Advertisement

Organisms Diversity & Evolution

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 447–542 | Cite as

Molecular and morphological recognition of species boundaries in the neglected ant genus Brachymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): toward a taxonomic revision

  • Claudia M. Ortiz-SepulvedaEmail author
  • Bert Van Bocxlaer
  • Andrés D. Meneses
  • Fernando Fernández
Original Article

Abstract

Brachymyrmex is a neglected genus of Formicinae because of its small body size, soft mesosoma, and superficially monotonous external morphology. These features have complicated the documentation of morphological variation, resulting in poorly defined and incompletely described species. Consequently, the taxonomy of the genus is complex and problematic, which has impeded research and conservation efforts. Here, we integrate molecular and morphological data to recognize species boundaries in Brachymyrmex and to guide its long-overdue revision. Specifically, we (1) redefine the limits of all described species, subspecies, and varieties based on intra- and interspecific morphological variation in workers; (2) document this variation quantitatively by constructing morphospace occupation and statistically analyzing measurements; (3) synthesize our findings on diagnostic traits in a dichotomous, illustrated identification key; and (4) examine the significance of our morphological identification system with molecular evidence from four gene fragments (EF1aEF1, EF1aEF2, WG, and COI). We recognize 40 species, of which four are new to science: Brachymyrmex bahamensis, Brachymyrmex bicolor, Brachymyrmex iridescens, and Brachymyrmex sosai. Furthermore, Brachymyrmex attenuatus and Brachymyrmex bonariensis are raised to species, and we propose 25 new synonyms. Morphometrics indicated that even poorly distinguishable species pairs show statistically significant differences in some traits, and that taxonomically problematic cases relate to taxa that demonstrate large intraspecific trait variance. Our molecular analysis supports the monophyly of the genus based on increased taxon sampling, and of the 19 species that were included 18 were retrieved as monophyletic. The single case of incongruence was also flagged in morphological analyses and requires extended geographic sampling before it can be resolved. In conclusion, the molecular work corroborates the morphologically recognized species boundaries. We also document the presence of worker dimorphism and putative worker-queen intercastes in several Brachymyrmex species, which indicates that the genus may present a promising study system to understand caste evolution in ants.

Keywords

Brachymyrmex Formicinae Phylogeny Taxonomy Neotropics Morphometrics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Alex Wild (ALWC), Brian Fisher (CASC), Jacques Delabie (CPDC), Claudia Medina (IAvH), John Longino (JTLC), Carlos R. F. Brandão, Rodrigo Feitosa, Flávia Esteves (MZSP), Stefan Cover and Gary Alpert (MCZC), Heraldo Vasconcelos, Renata Pacheco, Gabriela Camacho (UFUC), Maria Tavano and Roberto Poggi (MCSN), Daniel Burckhardt (NHMB), Dominique Zimmermann (NHMW), Frank Koch (MfNB), Fabiana Cuezzo (INSUE), Priscila Hanisch (MACN), Phil Ward (PSWC), Maurice Leponce and Thibaut Delsinne (RBINS), and William and Emma MacKay (WEMC) for providing acces to collections and/or for the loan of critical material. David Donoso and John Longino kindly provided sequencing data. Ted Schultz, Jeffrey Sosa-Calvo, Eugenia Okonski (USNM), and Carlos Sarmiento (ICN) provided continuous support in the development of this paper. John Lattke, Fabiana Cuezzo, Lívia Pires do Prado, and an anonymous referee tested the identification key and providing invaluable comments and suggestions. Comments of John Longino, an anonymous referee, and the editors have strongly improved this manuscript.

Funding information

We are grateful for funding from the Division de Investigación de Bogotá (DIB), Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia and the Colciencias program “Proyectos de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica” of 2010 (110152128319 CT 413–2011) (to CMOS and FF), for an Ernst Mayr Grant in 2011 (MCZ Harvard University), a grant from the Colciencias program “Jóvenes Investigadores e Innovadores—Virginia Gutiérrez de Pineda” in 2010–2011, a grant of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History installed by Cristian Samper (to CMOS), the Institut de Recherches Pluridisciplinaires en Sciences de l’Environnement (IREPSE; to BVB) and ANR-JCJC-EVOLINK of the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (to BVB); this work is a contribution to the CPER research project CLIMIBIO. The authors thank the French Ministère de l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, the Hauts de France Region and the European Funds for Regional Economical Development for their financial support to this project (to CMOS and BVB).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

13127_2019_406_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (3.8 mb)
ESM 1 (PDF 3.80 mb)

References

  1. Agosti, D. (1991). Revision of the oriental ant genus Cladomyrma, with an outline of the higher classification of the Formicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Systematic Entomology, 16, 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alayo, D. P. (1974). Introducción al estudio de los Himenopteros de Cuba. Superfamilia Formicoidea. Academia de Ciencias de Cuba, 53, 1–58.Google Scholar
  3. Amante, C., & Eakins, B. W. (2009). ETOPO1 1 arc-minute global relief model: procedures, data sources and analysis. In NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-24.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 57, 289–230.Google Scholar
  5. Blaimer, B. B., Brady, S. G., Schultz, T. R., Lloyd, M. W., & Ward, P. S. (2015). Phylogenomic methods outperform traditional multi-locus approaches in resolving deep evolutionary history: a case study of formicine ants. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 15, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-015-0552-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolton, B. (1994). Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press Cambridge.Google Scholar
  7. Bolton, B. (1995). A new general catalogue of the ants of the world. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bolton, B. (2003). Synopsis and classification of Formicidae. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, 71, 1–370.Google Scholar
  9. Bolton, B. (2007). How to conduct large-scale taxonomic revisions in Formicidae. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, 80, 52–71.Google Scholar
  10. Bolton, B. (2018). An online catalog of ants of the world. http://www.antcat.org/. Accessed Dec 15 2016.
  11. Brady, S. G., Schultz, T. R., Fisher, B. L., & Ward, P. S. (2006). Evaluating alternative hypotheses for the early evolution and diversification of ants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 18172–18177.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Brandão, C. R. F. (1991). Adendos ao catálogo abreviado das formigas da região Neotropical (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Revista Brasileira de Entomologia, 35, 319–412.Google Scholar
  13. Brownrigg, R. (2015). Mapdata: extra map databases (original S code by Becker R. A. and Wilks A. R). R package, version 2 (pp. 2–5).Google Scholar
  14. Brownrigg, R., Minka, T. P., & Deckmyn, A. (2015) Maps: draw geographical maps (original S code by Becker R. A. and Wilks A. R.). R package, Version 3.0.1.Google Scholar
  15. Clarke, K. R. (1993). Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18, 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cole, A. C. J. (1953). Studies of New Mexico ants. V. The genus Pheidole with synonymy (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, 28, 297–299.Google Scholar
  17. Creighton, W. S. (1950). The ants of North America. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 104, 1–585.Google Scholar
  18. Da Silva, R., Peloso, P. L. V., Sturaro, M. J., Veneza, I., Sampaio, I., Schneider, H., et al. (2018). Comparative analyses of species delimitation methods with molecular data in snappers (Perciformes: Lutjaninae). Mitochondrial DNA Part A, 29, 1108–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Zolessi, L. C., Abenante, Y. P., & González, L. A. (1978). Descripción y observaciones bioetológicas sobre una nueva especie de Brachymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Revista de Biología del Uruguay, 4, 21–44.Google Scholar
  20. Dejean, A., Fisher, B. L., Corbara, B., Rarevohitra, R., Randrianaivo, R., Rajemison, B., & Leponce, M. (2010). Spatial distribution of dominant arboreal ants in a Malagasy coastal rainforest: Gaps and presence of an invasive species. PLoS One, 5(2), e9319.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0009319.
  21. Dinno, A. (2017). Dunn test: Dunn’s test of multiple comparisons using rank sums. R package version 1.3.4.Google Scholar
  22. Emery, C. (1893). Beiträge zur Kenntniss der nordamerikanischen Ameisenfauna. Zoologische Jahrbücher. Abteilung für Systematik. Geographie und Biologie der Tiere, 7, 633–682.Google Scholar
  23. Emery, C. (1895). Note sur les fourmis du Chili avec descriptions de deux espèces nouvelles. Actes de la Société Scientifique du Chili, 4, 213–216.Google Scholar
  24. Emery, C. (1906). Studi sulle formiche della fauna Neotropica. XXVI. Bullettino della Società Entomologica Italiana, 37, 107–194.Google Scholar
  25. Emery, C. (1925). Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Formicinae. Genera Insectorum, 183, 1–302.Google Scholar
  26. Fisher, B. L., & Cover, S. P. (2007). Ants of North America. A guide to genera. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  27. Forel, A. (1874). Les fourmis de la Suisse. Systématique, notices anatomiques et physiologiques, architecture, distribution géographique, nouvelles expériences et observations de moeurs. Neue Denkschriften der Allgemeinen Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für die Gesammten Naturwissenschaften, 26, 1–452.Google Scholar
  28. Forel, A. (1876). Études myrmécologiques en 1875 avec remarques sur un point de l'anatomie des coccides. Bulletin de la Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles, 14, 33–62.Google Scholar
  29. Forel, A. (1893). Formicides de l'Antille St. Vincent, récoltées par Mons. H. H. Smith. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (pp. 333–418).Google Scholar
  30. Forel, A. (1895a). Nouvelles fourmis de diverses provenances, surtout d'Australie. Annales de la Société Entomologique de Belgique, 39, 41–49.Google Scholar
  31. Forel, A. (1895b). Die Ameisen- und Termitengäste von Brasilien. Anhang. Beschreibung einiger neuer brasilianischer Ameisenarten. In Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien (Vol. 45, pp. 178–179).Google Scholar
  32. Forel, A. (1897). Quelques Formicides de l'Antille de Grenada récoltés par. In M. H. H. Smith (Ed.), Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (pp. 297–300).Google Scholar
  33. Forel, A. (1899). Formicidae. [part]. Biologia Centrali-Americana Hymenoptera, 3, 105–136.Google Scholar
  34. Forel, A. (1901a). I. Fourmis mexicaines récoltées par M. le professeur W.-M. Wheeler. II. A propos de la classification des fourmis (Vol. 45, pp. 123–141). Annales de la Société Entomologique de Belgique.Google Scholar
  35. Forel, A. (1901b). Einige neue Ameisen aus Südbrasilien, Java, Natal und Mossamedes. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 10, 297–311.Google Scholar
  36. Forel, A. (1902). Fourmis nouvelles d'Australie. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 10, 405–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Forel, A. (1907). Formiciden aus dem Naturhistorischen Museum in Hamburg. II. Teil. Neueingänge seit 1900. Mitteilungen aus dem Naturhistorischen Museum in Hamburg (Vol. 24, pp. 1–20).Google Scholar
  38. Forel, A. (1908). Ameisen aus Sao Paulo (Brasilien), Paraguay etc. gesammelt von Prof. Herm. v. Ihering, Dr. Lutz, Dr. Fiebrig, etc. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 58, 340–418.Google Scholar
  39. Forel, A. (1909). Ameisen aus Guatemala usw., Paraguay und Argentinien (Hym.). Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift, 1909, 239–269.Google Scholar
  40. Forel, A. (1911). Ameisen des Herrn Prof. v. Ihering aus Brasilien (Sao Paulo usw.) nebst einigen anderen aus Südamerika und Afrika (Hym.). Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift, 285–312.Google Scholar
  41. Forel, A. (1912a). Formicides néotropiques. Part VI. 5me sous-famille Camponotinae Forel (Vol. 20, pp. 59–92). Mémoires de la Société Entomologique de Belgique.Google Scholar
  42. Forel, A. (1912b). The Percy Sladen Trust Expedition to the Indian Ocean in 1905, under the leadership of Mr. J. Stanley Gardiner, M.A. Volume 4. No. XI. Fourmis des Seychelles et des Aldabras, reçues de M. Hugh Scott. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London. Zoology, 15(2), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Forel, A. (1914). Formicides d'Afrique et d'Amérique nouveaux ou peu connus. Bulletin de la Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles, 50, 211–288.Google Scholar
  44. Grundmann, A. W. (1952). A new Brachymyrmex from northern Utah. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 25, 117.Google Scholar
  45. Guénard, B. (2018). First record of the emerging global pest Brachymyrmex patagonicus Mayr 1868 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from continental Asia. Asian Myrmecology, 10, 1–6.  https://doi.org/10.20362/am.010012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Guénard, B., Weiser, M., Gomez, K., Narula, N., & Economo, E. P. (2017). The global ant biodiversity informatics (GABI) database: a synthesis of ant species geographic distributions. Myrmecological News, 24, 83–89.Google Scholar
  47. Harris, R. A. (1979). A glossary of surface sculpturing. California Department of Food and Agriculture. Laboratory services, entomology. Occasional Papers, 28, 1–31.Google Scholar
  48. Hebert, P. D. N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S. L., & DeWaard, J. R. (2003). Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 270, 313–321.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Janicki, J., Narula, N., Ziegler, M., Guénard, B., & Economo, E. P. (2016). Visualizing and interacting with large-volume biodiversity data using client-server web-mapping applications: the design and implementation of antmaps.org. Ecological Informatics, 32, 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Katoh, K., & Standley, D. M. (2013). MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 30, 778–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kempf, W. W. (1972). Catálogo abreviado das formigas da região Neotropical. Studia Entomologica, 15, 3–344.Google Scholar
  52. Kruskal, J. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kugler, C. (1994). A revision of the ant genus Rogeria with description of the sting apparatus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research, 3, 17–89.Google Scholar
  54. Kusnezov, N. (1959). La fauna de hormigas en el oeste de la Patagonia y Tierra del Fuego. Acta Zoológica Lilloana. Tucumán. Argentina, 17, 321–401.Google Scholar
  55. Kusnezov, N. (1960). Brachymyrmex physogaster n. sp. aus Argentinien und das Problem der Physogastrie bie den Ameisen. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 165, 381–388.Google Scholar
  56. Lanfear, R., Calcott, B., & Ho, S. Y. W. (2012). Guindon S PartitionFinder: combined selection of partitioning schemes and substitution models for phylogenetic analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 29(6), 1695–1701.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mss020.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. LaPolla, J. S., & Longino, J. T. (2006). An unusual new Brachymyrmex Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Costa Rica, with implications for the phylogeny of the Lasiine tribe group. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 108, 297–305.Google Scholar
  58. LaPolla, J. S., Brady, S. G., & Shattuck, S. O. (2010). Phylogeny and taxonomy of the Prenolepis genus-group of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Systematic Entomology, 35, 118–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Leliaert, F., Verbruggen, H., Vanormelingen, P., Steen, F., López-Bautista, J. M., Zuccarello, G. C., & de Clerck, O. (2014). DNA-based species delimitation in algae. European Journal of Phycology, 49, 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. MacGown, J. A., Hill, J. G., & Deyrup, M. A. (2007). Brachymyrmex patagonicus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), an emerging pest species in the southeastern United States. Florida Entomologist, 90, 457–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Maddison, W. P., & Maddison, D. R. (2017). Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. (2.10 ed.).Google Scholar
  62. Mayr, G. (1868). Formicidae novae Americanae collectae a Prof. P. de Strobel. Annuario della Società dei Naturalisti e Matematici, Modena, 3, 161–178.Google Scholar
  63. Mayr, G. (1870). Formicidae novogranadenses. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Abteilung I, 61, 370–417.Google Scholar
  64. Mayr, G. (1887). Südamerikanische Formiciden. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 37, 511–632.Google Scholar
  65. Menozzi, C. (1927). Formiche raccolte dal Sig. H. Schmidt nei dintorni di San José di Costa Rica (Schluss). Entomologische Mitteilungen. Berlin-Dahlem, 16, 336–345.Google Scholar
  66. Miller, M. A., Pfeiffer, W., & Schwartz, T. (2010). Creating the CIPRES science gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In Proceedings of the gateway computing environments workshop (GCE), New Orleans, LA, 14 Nov. 2010 (pp. 1–8).Google Scholar
  67. Moreau, C. S., Bell, C. D., Vila, R., Archibald, S. B., & Pierce, N. E. (2006). Phylogeny of the ants: diversification in the age of angiosperms. Science, 312, 101–104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Moretti, T. C., Quirán, E. M., Solis, D. R., Rossi, M. L., & Thyssen, P. J. (2011). Pycnoscelus surinamensis (Linnaeus, 1758) (Blaberoidea: Blaberidae), a cockroach with a possible association with the ant Brachymyrmex cordemoyi Forel, 1895 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and which may be exhibiting a domiciliation trend. Symbiosis, 53, 37–39.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13199-010-0101-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Oksanen, J., Blanchet, F. G., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., Minchin, P. R., O’Hara, R. B., et al. (2015). vegan: Community Ecology Package. Version 2.3–0.Google Scholar
  70. Ortiz, C. M., & Fernández, F. (2014). Brachymyrmex species with tumuliform metathoracic spiracles: description of three new species and discussion of dimorphism in the genus (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). ZooKeys, 371, 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Page, R. E., Jr. (1982). Polyandry in Brachymyrmex depilis Emery (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pan-Pacific Entomologist, 58, 258.Google Scholar
  72. Peeters, C. P. (1991). Ergatoid queens and intercast in ants: two distinct adult forms wich look morphologically intermediate between workers and winged queens. Insectes Sociaux, 38(1), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01242708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pons, J., Barraclough, T. G., Gomez-Zurita, J., Cardoso, A., Duran, D. P., Hazell, S., Kamoun, S., Sumlin, W. D., & Vogler, A. P. (2006). Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. Systematic Biology, 55, 595–609.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Puillandre, N., Lambert, A., Brouillet, S., & Achaz, G. (2011). ABDG, automatic barcode gap discovery for primary species delimitation. Molecular Ecology, 21, 1864–1877.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Quirán, E. M. (2005). El género neotropical Brachymyrmex Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) en la Argentina. II: Redescripción de las especies B. admotus Mayr, de B. brevicornis Emery y B. gaucho Santschi. Neotropical Entomology, 34, 761–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Quirán, E. M. (2007). El género neotropical Brachymyrmex Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) en la Argentina. III: Redescripción de las especies: B. aphidicola Forel, de B. australis Forel y B. constrictus Santschi. Neotropical Entomology, 36, 699–706.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Quirán, E. M., Martínez, J. J., & Bachmann, A. O. (2004). The Neotropical genus Brachymyrmex Mayr, 1868 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Argentina. Redescription of the type species, B. patagonicus Mayr,1868; B. bruchi Forel, 1912 and B. oculatus Santschi, 1919. Acta Zoológica Mexicana, 20, 273–285.Google Scholar
  78. R Core Team (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Version 3.2.1. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
  79. Rambaut, A. (2012). FigTree. Version 1.4.0.Google Scholar
  80. Rambaut, A., Suchard, M. A., Xie, D., & Drummond, A. J. (2013). Tracer. Version 1.6.Google Scholar
  81. Roger, J. (1863). Die neu aufgeführten Gattungen und Arten meines Formiciden-Verzeichnisses, nebst Ergänzung einiger früher gegeben Beschreibungen. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift, 7, 131–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., Van der Mark, P., Ayres, D., Darling, A., Hӧhna, S., et al. (2012). MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology, 61(3), 539–542.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. Santschi, F. (1912). Quelques fourmis de l'Amérique australe. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 20, 519–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Santschi, F. (1916). Formicides sudaméricains nouveaux ou peu connus. Physis (Buenos Aires), 2, 365–399.Google Scholar
  85. Santschi, F. (1917). Description de quelques nouvelles fourmis de la République Argentine (Vol. 84, pp. 277–283). Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina.Google Scholar
  86. Santschi, F. (1919). Nouveaux formicides de la République Argentine. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 87, 37–57.Google Scholar
  87. Santschi, F. (1922). Description de nouvelles fourmis de l'Argentine et pays limitrophes (Vol. 94, pp. 241–262). Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina.Google Scholar
  88. Santschi, F. (1923a). Revue des fourmis du genre Brachymyrmex Mayr. In Anales del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Buenos Aires (Vol. 31, pp. 650–678).Google Scholar
  89. Santschi, F. (1923b). Solenopsis et autres fourmis néotropicales. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 30, 245–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Santschi, F. (1929). Nouvelles fourmis de la République Argentine et du Brésil (Vol. 107, pp. 273–316). Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina.Google Scholar
  91. Santschi, F. (1933). Fourmis de la République Argentine en particulier du territoire de Misiones. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 116, 105–124.Google Scholar
  92. Santschi, F. (1939). Études et descriptions de fourmis néotropiques. Revista de Entomologia (Rio de Janeiro), 10, 312–330.Google Scholar
  93. Sharaf, M. R., Salman, S., Aldhafer, H. M., Youysef, A. F. A., & Aldawood, A. S. (2016). First occurrence of the ant genus Brachymyrmex Mayr, 1868 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Sociobiology, 63(2), 800–803.  https://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v63i2.981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Smith, M. R. (1955). Ants of the genus Pheidole, subgenus Hendecapheidole (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 57, 301–305.Google Scholar
  95. Smith, D. R. (1979). Superfamily Formicoidea. In K. V. Krombein, P. D. Hurd, D. R. Smith, & B. D. Burks (Eds.), Catalog of Hymenoptera in America north of Mexico. Volume 2. Apocrita (Aculeata) (pp. 1323–1467). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  96. Snelling, R. R., & Hunt, J. H. (1975). The ants of Chile (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Revista Chilena de Entomología, 9, 63–129.Google Scholar
  97. Stamatakis, A., Hoover, P., & Rougemont, J. (2008). A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML web-servers. Systematic Biology, 75(5), 758–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Swofford, D. L. (2002). PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0b: Sinauer associates. Massachussetts: Sunderland.Google Scholar
  99. Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern Applied Statistics with S (4ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  100. Ward, P. S. (1989). Systematic studies on pseudomyrmecine ants: revision of the Pseudomyrmex oculatus and P. subtilissimus species groups, with taxonomic comments on other species. Quaestiones Entomologicae, 25, 393–468.Google Scholar
  101. Ward, P. S., Blaimer, B. B., & Fisher, B. L. (2016). A revised phylogenetic classification of the ant subfamily Formicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with resurrection of the genera Colobopsis and Dinomyrmex. Zootaxa, 4072, 343–357.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Wheeler, W. M. (1903). A decad of Texan Formicidae. Psyche, 10, 93–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Wheeler, W. M. (1921). The Tachigalia ants. Zoologica (New York), 3, 137–168.Google Scholar
  105. Wheeler, W. M. (1922). Ants of the American museum Congo expedition. A contribution to the myrmecology of Africa. In Bulletin of the American Museum of Natrural History (Vol. 45, pp. 1–582).Google Scholar
  106. Wheeler, W. M. (1934). Neotropical ants collected by Dr. Elisabeth Skwarra and others. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 77, 157–240.Google Scholar
  107. Wheeler, W. M. (1938). Ants from the caves of Yucatan. In A. S. Pearse (Ed.), Fauna of the caves of Yucatan (Vol. 491, pp. 251–304). Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication.Google Scholar
  108. Wheeler, W. M. (1942). Studies of Neotropical ant-plants and their ants. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 90, 1–262.Google Scholar
  109. Wheeler, G. C., & Wheeler, J. (1953). The ant larvae of the myrmicine tribe Pheidolini (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 55, 49–84.Google Scholar
  110. Wheeler, G. C., & Wheeler, J. (1978). Brachymyrmex musculus, a new ant in the United States. Entomological News, 89, 189–190.Google Scholar
  111. Wheeler, G. C., & Wheeler, J. (1982). Supplementary studies on ant larvae: Formicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche, 89, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Wheeler, G.C., & Wheeler, J. (1986) The ants of Nevada. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, vii + 138 pp.Google Scholar
  113. Wild, A. L. (2007). A catalogue of the ants of Paraguay (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa, 1622, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Wilson, E. O., & Taylor, R. W. (1967). The ants of Polynesia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Pacific Insects Monograph, 14, 1–109.Google Scholar
  115. Wilson, C. M., Smith-Herron, A., & Cook, J. L. (2016). Morphology of the male genitalia of Brachymyrmex and their implications in the Formicinae phylogeny. Journal of Hymenoptera Research, 50, 81–95.  https://doi.org/10.3897/JHR.50.8697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Xia, X. (2013). DAMBE5: a comprehensive software package for data analysis in molecular biology and evolution. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 30(7), 1720–1728.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst064.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  117. Yensen, N., Yensen, E., & Yensen, D. (1980). Intertidal ants from the Gulf of California, Mexico. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 73, 266–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Gesellschaft für Biologische Systematik 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Univ. Lille, CNRSLilleFrance
  2. 2.Instituto de Ciencias NaturalesUniversidad Nacional de ColombiaBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations