layer of litter, invisible to the passive observer (Deyrup and Cover 2004). Reproductives appear in the nest from late May to late June (MacKay and MacKay 2003). This species has propodeal spines that, in lateral view, are shorter than basal face of petiole. The side of mesosoma has fine, Map 119. Temnothorax texanus 181 irregular carinae that are not parallel. Workers are blackish occasionally with dark red on mesosoma while queens are blackish to brick red. Temnothorax texanus is found in New Jersey south to Florida and west to New Mexico (Deyrup and Cover 2004). In Alabama it has been collected in Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail. Temnothorax tuscaloosae (Wilson) This species nests at the bases of hardwood trees in moist habitats (Wilson 1950). This ant is usually dark brown with the legs and antennae pale yellow. The dorsum of the mesosoma is mostly smooth and shiny. Temnothorax tuscaloosae is only known from Alabama and North Carolina (Carter 1962). In Alabama it has been collected in the following counties: Monroe Co. Haines Island Reserve, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa (Wilson 1950) Genus Tetramorium Mayr Ants of this genus nest in the soil of under objects such as stones or logs. Tetramorium species are found throughout the world but are most common and diverse in Map 120. Temnothorax tuscaloosae 182 Asia and Australia. It is thought that most of these ants are generalist scavengers or predators. Members of this genus have a ridge formed by their clypeus in front of the antennal insertions, giving the appearance of the antennal sockets being deep pits. These ants can have 11 or 12-segmented antennae. Many of the species present in the US are thought to have been introduced by human activity (Brown 1957). Key to the genus Tetramorium (modified from Creighton 1950) 1 Antenna with 12 segments, erect body hairs simple ?..?Tetramorium caespitum 1? Antenna with 11 segments; erect body hairs simple, branched or trifid ???.?2 2(1?) Most erect body hairs branched or trifid ???...??.Tetramorium lanuginosum 2? Erect body hairs simple????????????....Tetramorium bicarinatum Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander) This is probably an introduced species. T. bicarinatum was considered widespread by Murphree (1947) and Glancey et al. collected a few specimens in 1976 in Mobile, Alabama. However, this species was not collected during this survey and if this species is still in Alabama it is probably exceedingly rare. It should be noted that past literature refers to T. bicarinatum as T. guineense (Fabricius). This species has an 11-segmented antenna and simple body hairs. It is reddish yellow in color with a blackish or brownish gaster. An antennal sulcus is present 183 Tetramorium bicarinatum is found in Florida west to Texas and also found in greenhouses or urban areas throughout the country (Creighton 1950). It has been introduced to many tropical and subtropical regions of the world. This species has been collected in Alabama in Mobile Co. (Glancey et al. 1976), and was widespread, according to Murphree (1947). Tetramorium caespitum (Linnaeus) ? Pavement ant This is an invasive ant, most likely from Europe or Asia (Brown 1957) that is extremely common pest on the Atlantic coast. T. caespitum is called the pavement ant because it is commonly found nesting under pavement, sidewalks or foundations . Colonies are also be found under stones or wood and occasionally in open soil. In colder regions these ants will invade structures and typically nest near heat sources, such as radiators or heat ducts (Hedges 1997). These ants will tend aphids, collect seeds and scavenge for dead animal and plant material. T. caespitum can also be destructive to crops by gnawing on roots and stalks. This species has a 12-segmented antenna and simple body hairs. The basal half of the first gastric segment is smooth and shiny and the head and thorax is longitudinally Map 121. Tetramorium caespitum 184 striated. The antennal scapes do not reach the occipital border of the head and there is no antennal sulcus. Tetramorium caespitum is widespread invasive found throughout the US, and most common in New England states. Also found in Europe, Asia and Africa. This species was collected in Alabama in Limestone Co. 2mi N of Decatur: Calhoun College. Tetramorium lanuginosum Mayr This species is listed as Tetramorium (Triglyphothrix) striatidens Emery in Murphree 1947. This is another tramp species that is found in the southeastern US and other tropical regions of the world and is probably a native of India. This species distinctive trifid hairs on its body. Tetramorium lanuginosum is found in Florida (Deyrup 2003) north to North Carolina (Creighton 1950) and west to Louisiana (Moser and Blum 1960), also found in tropics and sub-tropics worldwide. This species was collected in Alabama by Murphree (1947) in the following counties: Dale Co. Pinckard,. Houston Co. Ashford Genus Trachymyrmex Forel These ants are fungus growers that use plant material and insect feces as a substrate for their fungus. Nests are constructed in packed soil or sand and composed of Map 122. Tetramorium lanuginosum 185 interconnected oval chambers that are a few centimeters in diameter. Nest entrances are usually marked by crescent shaped mounds of excavated soil. The entrances are closed during times of extreme heat, probably to conserve moisture in the fungal chambers. The name of this genus is derived from the Greek word for rough: ?trachy?, referring to the rough, tuberculate nature of the bodies of these ants. Members of this genus are found in the Nearctic and Neotropical regions, 9 species are found in the US but this genus is diverse in the tropics of Central and South America. There is only one ant of this genus found in Alabama, Trachymyrmex septentrionalis. Trachymyrmex septentrionalis (McCook) This is a fairly common ant in the United States but it is often over looked because of its benign behavior. These ants are found in wooded areas ranging from dense forests yards, parks, and camp grounds throughout Alabama. Colony sizes range from 200 to 1400 adults (Holldobler and Wilson 1990). This species has spines and teeth on the mesosoma and head and tubercles on the gaster. The frontal lobes are expanded Map 123. Trachymyrmex septentrionalis 186 laterally but do not project forward to the anterior margin of the clypeus. This species has an 11-segmented antenna. Trachymyrmex septentrionalis is found in New York south to Florida and west to Texas and Kansas (Creighton 1950). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Butler Co. Pine Apple, Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, Hale Co. Payne Lake, Houston Co. 2mi W of Dothan, Chattahoochee SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lowndes Co. Prairie Creek CG, Macon Co. Tuskegee, Mobile, Monroe Co. Hybart, Claiborne Lake CG, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Pickens Co. Cochrane, Tuscaloosa Co. Lake Lurleen SP, Wilcox Co. Roland Cooper CG SUBFAMILY PONERINAE - Hunter ants North American ants of the subfamily Ponerinae are typically ground dwelling and generally form small colonies that are found in leaf litter or under the bark of fallen trees. With the exception of the genus Odontomachus these are usually small (~4mm), rather cryptic ants that are not commonly collected. Queens closely resemble the workers in size and morphology. In tropical regions these ants are more diverse and can reach much larger body sizes. The infamous ?bullet ant? (Paraponera clavata (Fab.)) of Central and South America is a good example as it is 18-25mm long and can deliver the most painful and debilitating insect sting (Schmidt 1990). 187 All ants in this subfamily are thought to be solitary predators (Creighton 1950, H?lldobler and Wilson 1990) although some have been known to consume nectar (Deyrup et al. 2003). Ponerines are considered to be primitive ants due to their behavior and morphology. They are lone foragers that do not recruit other workers to food items. At nest founding the queen forages until the first workers emerge even though her wing muscles degenerate to provide some nutrients (Haskins and Enzmann 1938). Ponerine species are all monomorphic and queens and workers tend to be similar in size. This subfamily derives its name from the genus Ponera which comes from the Greek word ?Poneros? for bad, worthless, or useless. It is unknown what exactly this refers to. A suggested common name for this subfamily is ?the hunter ants? due to their predatory habits. All of the suggested common names listed for this subfamily and the etymology of the generic and specific names are reported in Deyrup et al. 2003. Several recent surveys of Ponerines have been conducted in countries around the world including Poland (Czechowski 1999), Spain (Tinaut and Martinez-Ibanez. 1998) and Korea (Kim et al. 1998) Ponerines have a single petiolar segment and a well-developed sting. Their integument is thick and generally sculptured in some fashion. This subfamily has a worldwide distribution. Ponerine ants are more diverse in the tropical regions of the world. Of the approximately 30 species found in the United States, most can be found in the southern states. Seven species have been recorded in Alabama. 188 Key to the Alabama genera of Ponerinae (modified from Deyrup et al. 2003) 1 Mandibles elongate with tips turned inward?????????..Odontomachus 1? Mandibles not as above, triangular??????????????????..2 2(1?) Mandible (in side view) with large pit at base (fig. 6); middle tibia with obvious spines in addition to hairs, spines and spurs ????????.Cryptopone gilva 2? Mandible not as above; middle tibia lacking standing hairs?????????3 3(2?) Ventral process of petiole angulate posteriorly with small round translucent ?port- hole? anteriorly (fig. 7) ..???????????????????...Ponera 3? Ventral process of petiole rounded posteriorly; lacking ?port-hole? (fig. 8) ????????????????????????????Hypoponera Fig. 7. Lateral view of Ponera sp. petiole Fig. 8. Lateral view of Hypoponera sp. petiole Fig. 6. Lateral view of Cryptopone gilva head 189 Genus Cryptopone Emery ? Pit-jawed ants There is only one species in this genus reported in the United States, Cryptopone gilva (Roger). This genus derives its name from the Greek word ?kryptos? meaning hidden or secret and from ?poneros?, as used at the subfamily and generic level. This possibly refers to the cryptic nature of this genus. Cryptopone ants are distinguished from other Ponerines by the oval pit on the mandible, close to where it is attached to the head capsule. The middle tibia is also covered in spines and hairs. Their coloration is orange-brown. There are a total of 18 species of Cryptopone found worldwide with 15 occurring in the Pacific Asian region, ranging from Japan to Australia to Melanesia. One species is found in Central America, another in South Africa and one in southern North America (Bolton 1995). Cryptopone gilva (Roger) This species is found in rotten logs in moist wooded areas and are predatory on arthropods (Haskins 1931, M.R. Smith 1934). Haskins? work contains much of the known life history information of this ant. The specific name uses ?gilva?, the Latin term for pale yellow, probably referring to the color of type specimens. However, the typical color is orange-brown. Map 324. Cryptopone gilva 190 The range of Cryptopone gilva extends from North Carolina (Carter 1962) to Florida (Deyrup 2003) to Texas (D.R. Smith 1979). This species was collected in the following locality in Alabama: Butler Co. 4mi. N of Greenville Genus Hypoponera Santschi - Mini-ponerine ants Little is known about these ants. Hypoponera species superficially resemble species from the genus Ponera, however they lack the ?port-hole? on their petiole and they are generally smaller in size. In mounting and preserving Hypoponera and Ponera species, care should be taken to make the lower surface of the petiole visible. This can be done by shifting the hind legs forward or by elevating the gaster. Workers have small eyes (only a few ommatidia) while reproductives have much larger eyes. Queens closely resemble workers morphologically but can be separated by the larger eye size and presence of wings or wing scars. This genus derives its name from ?hypo? the Greek term for under or below and ?ponera? referring to the subfamily. This probably refers to size, since these ants tend to be smaller then Ponera species. Hypoponera species are structurally similar to Ponera species except they lack the distinctive ?port-hole? on the ventral side of the petiole. Key to the genus Hypoponera (modified from Deyrup et al. 2003) 1 Petiole of worker in lateral view narrowing strongly and rounded dorsally (fig. 9); head and body punctate but shining in fluorescent light .?.Hypoponera opacior 191 1? Petiole of worker in lateral view not rounded (fig. 10), only weakly narrowed dorsally; head and body punctate-granulate not shining ...Hypoponera opaciceps Hypoponera opaciceps (Mayr) This ant forms small colonies that are found in damp forested areas under the bark of fallen trees, rocks or occasionally in urban or disturbed areas. In Puerto Rico colonies are typically found under cow dung (Smith 1937). Alate flights have been reported in northern Florida from September to November (Van Pelt 1958) and year round in southern Florida (Deyrup et al. 2003). This ant is considered invasive in many parts of the world and was probably introduced to Polynesia and other areas from South America via commerce (Wilson and Taylor 1967). Map 145. Hypoponera opaciceps Fig. 9. Lateral view of Hypoponera opacior petiole Fig. 10. Lateral view of Hypoponera opaciceps petiole 192 The specific name of this ant is from ?opacus?, the Latin term for shady or dark and ?-ceps? referring to head. This is in reference to the punctate-granulate head that is opaque. H. opaciceps has a petiole that is not rounded or narrowed dorsally. This species is found throughout Central America, South America, West Indies, Southeast Asia, Polynesia. In the USA its range extends from South Carolina south to Florida, west to Colorado (Smith 1979). This species was collected in the following localities in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Loxley (Murphree 1947), Barbour Co. Blue Springs State Park, Conecuh Co. Castleberry (Murphree 1947), Covington Co. Conecuh Trail, Crenshaw Co. Brantley (Murphree 1947), Houston Co. Chattahoochee State Park, Marengo Co. Chickasaw SP, Mobile Co. Fowl River (Murphree 1947), Montgomery Co. Montgomery (Murphree 1947), Russell Co. Seale (Murphree 1947), Shelby Co. Inverness (Murphree 1947) Hypoponera opacior (Forel) As the common name implies Hypoponera opacior is more commonly collected then other ponerines and Murphree described it as such in 1947. It is typically found under the bark of fallen trees, under stones or in leaf litter where it forms small colonies. This ant inhabits a variety of environments and elevations ranging from the flatlands of Mobile Map 126. Hypoponera opacior 193 to the highlands of the Appalachian mountain range. ?Opacus? (Latin for shady or dark) is used for the specific name of this ant and it is though that this is probably referring to the color of the specimens when compared to other Hypoponera species. Hypoponera opacior is identified by its petiole that is rounded and strongly narrowed dorsally, distinctly different than the more uniform petiole (side profile) of H. opaciceps. This ant is found in Central America, South America, and the West Indies, in the USA it is found in Oregon east to Virginia and south to Florida (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species was collected in the following localities in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Barbour Co. Blue Springs SP and Eufala, Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Blount Co. Oneonta, Butler Co. 4mi N of Greenville and Pineapple, Chambers Co. Lafayette, Chilton Co. 1mi N of Mapleville, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, Cleburne Co. Heflin, Conecuh Co. Evergreen, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Cullman Co. Cullman, Dallas Co. Selma, Elmore Co. Elmore (Murphree 1947), Escambia Co. 2mi W of Brewton, Franklin Co. Bear Creek, Henry Co. 1mi N of Abbeville, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, 1mi W of Dothan, Lauderdale Co. Florence, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Chewacla Creek, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Madison Co. Uni. of Ala. Huntsville, Marengo Co. Foscue Creek, Mobile Co. Saraland, Monroe Co. Claiborne Lake CG, Montgomery Co. Montgomery, Morgan Co. Hartselle, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Sumter Co. Coatopa, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Walker Co. Townley, Winston Co. Natural Bridge 194 Genus Odontomachus Latrielle - Snapping ants Odontomachus ants have an interesting prey capture method: they lock their elongate mandibles in an open position until they contact potential prey items with sensory hairs that trigger the jaws to snap shut on prey (Just and Gronenberg 1999, Paul 2001). This ?snapping trap jaw? is known as the fastest animal movement (Gronenberg et al. 1993). These ants can also inflict a painful sting but are rarely problematic for humans as they are rather timid ants. If their colony is disturbed or if the workers are handled they are more likely to attempt to snap there jaws against the source of the disturbance causing a surprising amount of damage to exposed skin. The name of this genus is based on the Greek term ?Odonto? for tooth and ?machetes? for warrior. This refers to the mandibles and aggressive behavior of disturbed workers. Odontomachus ants have elongate mandibles with the tips turned inward. They are also the largest ponerine ants present in Alabama with a body length approaching 1cm. These ants can be found worldwide, but are most common in tropical regions. Key to the genus Odontomachus (modified from Deyrup et al. 2003) 1 Hairs on first gastral tergite fine, space between hairs less than one-third as wide as length of hair; posterior face of petiole smooth ???Odontomachus brunneus 1? Hairs on first gastral tergite sparse with spaces between hairs equal to or greater than one-half of length of hair; posterior face of petiole with obvious transverse striae ???????..????????????..Odontomachus ruginodis 195 Odontomachus brunneus (Patton) - Southeastern snapping ant This is the most commonly collected Odontomachus species in Alabama. It is found in southern Alabama in the costal counties and along the border with Florida where it inhabits wooded areas and swamps. Colonies are usually located at the base of trees or in rotten stumps. This species name is derived from ?brun? (Anglo-saxon), which means brown, referring to the coloration of this species. The first gastral tergite of O. brunneus is densely covered in fine hairs and the posterior face of the petiole is smooth. This species is found in Florida, southern Georgia and Alabama and probably found along the Gulf coast into Texas. Reported distributions in Central and South America (Brown 1976) are uncertain at this point (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species was collected in the following localities in Alabama: Baldwin Co. S of Bay Minnette, Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Mobile Co. Mobile Odontomachus ruginodis M. R. Smith. -Rough petiole snapping ant Odontomachus ruginodis is an invasive ant that was introduced from the West Indies. It is generally found in disturbed areas and unlike O. brunneus it seems to prefer open sunny habitats. This ant is most likely a native of the West Indies that has been introduced to certain areas of the Gulf coast by human activity. Map 127. Odontomachus brunneus 196 These ants, like other Odontomachus species, use their mandibles for defense and can use the force of their striking mandibles to bounce aggressors away from their nest. This has been termed the ?bouncer defense? (Carlin and Gladstein1989). ?Ruga? (Latin) means wrinkle and ?nodus? means knot or swelling, this is referring to the striated or wrinkled appearance of the posterior face of the petiole. The first gastral tergite of this species has sparse hair coverage and the posterior face of the petiole has a wrinkled appearance due to transverse striae. O. ruginodis is found throughout the West Indies, in the USA it is found in southern Florida and southern Alabama, possibly localized introductions to other areas (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species was collected in the following locality in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bon SeCour NWR Genus Ponera Latrielle - Little port-hole ants Ants in the genus Ponera are distinguished by the translucent ?port-hole? on the ventral portion of their petiole. Colonies are composed of around 30 individuals (Taylor 1967) and form nests in rotten wood or leaf litter. As other ponerines, these ants are thought to be predators of other insects. The distinctive ?port hole? on the ventral surface of the petiole is used to distinguish this genus from other ponerines. Map 128. Odontomachus ruginodis 197 There are 31 species of Ponera worldwide, most of which occur in Australia and Southeast Asia. Two species are found in North America, both have been collected in Alabama. Key to the genus Ponera (Deyrup et al. 2003) 1 Length ~2 mm, adult workers reddish brown ?.???..????Ponera exotica 1? Length ~3 mm, adult workers blackish brown ???..??Ponera pennsylvanica Ponera exotica M. R. Smith This small ant was first reported in North Carolina (Smith 1962) and was thought to be an introduced species due to similarities with Indo-Australian Ponera species. It is currently considered a native of North America due to its widespread distribution and the lack of any specimens found outside of the southeastern United States. Ponera exotica can be distinguished from P. pennsylvanica by its smaller size and lighter (reddish brown) color. This species is found from North Carolina south to Florida, and west to Oklahoma and southwestern Texas (Mackay and Anderson 1991). This species was collected in following localities in Alabama: Bibb Co. Glades Preserve; Lawrence Co. Prairie Grove Glades; Sumter Co., Hwy 17 X Noxubee River Map 129. Ponera exotica 198 Ponera pennsylvanica Buckley Ponera pennsylvanica can be found in rotting wood, leaf litter or under stones. Wheeler found that under artificial conditions these ants are fairly gregarious and colonies can be combined with little conflict (Wheeler 1900). This species is dark brown and larger then the other species of Ponera found in Alabama, P. exotica. Ponera pennsylvanica is found in southern Nova Scotia south to northern Florida, and west to eastern Minnesota and northeastern Texas, with isolated collection data from North and South Dakota, Colorado and New Mexico (Taylor 1967). Specimens have also been collected from west central Mexico (Mackay and Anderson 1991) This species was collected in the following localities in Alabama: Bibb Co. Blue Girth Creek, Blount Co. Oneonta, Clay Co. Talladega NF: Chinnabee Trail, DeKalb Co. De Soto SP, Jackson Co. Paint Rock River, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Monroe Co. Hybart, Sumter Co. Livingston, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Map 130. Ponera pennsylvanicus 199 SUBFAMILY PROCERATIINAE This is a small subfamily composed of ants that are specialist predators of arthropod eggs, especially those of spiders. Both genera present in Alabama (Proceratium and Discothyrea) have unusually modified gasters in which the terminal segment is tucked under the gaster and directed forward, the function of this modification is unknown. This subfamily is found worldwide. Members of this subfamily look similar to Ponerines except they have horizontal frontal lobes that are reduced or absent (as seen in full face view) and reveal the antennal sockets. The promesonotal suture is always absent. Key to the Alabama genera of Proceratiinae (modified from Bolton 1994) 1 Mandible lacking teeth, overhung by projecting clypeus; apical funicular segment strongly bulbous ???????..????????...?.Discothyrea testacea 1? Mandible with 3 or more teeth, not overhung by the clypeus; apical funicular segment moderately enlarged but not strongly bulbous ????...?Proceratium Genus Discothyrea Roger ? Pygmy egg eating ants There is only one species of this genus found north of Mexico, Discothyrea testacea Roger. Colonies are usually very small and found in rotting wood, leaf litter or under objects (Deyrup et al. 2003). This genus can be found worldwide. Members of this genus lack mandibular teeth, and their mandibles are overhung by the projecting clypeus. Also the apical funicular segment of the antenna is strongly bulbous. 200 Discothyrea testacea Roger This species is found in leaf litter usually through soil extractions. It is assumed that this species feeds on spider eggs but this has yet to be confirmed. Discothyrea testacea is found in North Carolina south to Florida and west to Oklahoma (Deyrup et al. 2003). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Chilton Co. 3mi N of Mapleville, Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP., Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lee Co. Auburn Genus Proceratium Roger ? Egg eating ants Members of this genus form small colonies (10-15 workers) that nest in rotting wood or in leaf litter. These ants most likely prey on the eggs of spiders (Brown 1958). Proceratium species are found throughout the world. Ants in this genus have mandibles with 3 or more teeth, which are not overhung by the clypeus. The apical funicular segment is moderately enlarged but not strongly bulbous. Map 131. Discothyrea testacea 201 Key to the genus Proceratium (Brown 1979, Baroni Urbani and de Andrade 2003, MacGown 2005) 1 Petiole rectangular; anterior border of clypeus straight; palpi formula 2,2 ?????????????????????????????..???2 1? Petiole convex; anterior border of clypeus subconvex, rectangular, or triangular; palpi formula 3,2 or 4,3 ?..?????????????????????3 2(1) Larger size; TL >3.7mm and HW >0.75mm; frontal area broader than 1/3 of the maximum HW ??????????????????Proceratium croceum 2? Smaller size; TL <3.5mm and HW <0.75mm; frontal area at most slightly more than ? of the maximum HW ?????????.....??Proceratium silaceum 3(1?) Gaster short and opaque, with short dense hairs ????.Proceratium pergandei 3? Gaster longer and shiny, with longer sparser hairs ???.Proceratium chickasaw Proceratium chickasaw De Andrade This ant is similar to P. pergandei and it nests in rotting wood or under stones. In this species the petiole is convex and the anterior border of clypeus is subconvex, rectangular, or triangular. The palpi formula is 3,2 or 4,3 and the gaster is long and shiny, with long sparser hairs (when compared to P. pergandei). Map 132. Proceratium chickasaw 202 Proceratium chickasaw is found in the southeastern US, from Georgia west to Texas. In Alabama this species was collected in the following counties: Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Mobile Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003), Lauderdale Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa Proceratium croceum (Roger) This ant is found in rotten logs and stumps and colonies have up to 30 workers. The petiole of this species is rectangular and the anterior border of clypeus is straight. The palpi formula is 2,2. These ants are larger size with TL >3.7mm and HW >0.75mm, while the frontal area is broader than 1/3 of the maximum HW. Proceratium croceum is found in Virginia south to Florida and west to Texas and Illinois (Deyrup et al. 2003) This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette; DeKalb Co. DeSoto SP, Mobile Co.(Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003), Montgomery Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003), Tuscaloosa Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003) Map 133. Proceratium croceum 203 Proceratium pergandei (Emery) This ant nests under stones or in rotten logs. In this species the petiole is convex and the anterior border of clypeus is subconvex, rectangular, or triangular. The palpi formula is 3,2 or 4,3 and the gaster short and opaque, with short dense hairs (when compared to P. chickasaw). Proceratium pergandei is found in Massachusetts south to Florida and west to Iowa, Arkansas and Louisiana (D.R. Smith 1979). This species was collected in Alabama in the following counties: Lawrence Co. Joe Wheeler SP; Mobile Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003) Proceratium silaceum Roger Nests of this ant is found in rotten wood or under stones. P. silaceum has been observed storing and eating spider eggs (Brown 1958). This is a smaller species with a TL <3.5mm and HW <0.75mm. The frontal area is at most slightly more than ? of the maximum HW. Proceratium silaceum is found in southern Ontario, south to Florida, west to Illinois and Oklahoma (D.R.Smith 1979). Map 134. Proceratium pergandei 204 This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003), Bibb Co. Glades Preserve, Tuscaloosa Co. Tuscaloosa, Mobile Co. (Baroni Urbani and De Andrade 2003) SUBFAMILY PSEUDOMYRMECINAE Pseudomyrmecines are distinctively elongate ants with large well-developed eyes. They are closely associated with plants, and typically nest in the stems and twigs of dead plants. These ants can be found worldwide and are particularly diverse in tropical and subtropical areas. Tropical members of this subfamily in South America and Africa have close mutualistic relationships with many plants. In these cases the host plant offers a hollow area (domatia) for the ants to nest in. In some instances the ants will tend honeydew- producing insects for food or the plant itself will provide food bodies or extra-floral nectar. The ants in return defend their host plant from herbivores and in some cases will attack other plants that compete with their host. These ants are elongate with large eyes that are suboval or reniform and consisting of several hundred fine ommatidia. Ocelli are present even in workers. Map 135. Proceratium silaceum 205 Genus Pseudomyrmex Lund This is the only genus of the subfamily Pseudomyrmecinae found in Alabama. These ants are common especially in dried twigs and stems. Key to the genus Pseudomyrmex (modified from Ward 1985) 1 Head and gaster usually dark brown; small species (HW < 0.82), with deep, wide metanotal groove; dorsal face of propodeum generally shorter than declivitous face ????????..????????????.?Pseudomyrmex ejectus 1? Head and gaster golden yellow to orange-brown (fourth abdominal tergite may have darker fuscous patches); generally larger in size (HW 0.68-0.96), metanotal groove usually relatively shallow; if metanotal groove deep, then dorsal face of propodeum notably longer than declivitous face ?????????????2 2(1?) Larger species (HW 0.87-0.96); frontal carinae relatively well-separated; eyes relatively short (REL 0.43-0.48); median portion of anterior clypeal margin weakly angulate, appearing tridentate ???.???.?.Pseudomyrmex seminole 2 Smaller species (HW 0.68-0.89); frontal carinae more closely contiguous; eyes averaging a little longer (REL 0.45-0.54); median portion of anterior clypeal margin usually straight ??????...????..??..Pseudomyrmex pallidus 206 Pseudomyrmex ejectus (F. Smith) This small species of Pseudomyrmex is only found on the coastal plain in Alabama. This ant is usually dark brown and small (HW < 0.82), with a deep, wide metanotal groove. Also the dorsal face of propodeum is generally shorter than declivitous face. Pseudomyrmex ejectus is found in the southeastern United States, south to Costa Rica (Ward 1985). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Bay Minette, Geneva Co. (Murphree 1947) Houston Co. Chattahoochee SP, Lee Co. Auburn, Macon Co. Tuskegee NF, Mobile Co. (Ward 1985), Monroe Co. (Ward 1985) Pseudomyrmex pallidus (F. Smith) This is the most common Pseudomyrmex species in Alabama, it is generally found in mesic areas or near bodies of water. This ant looks similar to P. seminole but is smaller (HW 0.68- Map 136. Pseudomyrmex ejectus Map 137. Pseudomyrmex pallidus 207 0.89) and the frontal carinae are more closely contiguous and the eyes are a little longer (REL 0.45-0.54). Also the median portion of anterior clypeal margin is usually straight. Pseudomyrmex pallidus is found throughout the southern United States, south to Costa Rica (Ward 1985). This species was collected in the following counties in Alabama: Baldwin Co. Fort Morgan, Blount Co. Oneonta, Clarke Co. Grove Hill, Coosa Co. Kellyton, Dale Co. Daleville, Dallas Co. 2mi W of Selma, Lee Co. Auburn, Marengo Co. Demopolis, Mobile Co. (Ward 1985), Montgomery Co. 1mi E of Montgomery, Shelby Co. Childersburg, Tallapoosa Co. Lake Martin Dam, Washington Co. Chatom, Wilcox Co. Dry Fork Pseudomyrmex seminole Ward This ant is uncommon in Alabama and seems to prefer a much more tropical environment. This species is larger (HW 0.87- 0.96) than P. pallidus and has frontal carinae that are relatively well separated. The eyes are relatively short (REL 0.43-0.48) and the median portion of anterior clypeal margin is weakly angulate, appearing tridentate. Pseudomyrmex seminole is found sporadically in the Gulf States and is most Map 138. Pseudomyrmex seminole 208 common in southern Florida (Deyrup 2003), south to Mexico (Ward 1985). In Alabama this species was only collected in Baldwin Co. Bay Minette. 209 RESULTS Prior to this study only 95 species of ants were recorded in Alabama. This work has added 59 new state records, bringing the total number of known ant species in Alabama to 154. These records have also been consolidated with identification keys as well as notes on natural history and distribution. Three species previously reported in Alabama are left out of this list Forelius analis Andre, Camponotus pylartes fraxinicola M.R. Smith and Dorymyrmex pyramicus Roger due to questions of the validity of these species (refer the descriptions of the above genera for more information). Also not included in the species total is the hybrid Solenopsis invicta x richteri. 210 DISCUSSION This survey fills in many of the gaps in the knowledge of the ant fauna of Alabama. The current total of 154 species is more in line with the numbers found in surrounding states including Georgia with 144 (Ipser et al. 2004), Mississippi with 163 (MacGown 2005), and Florida with 218 (Deyrup 2003). Species that were reported in previous studies but were not collected in this study or in the last 15 years include: Solenopsis geminata, Solenopsis xyloni, Paratrechina longicornis (exotic), Neivamyrmex opacithorax, Neivamyrmex carolinensis, Pyramica margaritae (exotic), Tetramorium lanuginosum (exotic), Temnothorax bradleyi, Temnothorax smithi, Formica archboldi, and Camponotus obliquus. Several of these species may be present but have been overlooked or are rare. Some, such as Solenopsis xyloni, S. geminata and P. longicornis are undoubtedly less common than they were in L.C. Murphree?s day and may even have been even extirpated, presumably due to the introduction of the red and black imported fire ants. New exotic species include Odontomachus ruginodis, Tetramorium caespitum, Pheidole obscurithorax and P. moerens. Odontomachus ruginodis is probably at the northern extant of its range, however the two Pheidole species appear to be well established and slowly spreading northward. There is no evidence that they will 211 displace other invasives or natives, and in fact P. obscurithorax appears to coexist with S. invicta. Tetramorium caespitum is most likely an introduced species that has been present in the US since the period of British colonization. The one record from north Alabama is probably the extent of its range and it is likely to be rare in the state. Other more established invasive species include Cyphomyrmex rimosus and Brachymyrmex musculus. Since both of these species are rather cryptic and benign their introductions have largely been undocumented. Undoubtedly the most common ant in Alabama remains Solenopsis invicta. This ant or the hybrid S. invicta x richteri was found in every county and every environment. The only places that S. invicta did not seem to dominate were the Appalachian mountains and isolated areas that were infested with the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile. 212 REFERENCES Allen, C.R. R.S. Lutz, and S. Demarais. 1995. Red imported fire ant impacts on northern bobwhite populations. Eco. Applications 5(3): 632-638. Alloway, T.M. 1979. Raiding behavior of two species of slave-making ants, Harpagoxenus americanus (Emery) and Leptothorax duloticus Wesson (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Anim. Behav 27: 202-210. Allred, D.M. 1982. Ants of Utah. Great Basin Nat. 42: 415-511. Baroni-Urbani, C. and M.L. de Andrade. 2003. The ant genus Proceratium in the extant and fossil record (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali, Monografie 36: 1-480. Banks, W.A., C.T. Adams, C.S. Lofgren and D.P. Wojcik. 1990. Imported fire ant infestation of soybean fields in the southern United States. Florida Entomol. 73: 503- 504. Bolton, B. 1994. Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 222pp. Bolton, B. 1995. A new general catalog of ants of the world. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 504pp. Bolton, B. 2000. The Ant Tribe Dacetini. Mem. Amer. Entomol. Inst.65: 1-1028. Bolton, B. 2003. Synopsis and classification of Formicidae. Mem. Amer. Entomol. Inst. 71: 1-370. 213 Brown, W.L. 1953. Revisionary studies in the ant tribe Dacetini. Amer. Midl. Nat. 50: 1? 137 Brown, W.L., Jr. 1957.Is the ant genus Tetramorium native in North America? Breviora 72:1-8 Brown, W.L., Jr. 1958. Predation of arthropod eggs by the genera Proceratium and Discothyrea. Psyche 64:115. Brown, W.L., Jr. 1976. Contributions toward a reclassification of the Formicidae. Part VI. Ponerinae, tribe Ponerini, subtribe Odontomachiti. Section A. Introduction, subtribal characters. Genus Odontomachus. Stud. Entomol. 19:67-171. Brown, W.L., Jr. 1979. A remarkable new species of Proceratium, with dietary and other notes on the genus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 86 : 337-346. Buren, W.F. 1944. A list of Iowa ants. Iowa State Coll. J. Sci. 18: 277-312. Buren, W. F. 1968. A review of the species of Crematogaster, sensu stricto, in North America (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Part II. Descriptions of new species. J of Georgia Entomol. Soc. 3: 91-121. Buren, W. F., G. E. Allen, W. H. Whitcomb, F. E. Lennartz, and R. N. Williams. 1974. Zoogeography of the imported fire ants. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 82: 113-124. Carlin, N.F., and D.S. Gladstein. 1989. The ?bouncer? defense of Odontomachus ruginodis and other Odontomachine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 96: 1- 19. Carroll, J.F, J.W. Kimbrough, and W.Hwhitcomb. 1981. Mycophagy by Aphaenogaster spp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Washington 83: 326-331. 214 Carter, W.G. 1962. Ant distribution in North Carolina. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 78:150-204. Chadee, D.D. and A. LeMaitre. 1990. Ants: potential vectors of hospital infections in Trinidad. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg.: 84, pp 297 Cockfield, S.D. and D.A. Potter. 1984.Predatory insects and spiders from suburban lawns in Lexington, Kentucky. Great Lakes Entomol. 17: 179-184 Creighton, W. S. 1930. The New World species of the genus Solenopsis (Hymenop. Formicidae). Proc. Amer. Acad. of Arts and Sciences 66: 39-151. Creighton, W.S. 1950. The ants of North America. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Harvard 104: 1-585. Czechowski, W. 1999. New data on the occurrence of ants of the subfamily Ponerinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Poland. Frag. Faun. Warsaw 42:7-10. Deyrup, M. 1998. Composition of the ant fauna of three Bahamian islands found in San Salvador, Bahamas, pp23-31 found in Wilson T.K. (ed.), Bahamian Field Station Proceedings of the 7 th symposium on the natural history of the Bahamas. Deyrup, M. 2003. An updated list of Florida ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Florida Entomol. 86: 43-48. Deyrup, M. and S.Cover. 2004. A new species of Odontomachus ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts and Sciences 66:39-151 Deyrup, M., L. Davis, and S. Cover. 2003. The Ponerine ants (Formicidae: Ponerinae) of the United States. Pamphlet from Ant Course 2003, South West Research Station, AZ Deyrup, M., S.Trager and N.Carlin. 1985. The genus Odontomachus in the southeastern United States (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomol. News 96: 188-195 215 Dubois, M. B. 1986. A revision of the native New World species of the ant genus Monomorium (minimum group) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Univ.Kansas Sci. Bull. 53: 65-119. Dubois, M.B. 1994.Checklist of Kansas ants. Kansas School Nat. 40 (2): 3-16 Dubois, M.B. and L.R. Davis. 1998. Stenamma foveolocephalum (= S. carolinense) rediscovered (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae). Sociobiology 32: 125-138. Dubois, M.B. and W.E. LaBerge. 1988. Annotated list of ants in Illinois. pp. 133-157 found in Trager, J.C. (ed.), Advances in myrmecology. Brill Pub. Company. New York, NY Fleetwood, S.C., P.D. Teel, and G. Thompson. 1984. The impact of imported fire ants on lone star tick mortality in open and canopied pasture habitats of east central Texas. Southwest Entomol. 9:158-163 Forbes, S.A. 1908. Habits and behavior of the cornfield ant, Lasius niger americanus. Univ. Ill. Agro. Exp. Stat. Bull. 131: 29-45 Forel, A. 1928. The social world of ants in relation with that of man, 2 volumes. Translated by C.K. Ogden. Putnam's Sons, UK, London. Foster, E. 1908. The introduction of Iridomyrmex humilis (Mayr) into New Orleans. J. Econ. Entomol. 1: 289-293 Glancey, B. M., D. P. Wojcik, C. H. Craig, and J. A. Mitchell. 1976. Ants of Mobile county, Al., as monitored by bait transects. J. Georgia Ent. Soc 11(3): 191-197 Gronenberg, W., J. Tautz, and B. Holldolber. 1993. Fast trap jaws and giant neurons in the ant Odontomachus. Science 262:561-563 216 Gruner, D.S., R.A. Heu, and M.E. Chun. 2003. Two ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) new to the Hawaiian Islands. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers 74: 1-6 Hare, J.F. and T.M. Alloway. 2001.Prudent Protomognathus and despotic Leptothorax duloticus, differential costs of ant slavery. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 98: 12093-12096 Haskins, C.P. 1931 Notes on the biology and social life of Euponera gilva Roger var. harnedi MR Smith. J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc. 38:121-126. Haskins, C.P. and E.V. Enzmann. 1938. Studies of certain sociological and physiological features in the Formicidae. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 37: 97-162 Hedges, S.A. 1997. Ants.pp.502-589 found in Moreland, D.(ed.), Handbook of pest control: the behavior, life history, and control of household pests.8 th Edition. Mallis Handbook & Tech. Training Company, Cleveland, OH Holldobler, B. and E.O. Wilson. 1990. The ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 732pp. Hunt, J.H. and R.R. Snelling. 1975. A checklist of the ants of Arizona. J. Arizona Acad. Sci. 10: 20-23 Ipser, R.M., M.A. Brinkman, W.A. Gardner, and H.B. Peeler. 2004. A survey of ground- dwelling ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Georgia. Florida Entomol. 87:253-260 Johnson, C. 1988a. Colony structure and behavioral observations in Pheidole morrisi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), pp. 271-383 found in Trager, J.C. Advances in myrmecology. Brill Pub. Company. New York, NY Johnson, C. 1988b. Species identification in the eastern Crematogaster. J. Entomol. Sci. 23: 314-322. 217 Johnston, A.B. and E.O.Wilson.1985. Correlates of variation in the major/minor ratio of the ant, Pheidole dentata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer.78: 8-11 Just, S. and W. Gronenberg. 1999. The control of mandible movements in the ant Odontomachus. J. Insect Physiol. 45: 231-240 Kaplan, I., and M.D. Eubanks. 2002. Disruption of cotton aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae)- natural enemy dynamics by red imported fire ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Envir. Entomol. 31:1175-1183 Kim, B.J., J.H. Kim, and K.G. Kim, 1998. Systematic study of Ponerinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Korea. Korean J. Entomol. 28: 145-154 Klotz, J.H. 1984. Diel differences in foraging in two ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 57: 111-118 Longino, J.T. 2005. The Ants of Costa Rica (website accessed: April 2005) evergreen.edu/ants/AntsofCostaRica.html MacGown, J. 2005. Mississippi Entomological Museum (website accessed: April 2005) msstate.edu/org/mississippientmuseum/Researchtaxapages/Formicidaehome.html MacKay, W. P. 1993. A review of the New World ants of the genus Dolichoderus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 22: 1-148. MacKay, W.P. 2000. A review of the New World ants of the subgenus Myrafant, (Genus Leptothorax)(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 36: 165-444 MacKay, W.P. and R.S. Anderson. 1991. New Distribution records for the ant genus Ponera (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in North America. J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc 99: 696- 699 218 MacKay, W.P. and E. MacKay. 2002. The ants of New Mexico (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Edwin Mellen Press. Lewiston, NY, USA. 398 pp. MacKay, W.P. and E. MacKay. 2005. The ants of North America.(website accessed: April 2005) www.utep.edu/leb/antgenera.htm Martinez, M.J. 1997. The first record of the ant Pheidole moerens Wheeler from western United States (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pan. Pac. Entomol. 73: 1-46 Masuko, K. 1985. Studies on the predatory biology of oriental dacetine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insect. Soc 31: 429-451 Masuko, K. 1995. Specialized predation on oribatid mites by two species of the ant genus Myrmecina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 101: 159-173 Moser, J.C. and M.S. Blum. 1960. The Formicidae of Louisiana. Insect Conditions La. 3: 48-50 Mueller, U.G., S.A. Rehner, and T.R. Schultz. 1998.The evolution of agriculture in ants. Science 281: 2034-2038 Murphree, L. C. 1947. Alabama ants, description, distribution, and biology, with notes on the control of the most important household species. M. S. Thesis, Mississippi State College, State College. 144 pp. Naves, M.A. 1985. A Monograph of the genus Pheidole in Florida, USA (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insecta Mundi 1:53-90 Nuhn, T.P. 1977. A survey of the ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) on the campus of North Carolina State University at Raleigh. M.S. thesis, North Caroline State University. 47pp. 219 Pass, B.C. 1960. Bionomics of the imported fire ant, Solenopsis saevissima richteri Forel. M.S. Thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 65pp. Paul, J. 2001. Mandible movements in ants. Comp. Biochem. Physio. Part A 131: 7-20. Powell, C.E. 1937. The ants of North Carolina and their guests. M.S. Thesis, Duke University. 54pp. Rees D.M. and A.W. Grundmann. 1940. A preliminary list of the ants of Utah. Bull.Univ. Utah Biol. Serv. 31: 3-12 Rojas-Fernandez, P. and C. Fragosa. 1994. The ant fauna (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Mapimi Biosphere Reserve, Durango, Mexico. Sociobiology 24: 47-75 Ruhren, S. and M.R. Dudash. 1996. Consequences of the timing of seed release of Erythronium americanum (Liliaceae), a deciduous forest myrmecochore. Amer. J. Bot. 83: 633-640 Schmidt, J.O. 1990. Hymenopteran Venoms: Striving Toward the Ultimate Defense Against Vertebrates, pp. 387-419 found in Evans, D.L., and J.O. Schmidt (eds.), Insect Defenses, Adaptive Mechanisms and Strategies of Prey and Predators . State Univ. of New York Press, Albany, NY. Smith, D.R. 1979. Formicoidea, pp.1323-1467 found in Krombein, K.V., P.D. Hurd, D.R. Smith, and D.R. Burks (eds.), Catalog of Hymenoptera north of Mexico. 2. Apocrita (Aculeata). Smithsonian Press, Washington D.C. Smith, M.R. 1928. An additional annotated list of the ants of Mississippi. with a description of a new species of Aphaenogaster (Hymenoptera.: Formicidae). Entomol. News 39: 246-279 220 Smith, M. R. 1932. An additional annotated list of the ants of Mississippi (Hym.: Formicidae). Entomol. News 42: 157-160. Smith, M.R. 1934. Ponerine ants of the genus Euponera in the United States. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 27: 557-564. Smith, M.R. 1936. Distribution of the Argentine ant in the United States and suggestions for its control or eradication. U. S. Dep. Agric. Circular #387, 39 pp. Smith, M.R. 1937. The ants of Puerto Rico. J. Agr. Univ. Puerto Rico 20: 819-875. Smith, M. R. 1942. The Legionary ants of the United States belonging to Eciton subgenus Neivamyrmex Borgmeier. Amer. Midl.Nat. 27: 537-590. Smith, M. R. 1957. Revision of the genus Stenamma Westwood in America north of Mexico (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Amer. Midl. Nat. 57: 133-174. Smith, M.R. 1962. A new species of exotic Ponera from North Carolina. Acta Hymenopterologica 1:377-382 Snelling, R.R. 1988. Taxonomic notes on Nearctic species of Camponotus, subgenus Myrmentoma (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), pp. 55-78 found in Trager, J. (ed.), Advances in myrmecology. Brill Pub. Company. New York, NY Snelling, R.R. 1995. Systematics of Nearctic ants of the genus Dorymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Contributions in Sci. 454: 1-14 Storz S.R. and W.R. Tschinkel. 2004. Distribution, spread, and ecological associations of the introduced ant Pheidole obscurithorax in the southeastern United States. J. Insect Sci. 4:12-23. Talbot, M 1943. Response of the ant Prenolepis imparis to temperature and humidity changes. Ecology 24:345-352 221 Talbot, M. 1954. Populations of the ant Aphaenogaster (Attomyrma) treatae Forel on abandoned fields on the Edwin S. George Reserve. Contrib. from the Laboratory of Vert. Biology of the Uni. of Michigan 69: 1-9 Talbot, M. 1957. Populations of ants in a Missouri woodland. Insect. Soc. 4:375-384. Taylor, R.W. 1967. A monographic revision of the ant genus Ponera Latrielle (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pac. Insects Monographs 13: 1-112 Thompson, C.R. 1989.The thief ants, Solenopsis molesta group, of Florida (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Florida Entomol. 72(2): 268-283. Tinaut, A. and D. Martinez-Ibanez. 1998. Nuevos datos para la fauna Iberica de hormigas. I Ponerinae y Formicinae (Hym. Formicidae). Bol. Asoc. Esp. Entomol 22: 233-236 Trager, J. C. 1984. A revision of the genus Paratrechina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the continental United States. Sociobiology 9: 49-162. Trager, J. C. 1988. A revision of the Conomyrma (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from the southeastern United States, especially Florida, with keys to the species. Florida Entomol. 71: 11-29. Trager, J. C. 1991. A revision of the fire ants, Solenopsis geminata group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae). J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc.99: 142-198 Trager, J.C. 1997. A preliminary list of ants of the St. Louis region. American Museum of Natural History (website accessed May 2004) research.amnh.org/entomology/social_insects/invtragerlab.html 222 Trager, J.C., J.A. MacGown, and M.D. Trager. 2005. Revision of the Nearctic endemic Formica pallidefulva group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae). Mem. Amer. Entomol. Inst. In Press. Tschinkel, W.R. 1987. Seasonal life history and nest architecture of a winter-active ant, Prenolepis imparis. Insect. Soc. 34: 143-164. Tschinkel, W.R. 1999. Sociometry and sociogenisis of colony-level attributes of the Florida harvester ant (Hymenopter: Formicidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer 92: 80-89 Tschinkel, W.R. and C.A. Hess. 1999. Arboreal ant community of a pine forest in northern Florida. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 92: 63-70 Umphrey, G.J. 1996. Morphometric discrimination among sibling species in the fulva- rudis-texana complex in the ant genus Aphaenogaster (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Canadian J. Zool. 74: 528-559 Van Pelt, A.F. Jr. 1958. The ecology of the ants of Welaka Reserve, Florida (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Part II. Annotated list. Amer. Midl. Nat. 59: 1-57. Van Pelt, A.F. Jr. and J.B. Gentry. 1985. The ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Savannah River Plant, South Carolina. Report SRO-NERP-14, Dept. Energy, Savannah River Eco. Lab. Aiken, SC. 56pp. Vinson S.B. and A.A. Sorenson. 1986. Imported Fire Ants: Life History and Impact. The Texas Department of Agriculture, Austin, TX. 28pp. Ward, P.S. 1985. The Nearctic species of the genus Pseudomyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Quaestiones Entomologicae 21:209-246. 223 Ward, P.S. 1987. Distribution of the introduced Argentine ant (Iridomyrmex humilis) in natural habitats of the lower Sacramento Valley and its effects on the indigenous ant fauna. Hilgardia 55(2): 1-16. Watkins, J.F. 1985. The identification and distribution of the army ants of the United States of American (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Ecitoninae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 58(3): 479-502. Wheeler, G.C., and J.N. Wheeler. 1978. Brachymyrmex musculus, a new ant in the United States. Entomol. News 7: 189-190. Wheeler, G.C. and J.N. Wheeler. 1985. A checklist of Texas ants. Prairie Nat. 17: 49-64. Wheeler, G.C. and J.N. Wheeler. 1986. The ants of Nevada. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA. 138pp. Wheeler, G.C. and J.N. Wheeler. 1987. A checklist of the ants of South Dakota. Prairie Nat. 19: 199-208 Wheeler, G.C. and J.N. Wheeler. 1988. A checklist of the ants of Wyoming (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insecta Mundi 2: 231-239 Wheeler, G.C., J.N. Wheeler, and P.B. Kannowski.1994.Checklist of the ants of Michigan (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Great Lakes Entomol. 26: 297-310 Wheeler, W.M. 1900. The habits of Ponera and Stigmatomma. Biol. Bull. 2:43-69 Wheeler, W.M. 1918. Ants collected in Georgia by Dr. J.C. Bradley and Mr. W.T. Davis. Psyche: 112-117 Wilson, E. O. 1950. A new Leptothorax from Alabama (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 57: 128-130. 224 Wilson, E.O. 1975. Enemy specification the alarm recruitment system of an ant. Science 190: 798-800 Wilson, E.O. 1976a. Organization of colony defense in the ant Pheidole dentata Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1:63-81 Wilson, E.O. 1976b. Which are the most prevalent ant genera? Stud. Entomol. 19: 187- 200 Wilson, E.O. 2003. Pheidole in the New World. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 794pp. Wilson, E.O., and R.W. Taylor. 1967. The ants of Polynesia. Pac. Insects Monog. 14: 1- 109 Yensen, N.P., W.H. Clark, and A. Francoeur. 1977. A checklist of Idaho ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pan Pac. Entomol. 53: 181-187