Acromyrmex pubescens (Emery 1905)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.179222 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6247355 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C2878B-FFF4-FFF0-F3D4-D79E3563FC3B |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Acromyrmex pubescens (Emery 1905) |
status |
|
Acromyrmex pubescens (Emery 1905) . REVISED STATUS.
Atta (Acromyrmex) pubescens Emery 1905: 51 . [w syntypes examined, MCSN, MHNG; Paraguay (Balzán)].
Acromyrmex lundi var. pubescens (Emery) . Bruch 1914: 216.
Acromyrmex lundi st. pubescens (Emery) . Santschi 1916: 386.
Acromyrmex lundi pubescens (Emery) . Kempf 1972: 13.
Fowler (1985a) described the differing habitat associations of Acromyrmex lundii and Acromyrmex pubescens , noting that the former is found in open habitats and the latter in the patchy forest “islands” that occur in the chaco savannah. The two forms are sympatric and structurally similar, both bearing elongate lateral pronotal spines that are longer than the mesonotal spines. However, these ants are distinguishable in pubescence. Much of the integument of A. pubescens is covered in a dense decumbent pubescence while the integument of A. lundi is relatively bare. This difference is easiest to diagnose on the mesopleura, as the mesopleural pubescence of A. pubescens comprises overlapping hairs, while that of A. lundii is sparse and the hairs non-overlapping. Given the ecological and morphological differences in sympatry between these two forms, I elevate A. pubescens to species here.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Acromyrmex pubescens (Emery 1905)
Wild, Alexander L. 2007 |
Atta (Acromyrmex) pubescens
Emery 1905: 51 |