Myrmecina striata Emery, 1889

Gu, Zhuojian, Zhang, Chen, Du, Congcong & Chen, Zhilin, 2025, Synopsis of the ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 from China (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae), with description of eleven new species, Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 72 (2), pp. 395-448 : 395-448

Myrmecina striata Emery, 1889

Myrmecina striata Emery, 1889: 500 (w.) MYANMAR.

Material examined.

Unexamined.

Diagnostic features.

(1) Body predominantly black; mandibles, antennae, legs, and posterior abdominal segments reddish; (2) head and mesosoma regularly and deeply grooved, with shining intergroove ridges nearly smooth (lacking transverse rugae); (3) clypeus not bilobed, with paired faint carinae and no median denticle (vs. median denticle present in some congeners); (4) mesonotum lacks teeth or spinules; instead bears a minute tubercle on each side (vs. acute spinules in M. latreillei ); (5) metanotal spines, morphology identical to M. latreillei (retained plesiomorphic condition); (6) petiolar nodes finely grooved, abdomen glossy and smooth (vs. rugose or punctate in related species); (7) small body length ( TL 3.5), typical for the genus; (8) resembles M. sulcata in clypeal structure but differs in smoother intergroove ridges and reduced mesonotal armature (tubercles vs. spines).

Distribution.

Jiangsu (dubious), Sichuan (dubious), Yunnan (dubious); INDIA, MYANMAR, SRI LANKA.

Notes.

To date, we have been unable to examine the type specimens or high-resolution images of the type material of M. striata . Therefore, the diagnostic features summarized above are based solely on the original description by Emery (1895). Regarding the reported distribution of this species in China, the records remain doubtful or questionable. A further practical reason for provisional retention is the sheer number of published records that already cite M. striata from China. According to AntWiki. org, the species has been reported from: Guangxi 3 records ( Li 2006; Huang and Zhou 2007; Guénard and Dunn 2012); Jiangsu 4 records ( Li et al. 2011; Guénard and Dunn 2012); Yunnan 27 records ( Xu 1998; Xu et al. 1999; Xu et al. 2001; Li et al. 2009; Chen et al. 2011; Guénard and Dunn 2012; Lu et al. 2016; Fontanilla et al. 2019; Huang et al. 2019); Sichuan 2 records ( Luo et al. 2019 a, 2019 b; He et al. 2020). These citations involve at least 15 different institutions. The combination of diagnostic traits does not match any confirmed specimens from known regional congeners. Whether M. striata truly occurs in China requires further verification by direct examination of type specimens (or high-resolution photographs of type) and critical comparison with Chinese specimens currently identified as this species. At present we have no practical means of verifying every locality or re-examining every voucher. Deleting the species from the Chinese fauna would therefore imply that all of these records are definitively erroneous — a conclusion we cannot yet be justified. Flagging the taxon as “dubious” preserves the existing information while clearly signaling to future workers that confirmation is required. Current Chinese records should be treated with caution until comparative studies confirm their validity.