Lepisiota Santschi, 1926

Harshana, Anand & Dey, Debjani, 2022, Taxonomic studies on the ant genus <i> Lepisiota </ i> Santschi 1926 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae) in India, with description of four new species, Oriental Insects 57 (3), pp. 785-818 : 4-6

Genus Lepisiota Santschi, 1926

Type species: Plagiolepis rothneyi ; Forel, 1894

Worker diagnosis

Antennae 11 segmented; propodeum armed with a pair of spines, teeth, or tubercles; the dorsal edge of petiole armed with a pair of teeth or spines but sometimes only emarginated; acidopore well-developed ( Bolton 1994).

List of the Indian species of Lepisiota Santschi, 1926

Lepisiota annandalei ( Mukerjee, 1930)

Lepisiota binghami sp. nov.

Lepisiota bipartita ( Smith, 1861)

Lepisiota fergusoni ( Forel, 1895)

Lepisiota integra ( Forel, 1894)

Lepisiota layla Wachkoo, Bharti & Akbar, 2021

Lepisiota lunaris ( Emery, 1893)

Lepisiota mayri Wachkoo, Bharti & Akbar, 2021

Lepisiota modesta ( Forel, 1894)

Lepisiota opaca ( Forel, 1892)

Lepisiota pulchella ( Forel, 1892)

Lepisiota pusaensis sp. nov.

Lepisiota rothneyi ( Forel, 1894)

Lepisiota satpuraensis sp. nov.

Lepisiota sericea ( Forel, 1892)

Lepisiota wilsoni sp. nov.

Lepisiota wroughtonii ( Forel, 1902)

Key to the workers of Indian species of Lepisiota Santschi, 1926 (based on Wachkoo et al. 2021)

1. Antennal scape long, surpassing posterior margin of head by about half of its length or more ( Figs 5E , 7B )........................................................... 2

–. Antennal scape short, surpassing posterior margin of head by a third of its length or less ( Fig. 8C ).......................................................................... 4

2. Bicoloured species; head and gaster dark brown to black while mesosoma reddish-brown ( Fig. 5D–F )............................ L. bipartita (Smith)

–. Uniformly dark-brown or black-brown species..................................... 3

3. Dark brown species; petiolar scale with distinctly angular sides, dorsally emarginate with teeth-like apical corners ( Fig. 7A )............... .......................................................................................... L. integra (Forel)

–. Black-brown species; petiolar scale with smoothly curved sides, dorsally rounded and narrow, without teeth ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Figs 35–36) ............................................................................................ L. sericea (Forel)

4. Bicoloured species ( Figs 1–3 , 8 )................................................................ 5

–. Uniformly dark brown to black species ( Figs 5A–C , 7D–F ) ............. 10

5. Body shiny to subopaque; weakly sculptured ( Figs 1–3 )...................... 6

–. Body dull; coarsely sculptured ( Fig 8 ) ..................................................... 8

6. Body with scanty pilosity; posterior margin of head with 2–3 erect setae, dorsum of pronotum with 2–4 long erect setae, mesonotum with 1–2 erect setae, metanotum lacks erect setae and propodeum with 0–1 erect setae ( Fig. 1A ) ................................................. L. binghami sp. nov.

–. Body with abundant pilosity; posterior margin of head with 4–5 erect setae or more, dorsum of pronotum with more than 10 long erect setae, mesonotum with four or more erect setae, metanotum with two or more erect setae, and propodeum with 4–6 or more erect setae ( Figs 2A , 3A ).......................................................................................................... 7

7. Smaller species (HL 0.58–0.59, WL 0.83–0.85); body with appressed pubescence ( Fig. 2 )......................... ......................... L. pusaensis sp. nov.

–. Larger species (HL 0.80–0.83, WL 1.12–1.21); body with semi-erect pubescence ( Fig. 3 ).............................................. L. satpuraensis sp. nov.

8. Head reticulate-striate; propodeal spines blunt, directed backward; petiole dorsally emarginated ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Fig. 39)................... ....................................................................................... L. fergusoni (Forel)

–. Head reticulate-punctate; propodeal spines pointed, directed upward; petiole dorsally bispinose........................................................................... 9

9. Gaster smooth and shiny ( Fig. 8B )................................ L. opaca (Forel)

–. Gaster microreticulate and subopaque ( Fig. 8E )............................... .............................................................................. L. pulchella (Forel)

10. Propodeal spines indistinct; gastral pilosity restricted to few pairs of black setae on the posterior margin of tergites .................................... 11

–. Propodeal spines well-developed as two broad-based blunt tubercles, teeth or spines; whole gastral dorsum covered with abundant white to yellowish setae............................................................................................ 12

11. Pronotum without setae; body sparsely pubescent, shiny ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Fig. 32)...................................................... L. rothneyi (Forel)

–. Pronotum with few short setae; body fairly pubescent, opaque ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Fig. 38).................................................... L. wroughtonii (Forel)

12. Body abundantly covered with long, erect white setae ( Fig. 7D–F )..... ............................................................ L. layla Wachkoo, Bharti & Akbar

–. Body covered with usual short erect setae ( Figs 4 , 5A )...................... 13

13. Petiole dorsally emarginated without distinct teeth or spines; scanty mesosomal setae ( Fig. 5A )............................ L. annandalei (Mukerjee)

–. Petiole dorsally distinctly bispinose; setae present across entire mesosomal dorsum............................................................................................. 14

14. Head and pronotum smooth and shiny; propodeal spines as two broad-based blunt tubercles ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Figs 22–23)............ ......................................................................................... L. modesta (Forel)

–. Head and pronotum either microreticulate or microreticulate with feeble striations; propodeal spines pointed or blunt........................... 15

15. Head and mesosoma microreticulate with feeble striations ( Fig. 4B– C ); propodeal spines blunt ( Fig. 4A )............ ............ L. wilsoni sp. nov.

–. Head and mesosoma microreticulate; propodeal spines pointed...... 16

16. Antennal scape with sparse appressed to decumbent pubescence; mesosomal setae sparse; smaller species (HW 0.51–0.57)....................... ......................................................................................... L. lunaris (Emery)

–. Antennal scape with dense subdecumbent to suberect pubescence; mesosomal setae abundant; larger species (HW 0.60–0.69) ( Wachkoo et al. 2021, Figs 19–21).................. L. mayri Wachkoo, Bharti & Akbar

Figures

Figure 1A–C. Lepisiota binghami sp. nov. (Holotype worker). A, body in profile view; B, body in dorsal view; C, head in full-face view.

Figure 2A–C. Lepisiota pusaensis sp. nov. (Holotype worker). A, body in profile view; B, body in dorsal view; C, head in full-face view.

Figure 3A–C. Lepisiota satpuraensis sp. nov. (Holotype worker). A, body in profile view; B, body in dorsal view; C, head in full-face view.

Figure 4A–C. Lepisiota wilsoni sp. nov. (Holotype worker). A, body in profile view; B, body in dorsal view; C, head in full-face view.

Figure 5A–F. Workers of Lepisiota annandalei (A–C), Lepisiota bipartita (D–F). A, D, body in profile view; B, E, body in dorsal view; C, F, head in full-face view.

Figure 7A–F. Workers of Lepisiota integra (A–C), Lepisiota layla (D–F). A, D, body in profile view; B, E, body in dorsal view; C, F, head in full-face view.

Figure 8A–F. Syntype worker (AntWeb: CASENT0909893, photographed by Zach Lieberman) of Lepisiota opaca (A–C), worker of Lepisiota pulchella (D–F). A, D, body in profile view; B, E, body in dorsal view; C, F, head in full-face view.