Ravavy Fisher, 2009

Yoshimura, Masashi & Fisher, Brian L., 2011, A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae, Zootaxa 2794, pp. 1-34 : 12-13

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.276993
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5689425
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F-900C-FFBA-FF0B-BED5C65266FB
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Ravavy Fisher, 2009
status

Treatment

Ravavy Fisher, 2009

( Figs 3 View FIGURES 1 – 5 , 6 View FIGURES 6 – 10 , 13 View FIGURES 11 – 15 , 19 View FIGURES 16 – 23 , 21, 26 View FIGURES 24 – 28 , 32 View FIGURES 29 – 33 , 36 View FIGURES 34 – 38 , 41 View FIGURES 41 – 45 , 52 View FIGURES 52 – 54 , 58 View FIGURES 58 – 61 , 64 View FIGURES 62 – 66 , 69 View FIGURES 67 – 71 , 74 View FIGURES 72 – 76 , 79 View FIGURES 77 – 81 )

With characters of Dolichoderinae . All known males alate. Median hypostoma absent ( Fig. 64 View FIGURES 62 – 66 ). Mandible broadly spatulate ( Fig. 74 View FIGURES 72 – 76 ). Basal angle of mandible distinct, basal margin lacking teeth and denticles. Distal apex of mandible with single, long, acute tooth. Palpal formula 6,3 (one specimen of R. miafina dissected: Fig. 79 View FIGURES 77 – 81 ). Third maxillary palpal segment longer than fourth, but shorter than the combined length of fourth and fifth. Distal margin of labrum deeply concave and bilobed, longest setae located near apices of lobes ( Fig. 69 View FIGURES 67 – 71 ). Scape excluding its basal condyle shorter than length of flagellar segments 1+2 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURES 1 – 5 ). Pedicel conical. First and second flagellar segments slightly bent. Axillae weakly compressed medially, anterior and posterior margins not parallel. Petiolar node raised vertically, its anterior margin nearly as long as posterior margin in lateral view, not much expanded laterally. Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ). Anterior surface of abdominal segment III with indentation that fits posterior surface of petiolar node ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ). Pygostyles present.

Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed, its distal margin widely concave ( Fig. 26 View FIGURES 24 – 28 ). Apicoventral portion of basimere without projection ( Fig. 32 View FIGURES 29 – 33 ). Harpago moderate in size, visibly distinct but not separated from basimere by a membranous region. Harpago narrow in lateral view, without distinct ventral face (as in Fig. 23 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ). Basoventral portion of aedeagus with long and narrow lobe ventrally ( Figs 36 View FIGURES 34 – 38 , 41 View FIGURES 41 – 45 ). Ventral margin of aedeagus with denticles.

Forewing elongated apical to wing stigma, its radial sector (Rs) reaches costal margin ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 52 – 54 ), media between Rs+M and 2rs-m unrecognizable, 2rs-m reduced in length, and 1m-cu present. On hindwing, M+Cu, 1rsm+M, and free section of radial sector present, free section of cubitus vestigial, cu-a present ( Fig. 58 View FIGURES 58 – 61 ).

Remarks. Genus Ravavy is endemic to Madagascar and males of Ravavy are known only for R. miafina . These males are distinguished easily from those of the four other Malagasy dolichoderine genera by the absence of the median hypostoma ( Fig. 64 View FIGURES 62 – 66 ), a broadly spatulate mandible with a long and acute tooth on its distal apex ( Fig. 74 View FIGURES 72 – 76 ), lack of serrate and minute denticles on the masticatory margin of the mandible, the first flagellomere slightly bent, dorsal margin of the propodeum in lateral view much longer than its declivitous margin ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 6 – 10 ) (see also remarks of Ochetellus ), the presence of a long and narrow basoventral lobe on the aedeagus ( Figs 36 View FIGURES 34 – 38 , 41 View FIGURES 41 – 45 ), and the forewing elongate apical to the stigma ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 52 – 54 ).Ward et al. (2010) listed a lacking or reduced median hypostoma as a tribal diagnosis of Bothriomyrmecini , to which Ravavy belongs.

The genus Ravavy was described by Fisher (2009). Although the mandible character proposed by Fisher (2009) distinguishes this genus from all other dolichoderines, our current study allows a more comprehensive comparison of additional characters with genera that do not occur in Madagascar. We offer the following revised and expanded analysis of diagnostic characters. Fisher (2009) proposed the elongate basal margin and reduced masticatory margin of the mandible as unique to Ravavy ; however, outside of Madagascar, those two characters can also be seen in a figure of a male Forelius in Shattuck (1992a: fig. 78). The shape of the mandible in Ravavy is better described as broadly spatulate, with a single acute tooth on its apex. The acute tooth is not necessarily the apical tooth, because several vestigial denticles can be seen distal to it ( Fig. 74 View FIGURES 72 – 76 ). The attachment between the petiole and abdominal segment III is best described as narrow, since the width is relatively small compared with that in Ochetellus ( Fig. 18 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ); the broad attachment between the petiole and abdominal segment III is a unique character of Ochetellus . Though described as absent in the original description (Fisher, 2009), a reexamination of fresh material revealed that an indentation on the anterior face of abdominal segment III is present in Ravavy ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ). The lack of this indentation in the males examined is limited to Ochetellus (see also Ochetellus ) ( Fig. 20 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ).

A male of Leptomyrmex Mayr in Shattuck (1992a: figs 100, 101) may appear superficially similar to a Ravavy male due to its long head, long mesosoma, and non-triangular mandible. Based on descriptions of males of Leptomyrmex provided in previous studies ( Wheeler 1934; Shattuck 1992a, 1995; Brandão et al. 1999; and Lucky & Ward 2010), these two genera differ in the following characters: the medial hypostoma is lacking in Ravavy ( Fig. 64 View FIGURES 62 – 66 ), while present in Leptomyrmex ; palpal formula is 6,3 in Ravavy ( Fig. 79 View FIGURES 77 – 81 ), while 6,4 in Leptomyrmex ; the mandible has only one or two vestigial denticles in addition to a long tooth in Ravavy ( Fig. 74 View FIGURES 72 – 76 ), while it has many serrate denticles in Leptomyrmex ; axillae are present in Ravavy , while absent in Leptomyrmex ; an indentation is present on the third abdominal segment in Ravavy ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 16 – 23 ), while no indentation or groove is found on the segment in Leptomyrmex ; posterior margin of abdominal sternum IX is concave in Ravavy ( Fig. 26 View FIGURES 24 – 28 ), while convex to entire in Leptomyrmex ; the pterostigma is developed as usual without a “pterostigmal appendage” ( Wheeler 1934: fig. 2) in Ravavy , while the pterostigma is reduced in size and the “pterostigmal appendage” is developed in most macro- Leptomyrmex .