Research Article
Print
Research Article
The ants of the Galápagos Islands (Hymenoptera, Formicidae): a historical overview, checklist, and identification key
expand article infoHenri W. Herrera‡§|, María C. Tocora#¤, Gianpiero Fiorentino«, Charlotte E. Causton§, Wouter Dekoninck‡, Frederik Hendrickx‡|
‡ Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, Belgium
§ Charles Darwin Research Station, Charles Darwin Foundation, Puerto Ayora, Ecuador
| Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
¶ Entomology Museum, Riobamba, Ecuador
# University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
¤ Texas Tech University, Lubbock, United States of America
« New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, United States of America

Corresponding author: Henri W. Herrera ( henri.herrera@espoch.edu.ec )

Corresponding author: Gianpiero Fiorentino ( gf6@njit.edu )

Academic editor: Sebastian Salata
© 2024 Henri W. Herrera, María C. Tocora, Gianpiero Fiorentino, Charlotte E. Causton, Wouter Dekoninck, Frederik Hendrickx.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Herrera HW, Tocora MC, Fiorentino G, Causton CE, Dekoninck W, Hendrickx F (2024) The ants of the Galápagos Islands (Hymenoptera, Formicidae): a historical overview, checklist, and identification key. ZooKeys 1191: 151-213. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1191.107324
ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7B9C6D11-82D8-4521-BD8E-4D7D3DAB27A4
Open Access

Abstract

The Galápagos ant fauna has long been understudied, with the last taxonomic summary being published almost a century ago. Here, a comprehensive and updated overview of the known ant species of the Galápagos Islands is provided with updated species distributions. The list is based on an extensive review of literature, the identification of more than 382,000 specimens deposited in different entomological collections, and recent expeditions to the islands. The ant fauna is composed of five subfamilies (Dolichoderinae, Dorylinae, Formicinae, Myrmicinae, and Ponerinae), 22 genera, 50 species, and 25 subspecies, although three species (Crematogaster crinosa Mayr, 1862, Camponotus senex (Smith, 1858), and Solenopsis saevissima (Smith, 1855)) are considered dubious records. Finally, an illustrated identification key of the species found in the archipelago is presented.

Key words

Checklist, distribution, Galápagos ants, taxonomy

Introduction

Until recently, the ant fauna of the Galápagos Islands was poorly studied. Early expeditions to the Galápagos collected only a few specimens at specific sites, primarily in the arid zones, which were more accessible (Smith 1877; Emery 1893; Wheeler 1919, 1924, 1933). This resulted in the first lists of Galápagos ant species published by Wheeler (1919, 1924, 1933) and Stitz (1932). Linsley and Usinger (1966) updated these lists by compiling all known reports of ants in the Galápagos archipelago, reporting 19 species and 34 subspecies. Only after Silberglied (1972) reported Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger, 1863), the invasive little fire ant, in the Galápagos, did the interest in ants increase. At that time, studies were mainly focused on understanding the impact of W. auropunctata on native species (Clark et al. 1982; Lubin 1984). These studies led to several new records though they were limited to certain localities on a few major islands. Later studies by Pezzatti et al. (1998) and Snelling and Longino (1992) provided some important additions to the Galápagos ant fauna, but a systematic sampling of all islands was still needed (Brandão and Paiva 1994). In 2005, we initiated a project to study material deposited in collections worldwide and sampled all major islands in the archipelago, which resulted in many new ant records (Fig. 1) (among others: Longino 2003; Pacheco et al. 2007; Herrera and Longino 2008; Herrera and Causton 2010; Lattke 2011; Herrera et al. 2013, 2014). Here, we list all known species records (past and present) from the Galápagos Islands and provide an illustrated identification key for the established 47 taxa known to date, we do not include dubious records in the key. Also, this checklist does not include species intercepted in quarantine inspection activities in the Galápagos as these have not been confirmed as established in the islands. These intercepted species include: Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich, 1793), Brachymyrmex patagonicus Mayr, 1868, Camponotus brettesi Forel, 1899, Crematogaster curvispinosa Mayr, 1862, Eciton vagans angustatum Roger, 1863, Ectatomma ruidum (Roger, 1860), Linepithema humile (Mayr, 1868), and Notoncus ectatommoides (Forel, 1892).

Figure 1. 

Delimitation of the three periods in the study of Galápagos ants. Period I: 1877–1933; Period II: 1933 until the end of the 1990’s; Period III: 2000 onwards. The following references correspond to the years listed in the figure: 1877 = Smith (1877); 1893 = Emery (1893); 1919 = Wheeler (1919); 1924 = Wheeler (1924); 1933 = Wheeler (1933); 1972 = Silberglied (1972); 1982 = Clark et al. (1982); 1984 = Lubin (1984); 1992 = (Snelling and Longino 1992); 1998 = Pezzatti et al. (1998); 2007 – 2011 = Pacheco et al. (2007), Herrera and Longino (2008), Herrera and Causton (2010), Lattke (2011); 2013 – 2014 = Herrera et al. (2013, 2014).

Materials and methods

This paper is based on literature reviews and the study of 382,023 specimens deposited mostly in the Terrestrial Invertebrates Collection of the Charles Darwin Research Station (ICCDRS ) as well as the collections of John T. Longino (JTLC), California Academy of Sciences (CAS), Quito Catholic Zoology Museum (QCAZ), the University of Texas Insect Collection (UTIC) and the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS). We mapped the geographical distribution of the sampling events using the Free and Open Source QGIS. We revised and updated information on samples used for previous publications and indicated where this material is deposited. The list of subfamilies and species is ordered alphabetically. Specimens from the genus Nylanderia are currently under revision and are merged into Nylanderia spp. Accordingly, only previous literature records of Nylanderia species are included in the checklist. We implemented a similar approach for the only known from Galápagos subspecies of Camponotus macilentus Smith, 1877 and Camponotus planus Smith, 1877, for which the taxonomic key is only at species level. Neither the material examined, nor the vague descriptions found in old literature allowed us to morphologically discriminate between the proposed subspecies. The genus Nylanderia in Galápagos and the Camponotus (sub)species complexes will be addressed in future studies. Scanning images at high resolution were obtained using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (Todokoro and Ezumi 1999) and z-stacked images available in AntWeb (Herrera 2019) were used to illustrate the key. Morphological terms referred to in the key (Fig. 2A–D), followed Eady (1968), Harris (1979), Bolton (1994), and Bolton et al. (2003). Locality terminology referring to the different volcanoes on Isabela Island is as follows: Alcedo Crater (CA), Volcano Alcedo (VA), Volcano Ecuador (VE), Volcano Darwin (VD), Volcano Sierra Negra (SN), and Volcano Wolf (VW).

Figure 2. 

Glossary of terminology labeled from left to right A lateral view of a major worker of Camponotus planus B profile view of terminal portion of gaster of Paratrechina longicornis (Latreille, 1802) C frontal view of Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander, 1846) D lateral view of Tetramorium bicarinatum. Abbreviations: ac = antenna club; acp = acidopore; c = clypeus; cx = coxa; ey = eye; fc = frontal carina; fl = frontal lobe; fu = funiculus; GA = gaster; G1, 2, 3, 4, 5 = gastral segments 1–5; HD = head; lc = lateral portion of clypeus; man = mandible; mb = basal margin of mandible; mc = median portion of clypeus; MES = mesosoma; mg = metanotal groove; mn = mesonotum; mpl = mesopleuron; mtp = metapleuron; om = occipital margin; pe = petiole; pms = promesonotal; pn = pronotum; pro = propodeum; ppt = post-petiole; ps = propodeal spine; py = pygidium; s = sting; sc = scape scb = scrobe; sp = spiracle.

Results

Five subfamilies of Formicidae can be found in the Galápagos: Dolichoderinae, Dorylinae, Formicinae, Myrmicinae, and Ponerinae, representing 22 genera, 50 species and 25 subspecies. The subfamily Myrmicinae is the largest with 32 species, while only one species on the islands represents Dorylinae, Cylindromyrmex whymperi (Cameron, 1891). The introduced species Solenopsis globularia (Smith, 1858) (on 35 islands, islets, and/or rocks), Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander, 1846) (on 33), Cardiocondyla emeryi Forel, 1881 (on 30), Monomorium floricola (Jerdon, 1851) (on 27), Camponotus zonatus Emery, 1894 (on 24), Tetramorium lanuginosum Mayr, 1870 (on 24), Wasmannia auropunctata (on 21), Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius, 1804) (on 20), and Tapinoma melanocephalum (Fabricius, 1793) (on 18), are the most widely distributed species in the archipelago. Among the putative endemic species (8, Herrera et al. 2020), Leptogenys santacruzi Lattke, 2011 is most rare, with only a few records from the islands of Santa Cruz and Santiago.

Discussion

We report 50 species and 25 subspecies of ants from 22 genera from the Galápagos Islands. The number of new species and locality records in the last 15 years combined with the fact that many islands are still highly understudied demonstrates that considerable work still needs to be done to identify and understand the islands’ ant diversity.

Of the species recorded in this checklist, there are still dubious records. This is the case for Camponotus senex, Crematogaster crinosa, and Solenopsis saevissima (Wheeler 1924; Crocker 1933; Peck et al. 1998). Recent fieldwork, extensive studies and revision of old collections could not confirm their presence in the archipelago. Wheeler (1924) defined C. senex as a species that is unlikely to be present in the Galápagos, while Trager (1991) and Pacheco et al. (2007) did not mention S. saevissima as part of the fauna of the archipelago. Regarding C. crinosa, this species could have been sampled from locations outside the archipelago by Mr. Maurice Willows during the Templeton Crocker Expedition (Crocker 1933). Wheeler (1924) cataloged this record as unexpected in the Galápagos. These three species are not included in the taxonomic keys in this work. Furthermore, the records of Anoplolepis gracilipes (Smith, 1857), Camponotus planatus Roger, 1863, Strumigenys godeffroyi Mayr, 1866, Tetramorium pacificum Mayr, 1870, and Pseudoponera stigma (Fabricius, 1804) in the Galápagos (McGlynn 1999) are considered doubtful due to potential misidentification of these species. It is also possible that these species were collected on recently arriving in Galápagos and that they did not establish. As such, these species are not included in this species checklist.

Regarding the genus Camponotus, our studies suggest that the identification of the introduced ant Camponotus zonatus may have been confused with that of the only known from Galápagos species C. macilentus. This confusion is of particular interest regarding ecological studies that have cited the abundance of C. macilentus, which is typically more cryptic (McMullen 2011). Material examined retrospectively by the first author, collected by Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch and Cherix (2005), and von Aesch (2006), showed that C. zonatus was collected during these field trips, nevertheless, this ant is not mentioned in any of these papers. Some of the records for the subspecies of Camponotus are also questioned for putative subspecies of C. macilentus and C. planus in the archipelago, and for now, we have only cited the records of Wheeler (1919, 1924, 1933) and Stitz (1932). Lastly, for the genus Nylanderia, future taxonomic and genetic studies are necessary to understand the number of species present and their status in Galápagos.

Although efforts in the last two decades have substantially increased our knowledge of the ant fauna of the Galápagos Islands, a good portion of the material studied during the last 15 years came from surveys that were not focused on ants. Ants remain poorly studied, and systematic sampling of the archipelago is necessary. Apart from Santa Cruz (in 1982, 1984) and Floreana (in 1997 and 2005) (Clark et al. 1982; Lubin 1984; Pezzatti et al. 1998; von Aesch 2006; HWH unpublished data), none of the other islands have been sampled extensively (Fig. 3). As a result, a multi-institutional project was initiated in 2020 to remedy this by surveying all islands. In addition, revision of taxonomic material in yet unexplored collections is underway. Revisions of these collections and systematic field surveys will provide the much-needed information to understand the role of ant species in ecosystem processes in the Galápagos as well as for prioritizing the management of introduced and invasive species and protecting endemic species.

Figure 3. 

Heatmap highlighting the distribution of ant samples taken from 1963 to 2022. Regions indicated in pale purple have not yet been sampled for ants.

Checklist and identification keys

Key to the subfamilies of the Galápagos Islands

1 Mesosoma attached to the gaster by a single intermediate segment, the petiole (Fig. 44C) 2
– Mesosoma attached to the gaster by two intermediate segments, the petiole, and post-petiole (Fig. 36C) Myrmicinae
2 Gaster with a slight to remarkable constriction between its first and second segments (Fig. 45C); in the first case mandibles elongated (Fig. 48C); last segment of the gaster with sting, sometimes visible 3
– Gaster without constriction between its first and second segments (Fig. 8D); never with long and slender mandibles; last segment of the gaster without sting 4
3 Pygidium with small spines or denticles (Fig. 7C); antennal scape short and robust, never surpassing the middle of the eyes; funiculus robust, with segments increasing progressively in size toward the apex; head in frontal view with frontal carinae very well marked, and with thick longitudinal ridges running from occipital margin towards the clypeus (Fig. 7D) (Dorylinae) Cylindromyrmex whymperi
– Pygidium without spines or denticles (Fig. 44D); antennal scape surpassing the middle of the eyes (long and slender); head in frontal view without ridges Ponerinae
4 Apex of abdomen with a circular orifice surrounded by a fringe of short setae, the acidopore, formed from the hypopygium (Fig. 8E) Formicinae
– Apex of abdomen without acidopore (Fig. 4D) Dolichoderinae

Key to species and subspecies of the subfamily Dolichoderinae

1 In lateral and dorsal views, petiole visible (Fig. 4B, D); cluster of long hairs located in the ventral surface of the head, the psammophore (Fig. 4E); dorsopropodeum with cone (Fig. 4D); head and mesosoma reddish brown, gaster, funiculus of antenna, petiole, and legs brownish black (Fig. 5B) Dorymyrmex) Dorymyrmex pyramicus albemarlensis
– Petiole squamiform and notably reduced, in lateral and dorsal view, hidden under the first segment of the gaster (Fig. 5B, E); psammophore lacking on the ventral surface of the head; propodeum without cone on the dorsum (Fig. 5D) (Tapinoma) 2
2 Small (~ 1.5 mm), head mesosoma and antennae pale brown, legs and gaster pale yellow (Fig. 5A, B); anterior margin of clypeus relatively straight (Fig. 5C) Tapinoma melanocephalum
– Ants measuring ~ 2 mm with body and legs brown-gray (Fig. 6A, B); anterior base of clypeus slightly concave in the middle (Fig. 6C) Tapinoma sp. hh07

Genus Dorymyrmex Mayr, 1866

Dorymyrmex pyramicus albemarlensis Wheeler, 1919

Fig. 4

Remarks. In Wheeler (1924) [CAS], Wheeler (1933). Cited as Conomyrma pyramica albemarlensis (Linsley and Usinger 1966), Conomyrma sp. (Clark et al. 1982) [ICCDRS ], C. pyramica (Lubin 1983), C. albemarlensis, C. pyramica (Lubin 1984), C. albemarlensis (Lubin 1985), Conomyrma sp. (Meier 1994), Dorymyrmex pyramicus (Abedrabbo 1994) [ICCDRS ] and C. albemarlensis (de la Vega 1994). Registered also in Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015), Herrera (2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 4. 

Dorymyrmex pyramicus albemarlensis worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C apex of abdomen D mesosoma in profile E maxillary and labial palps.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Possibly endemic: Baltra, Bartolomé, Daphne Mayor, Edén, Española, Fernandina, Genovesa, Isabela (VA, VD, VW), Marchena, Pinta, Rábida, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Santiago (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Tapinoma Foerster, 1850

Tapinoma melanocephalum (Fabricius, 1793)

Fig. 5

Remarks. Originally described as Formica melanocephalum (Fabricius, 1793). First published record Emery (1893), cited also in Wheeler (1919) [CAS], Wheeler (1924), Linsley and Usinger (1966), Clark et al. (1982) [ICCDRS ], Lubin (1984) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (1987 1990, 1993), Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], Brandão and Paiva (1994), de la Vega (1994), Meier (1994) [ICCDRS ], Peck et al. (1998), Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005) [ICCDRS ], Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), McMullen (2009), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (2012), Chamorro et al. (2012) [ICCDRS ], Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 5. 

Tapinoma melanocephalum worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up mandibles showing dentition D mesosoma in profile E gaster in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Albany, Baltra, Champion, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Genovesa, Isabela (CA, SN, VA), Marchena, Pinta, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Mariela Mediana Islet.

Tapinoma sp. hh07

Fig. 6

Remarks. In Herrera et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 6. 

Tapinoma sp. hh07 worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up mandibles showing dentition D head in full-face view E view in profile.

Distribution. Undetermined origin: Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2014).

Genus Cylindromyrmex Mayr, 1870

Cylindromyrmex whymperi (Cameron, 1891)

Fig. 7

Remarks. Originally described as Holcoponera whymperi (Cameron, 1891). Cited as Cylindromyrmex striatus in Wheeler (1919) [CAS]. Cylindromyrmex williamsi in Wheeler (1924). Cylindromyrmex striatus tibialis in Stitz (1932). Cylindromyrmex williamsi in Linsley and Usinger (1966), Cylindromyrmex sp. in Silberglied (1972). Cylindromyrmex striatus in Lubin (1984), Cylindromyrmex sp. in de la Vega (1994). Cylindromyrmex whymperi in De Andrade (1998), Cylindromyrmex striatus in Causton et al. (2006), Cylindromyrmex whymperi Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 7. 

Cylindromyrmex whymperi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D view in profile E stinging apparatus. The small circles indicate spines on the pygidium.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), De Andrade (1998), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Baltra, Fernandina, Isabela (VA, VW), Santa Cruz (Herrera and al. 2020).

New record. Santiago Island.

Key to the genera and species of the subfamily Formicinae

1 Antenna, including scape, with 9 segments (Fig. 8C) (Brachymyrmex) Brachymyrmex heeri
– Antenna, including scape, with > 9 segments (Fig. 11C) 2
2 Polymorphic, minor workers > 4 mm (total length); antennal insertions located distantly from posterior margin of the clypeus (Fig. 11D); head in dorsal view with frontal carinae (Fig. 11D) (Camponotus) 3
– Monomorphic, workers of small size, < 4 mm (total length), with antennal insertions located near to posterior margin of clypeus (Fig. 12A, C); head in dorsal view with frontal carinae hardly visible (Fig. 11C) 5
3 In lateral view, promesonotum and dorsum of propodeum flat; propodeal declivity angulate (Fig. 11E); short and erect hairs distributed evenly along mesosoma; head, mesosoma, and gaster black with antennae and legs reddish (Fig. 11A, B) Camponotus planus
– In lateral view, promesonotum and propodeum rounded until the base of the declivity of propodeum, forming a single convexity (Figs 9B, E, 10B, C); long and erect hairs distributed unevenly along mesosoma; ants yellowish (Figs 9B, 10B) 4
4 Longitudinal carina visible in middle of the clypeus (major workers); head in frontal view with frontal carinae closing towards the middle of eyes; mesosoma with > 10 erect hairs (Fig. 9B, E) Camponotus zonatus
– Longitudinal carina in the middle of clypeus inconspicuous or absent (major workers); head in frontal view with frontal carinae opening from base of fronto-clypeal suture towards middle of eyes; mesosoma with < 10 erect hairs (Fig. 10B, C) Camponotus macilentus
5 Scape obviously elongate without erect setae and extending at least twice the length of the head in lateral view (Fig. 13D); mandibles with 5 teeth; mesosoma smooth with absence of appressed hairs (Fig. 13B, E) (Paratrechina) Paratrechina longicornis
– Scape with abundant erect setae and never extending twice the length of the head in lateral view (Fig. 12C, D); mandible with 6 or 7 teeth; mesosoma with appressed hairs (Fig. 12E) (Nylanderia) 6
6 Head, mesosoma, gaster and legs dark brown with trochanters yellowish; mesopleuron and metapleuron smooth and shiny (Fig. 12A, B) Nylanderia steinheili
– Species without combination of characteristics described above Nylanderia spp.

Genus Brachymyrmex Mayr, 1868

Brachymyrmex heeri Forel, 1874

Fig. 8

Remarks. First published record in Herrera and Longino (2008) [ICCDRS ]. Cited as Brachymyrmex sp. in Causton et al. (2006). Brachymyrmex heeri in Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Wauters et al. (2016) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 8. 

Brachymyrmex heeri worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D view in profile E head and antenna in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic, Neotropical, and Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Isabela (SN, VE), Marchena, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Camponotus Mayr, 1861

Camponotus zonatus Emery, 1894

Fig. 9

Remarks. First published record (Herrera and Causton 2010) [ICCDRS ]. Cited in Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 9. 

Camponotus zonatus worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D gaster in profile view E close up of acidopore.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #1, Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #4, Bainbridge #5, Bainbridge #6, Baltra, Champion, Cuevas, Daphne Mayor, Eden, Floreana, Genovesa, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VW), Mao, Marchena, Pinta, Pinzón, Plaza Norte, Plaza Sur, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Santiago, Seymour Norte (Herrera et al. 2020).

Camponotus macilentus Smith, 1877

Fig. 10

Remarks. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus in Wheeler (1919). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus in Emery (1920). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus macilentus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus macilentus in Clark et al. (1982), Lubin (1983) [ICCDRS ], Lubin (1984, 1985), Brandão and Paiva (1994), Meier (1994), Peck (1994b), Bolton (1995), Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (2011, 2012). Misidentification in Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], von-Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 10. 

Camponotus macilentus worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D view in profile E. mesosoma and head profile view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Baltra, Champion, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Genovesa, Isabela (SN, VA, VD, VW), Marchena, Pinta, Pinzón, Plaza Norte, Rábida, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Santiago, (Herrera and al. 2020).

Citations.

Camponotus macilentus albemarlensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. albemarlensis Wheeler, 1919: 284. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. albemarlensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus albemarlensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. albemarlensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus albemarlensis in (Bolton, 1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Isabela Island.

Camponotus macilentus altinotus Stitz, 1932. Cited as Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. altinota Stitz, 1932: 370. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus altinotus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus macilentus var. altinotus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus altinotus in (Bolton, 1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Floreana Island (Stitz 1932).

Camponotus macilentus barringtonensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. barringtonensis Wheeler, 1919: 282. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. barringtonensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus barringtonensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. barringtonensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus barringtonensis in (Bolton, 1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Fé Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus macilentus bindloensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. bindloensis Wheeler, 1919: 286. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. bindloensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus bindloensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. bindloensis in Kempf (1972), Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus bindloensis in Bolton (1995). Camponotus macilentus bindloensis in Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton et al. (2006), Bolton (2014).

Distribution. Endemic: Marchena Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus macilentus castellanus Wheeler, 1924. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. castellanus Wheeler, 1924: 116. Cited as Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus castellanus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. castellanus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus castellanus Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Genovesa Island (Wheeler 1924).

Camponotus macilentus duncanensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. duncanensis Wheeler, 1919: 283. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. duncanensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus duncanensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. duncanensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus macilentus duncanensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Floreana, Pinzón Islands (Wheeler 1919, Stitz 1932).

Camponotus macilentus hoodensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. hoodensis Wheeler, 1919: 285. Cited ad Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. hoodensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus hoodensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. hoodensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus hoodensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Española Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus macilentus jacobensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. jacobensis Wheeler, 1919: 280. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. jacobensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus jacobensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. jacobensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus jacobensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santiago Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus macilentus narboroensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. narboroensis Wheeler, 1919: 286. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. narboroensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus narboroensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. narboroensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus narboroensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Fernandina Island (Wheeler 1919, 1933).

Camponotus macilentus pervicus Wheeler, 1924. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. pervicus Wheeler, 1924: 115. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus pervicus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. pervicus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus pervicus in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Cruz Island (Wheeler 1924).

Camponotus macilentus sapphirinus Wheeler, 1924. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. sapphirinus Wheeler, 1924: 114. Cited as Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus sapphirinus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. sapphirinus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus sapphirinus in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Cruz, Baltra Islands (Wheeler 1924).

Camponotus macilentus vulcanalis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. vulcanalis Wheeler, 1919: 284. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. vulcanalis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus vulcanalis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus var. vulcanalis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus vulcanalis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Isabela Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus macilentus wollebaeki Stitz, 1932. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmamblys) macilentus var. wollebaeki Stitz, 1932: 371. Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus wollebaeki in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus macilentus var. wollebaeki in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Pseudocolobopsis) macilentus wollebaeki in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Floreana Island (Stitz 1932).

Camponotus planus Smith, 1877

Fig. 11

Remarks. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus in Wheeler (1919), Emery (1920). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus in Wheeler (1924), Stitz (1932). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus planus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus planus in Clark et al. (1982) [ICCDRS ], Lubin (1983, 1984, 1985) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (1993), Brandão and Paiva (1994), de la Vega (1994), Meier (1994) [ICCDRS ]. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus in Bolton (1995). Camponotus planus in Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005) [ICCDRS ], Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Jaramillo et al. (2010), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Chamorro et al. (2012) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) [ICCDRS ] and Wauters (2016) [ICCDRS ; RBINS].

Figure 11. 

Camponotus planus worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D head profile view E mesosoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Bainbridge #1, Baltra, Bartolomé, Cousin, Fernandina, Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Logie, Marchena, Pinzón, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé (Herrera et al. 2020).

Citations.

Camponotus planus fernandinensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. fernandinensis Wheeler, 1919: 296. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus fernandinensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. fernandinensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus fernandinensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Fernandina Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus planus fidelis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. fidelis Wheeler, 1919: 295. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. fidelis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus fidelis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. fidelis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus fidelis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Fé (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus planus hephaestus Wheeler, 1933. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. hephaestus Wheeler, 1933: 59. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus hephaestus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. hephaestus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus hephaestus in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Isabela Island (Wheeler 1933).

Camponotus planus indefessus Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. indefessus Wheeler, 1919: 294. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus indefessus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. indefessus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus indefessus in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Cruz Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus planus isabelensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. isabelensis Wheeler, 1919: 293. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus isabelensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. isabelensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus isabelensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Isabela Island (Wheeler 1919, 1933).

Camponotus planus peregrinus Emery, 1893. Cited as Camponotus peregrinus Emery, 1893: 91. Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus peregrinus in Wheeler (1919). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. peregrinus in Wheeler (1924), Stitz (1932). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus peregrinus in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. peregrinus in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus peregrinus in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Floreana, San Cristóbal Island (Wheeler 1919; Stitz 1932; Wheeler 1933).

Camponotus planus pinzonensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. pinzonensis Wheeler, 1919: 297. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. pinzonensis in Emery (1925). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus pinzonensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. pinzonensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus pinzonensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Pinzón Island (Wheeler 1919).

Camponotus planus sansalvadorensis Wheeler, 1924. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. sansalvadorensis Wheeler, 1924: 119. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus sansalvadorensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. sansalvadorensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus sansalvadorensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santiago Island (Wheeler 1924).

Camponotus planus santacruzensis Wheeler, 1919. Cited as Camponotus (Myrmorhachis) planus var. santacruzensis Wheeler, 1919: 294. Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. santacruzensis in Wheeler (1924). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus santacruzensis in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus var. santacruzensis in Kempf (1972). Camponotus (Myrmocladoecus) planus santacruzensis in Bolton (1995), Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Endemic: Santa Cruz, Baltra Island (Wheeler 1919, 1924, 1933).

Camponotus senex (Smith, 1858). Originally described as Formica senex (Smith, 1858). Cited in Smith (1877), Wheeler (1919). Doubtful record for Galápagos (Wheeler 1924). Cited also in Linsley and Usinger (1966), Kempf (1972), Brandão and Paiva (1994) and Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Uncertain: San Cristóbal Island (Smith 1877).

Genus Nylanderia Emery, 1906

Nylanderia fulva nesiotis (Wheeler, 1919)

Remarks. Cited as Prenolepis fulva nesiotis in Wheeler (1919, 1924, 1933) [CAS]. As Paratrechina fulva nesiotis in Linsley and Usinger (1966) and Nylanderia fulva nesiotis in Kempf (1972), Paratrechina nesiotis in Lubin (1983, 1984, 1985), see also Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Española, Isabela, Santiago, San Cristobal, Santa Cruz (Wheeler 1919, 1924, 1933).

Nylanderia guatemalensis itinerans (Forel, 1901)

Remarks. Cited as Prenolepis vividula guatemalensis itinerans in Wheeler (1919, 1924), Nylanderia vividula guatemalensis var. itinerans in Wheeler (1933) [CAS], Paratrechina vividula itinerans in Linsley and Usinger (1966), Nylanderia guatemalensis var. itinerans in Kempf (1972), Paratrechina vividula itinerans in Brandão and Paiva (1994) and Paratrechina guatemalensis itinerans in Pezzatti et al. (1998). See also Herrera (2015, 2019).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, San Cristobal, Santa Cruz (Wheeler 1919, 1924, 1933).

Nylanderia steinheili (Forel, 1893)

Fig. 12

Remarks. Cited as Prenolepis steinheili in (Forel, 1893). First record in Herrera et al. (2014), cited also in Dekoninck et al. (2014), Herrera (2015a. b), Wauters et al. (2016) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 12. 

Nylanderia steinheili worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D view in profile E mesosoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Brandão (1991), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (CA), Pinzón, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2014, 2020) [ICCDRS ].

New record. Santiago Island.

Nylanderia vaga (Forel, 1901)

Remarks. Cited as Prenolepis vaga in (Forel, 1901). Cited as Paratrechina vaga in Clark et al. (1982), McMullen (1987), McMullen (1990), McMullen (1993), Causton et al. (2006) and McMullen (2007). Cited as possibly N. vaga in Pezzatti et al. (1998).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Australasia, Indomalaya, Neotropical, Oceania.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Santa Cruz, Pinta (Clark et al. 1982; McMullen 1987 1990, 1993, 2007).

Genus Paratrechina Motschoulsky, 1863

Paratrechina longicornis (Latreille, 1802)

Fig. 13

Remarks. Cited as Formica longicornis in (Latreille, 1802). Cited as Prenolepis longicornis (Latreille, 1802) in Wheeler (1919), Wheeler (1924) and Stitz (1932). Paratrechina longicornis in Wheeler (1933) [CAS], Kempf (1972), Linsley and Usinger (1966), Lubin (1984) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (1987), McMullen (1990), McMullen (1993), Brandão and Paiva (1994), Meier (1994) [ICCDRS ], Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ]. Also, in Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ]. Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 13. 

Paratrechina longicornis worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D view in profile E mesosoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Baltra, Bartolomé, Champion, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Española), Isabela (SN, VA), Marchena, Pinta, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Seymour Norte (Herrera et al. 2020).

Key to the genera and species of the subfamily Myrmicinae

1 Postpetiole attached to the dorsal surface of the first segment of the gaster (Crematogaster) (Fig. 17C) Crematogaster JTL – 022
– Postpetiole attached on anterior surface of the first segment of the gaster (Figs 14C, 40C) 2
2 Antenna with 12 segments, scape included (Fig. 14D) 3
– Antenna with < 12 segments: scape included (Figs 18C, 33C) 19
3 Antennal club of two segments (Fig. 14D); triangular mandible equipped with a tooth at the basal margin; median portion of clypeus bicarinate with 2 clypeal teeth in the anterior clypeal margin, pointing to the apical margin of the mandibles when these are almost closed (Fig. 14E). Eye composed of 3 ommatidia (Fig. 14F) (Adelomyrmex) Adelomyrmex longinoi
– Antennal club diffuse or with 2 or 3 segments (Fig. 42A, C); mandible triangular with absence of teeth on the basal margin; pair of apical teeth at the anterior margin of clypeus absent (Fig. 42D) 4
4 Propodeum without spines (Figs 21C, 22F) 5
– Propodeum armed with spines (Figs 16C, 38C, 37C) 8
5 Posterior surface of the head and propodeal dorsum transversely striate (Fig. 42E, F) (Trichomyrmex) Trichomyrmex destructor
– Posterior surface of the head and propodeal dorsum not transversely striate (Figs 22D, 23D); (Monomorium) 6
6 Head, mesosoma and gaster smooth and shiny (Fig. 21A, B, D, E); in lateral view mesosoma with > 4 erect setae (Fig. 21C); bicolored with mesosoma pale brown, head and gaster dark brown (Fig. 21A, B) Monomorium floricola
– Head and mesosoma neither smooth nor shiny (Figs 22A, C, D, E, 23C, D, E); in lateral view mesosoma with ≤ 4erect setae (Fig. 22D), in dorsal and lateral view with appressed hairs (Fig. 23D, E) 7
7 In lateral or dorsal view, pronotum with a pair of erect setae (Fig. 22D, E), in lateral view post-petiole almost the same size as petiole (Fig. 22B, F); ant yellowish in its entirety (Fig. 22B) Monomorium pharaonis
– In lateral or dorsal view, pronotum without a pair of erect setae, only appressed pubescence present (Fig. 23E, D); in lateral view post-petiole slightly dilated, 1.5 times larger than petiole (Fig. 23B, F); bicolored with head, mesosoma, and legs reddish yellow and gaster dark brown (Fig. 23B) Monomorium cf. pharaonis
8 Antennal scrobes very well marked, extending posteriorly past the eyes (Fig. 37D); frontal carina clearly differentiated to extending tenuously until or near to the occipital corners (Fig. 41C) (Tetramorium) 9
– Antennal scrobes absent (Figs 15C, 28C); frontal carinae short and never extending posteriorly past the eyes (Figs 13C, 28D) 13
9 Propodeal spines long, strong, and acute (Figs 37C, 41D) 10
– Propodeal spines short and not acute (Figs 38C, 40C) 12
10 Sculpture on the cephalic dorsum of the head strigose (Fig. 41E); body dark brown to black; legs, antennae, and mandibles pale brown (Fig. 41A) Tetramorium lucayanum
– Sculpture on the cephalic dorsum of the head alveolate or areolate (Fig. 37E); yellowish and reddish ants (Figs 37B, 38B, 39B, 40B) 11
11 Anterior clypeal margin with a distinct median notch or impression; median portion of the clypeus with 3 longitudinal carinae (Fig. 37E); head, mesosoma, waist and gaster covered by numerous thick erect and suberect hairs (Fig. 37B, C, F); bicolored with gaster dark (Fig. 37B) Tetramorium bicarinatum
– Anterior clypeal margin without a median notch or impression (Fig. 39C); median portion of the clypeus with a central carina weak or discontinuously marked (Fig. 39B); head, mesosoma, waist, and gaster densely covered by a fine and long white pilosity (Fig. 39D, E, F); entirely reddish (Fig. 39B) Tetramorium lanuginosum
12 Frontal carinae very well marked (Fig. 40D); antennal scrobes shallow, broad and conspicuous (Fig. 40E) mesosoma with < 10 erect hairs Tetramorium simillimum
– Frontal carinae not well marked, scrobes vestigial, feebly developed (Fig. 38D, E); mesosoma with > 10 erect hairs Tetramorium caldarium
13 Head in full-face view and mesosoma in dorsal view strigose (Fig. 28C, E); mesosoma in lateral view clearly convex, without sutures impressed on the dorsum (Fig. 28B, E); eyes composed of 5 ommatidia (Fig. 28D) (Rogeria) Rogeria curvipubens
– Head in full-face view and mesosoma in dorsal view with variable sculpturing, but never uniformly strigose; mesosoma with notopropodeal suture present and grooved in lateral view (Slightly reduced to absent in Cardiocondyla minutior); number of ommatidia variable 14
14 Monomorphic worker caste; dorsal view of the head and mesosoma densely foveolate with small appressed hairs (Figs 15C, D, 16D, F); promesonotum flat or slightly convex (Figs 15E, 16C); anterior margin of clypeus projected over the basal margin of the mandibles (Fig. 16E); in dorsal view, post-petiole spherical and notably dilated in comparison with petiole (Fig. 15F) Cardiocondyla) 15
– Polymorphic worker caste; dorsal view of the head with the occipital corners smooth and shiny (major workers) (Fig. 27C); promesonotum convex (Fig. 25C); anterior margin of clypeus not projected over the basal margin of the mandibles (Fig. 25D); postpetiole never spherical (Fig. 26C) (Pheidole) 16
15 Metanotal groove not impressed on the dorsum of mesosoma (Fig. 16C, F); head, mesosoma, and gaster dark brown; propodeal spines short (Fig. 16C, B) Cardiocondyla minutior
– Metanotal groove impressed on the dorsum of mesosoma (Fig. 15D, E); mesosoma pale brown or orange, contrasting with darker gaster; propodeal spines longer and more acute than above (Fig. 15E) Cardiocondyla emeryi
16 Major workers orange to reddish; total length ~ 2 mm (Figs 24B, 27B) 17
– Major workers dark brown to brown; total length ~ 2.5 mm (Figs 25B, 26B) 18
17 Major workers: head in frontal view with antennal scrobe weakly developed and alveolate (Fig. 24D, E); mesosoma in lateral view alveolate (Fig. 24C, E) Pheidole flavens
– Major workers: head in frontal view with antennal scrobe absent (Fig. 27A, C, B); mesosoma in lateral view, with the pronotum in major proportion smooth and shiny (Fig. 27B, D), but rugulose and alveolate between the mesonotum and propodeum (Fig. 27D) Pheidole hh01
18 Promesonotum in lateral view convex until it reaches the metanotal groove (Fig. 25C); post-petiole hexagonal in dorsal view exaggeratedly swollen relative to petiole (Fig. 25E); subpostpetiolar process slightly bulging (Fig. 25F) Pheidole megacephala
– Promesonotum in lateral view forming two convexities, truncated before reaching the metanotal groove (Fig. 26D); postpetiole not swollen compared to petiole (Fig. 26E); subpostpetiolar process absent or reduced (Fig. 26F) Pheidole williamsi
19 Antenna with 10 or 11 segments (Figs 29C, 43C) 20
– Antenna with < 6 segments (Fig. 33F), (Strumigenys) 24
20 Antenna with 10 segments; funiculus with 2-segmented club (Fig. 29C); antennal scrobes absent (Fig. 30C); propodeum without spines (Fig. 31C) (Solenopsis) 21
– Antenna with 11 segments (Figs 18C, 43E); funiculus with a diffuse 3-segmented club (Figs 18C, 43C) antennal scrobes present (Figs 19E, 43E); spines on propodeum present or not (Figs 20C, 43D) 27
21 Large (Fig. 29B), second and usually third segments of funiculus at least 1½ times as long as broad (Fig. 29A, C); petiole with thin flange ventrally; dark brown to black (Fig. 29B) Solenopsis geminata
– Smaller (Figs 30B, 31B, 32B), second and third segments of funiculus at most only slightly longer than broad, usually broader than long (Fig. 31D); petiole lacking flange ventrally, reddish to orange and dark brown (Figs 30B, 31B, 32B) 22
22 Postpetiole greatly dilated, wider than petiole (seen from above), globose; eye with 15–25 ommatidia (Fig. 30D, E) Solenopsis globularia
– Postpetiole not dilated nor globose (Fig. 32C); eye with 3–5 ommatidia (Fig. 31D) 23
23 In full face view, occipital margin of the head slightly concave (Fig. 31E); anterior clypeal margin with the median portion concave and oriented onward; frontal lobes longitudinally striated (Fig. 31E) Solenopsis gnoma
– In full face view, occipital margin of the head relatively straight to convex rather than concave (Fig. 32E); anterior clypeal margin with the median portion erect and not oriented onward; frontal lobes smooth and shiny, not striated (Fig. 32E) Solenopsis cf. basalis (hh06)
24 Mandibles long and straight (Figs 33C, 35C) 25
– Mandibles short and curved downwards in profile, otherwise triangular (Figs 34D, 36C) 26
25 Mandibles with a small preapical tooth, without denticles on inner border (Fig. 35C); head and mesosoma with appressed spatulate hairs (Figs 34E, 35D, E, F) Strumigenys louisianae
– Mandibles armed with small denticles on inner border (Fig. 33C); head and mesosoma without appressed (spatulate) circular hairs (Fig. 33D, E) Strumigenys eggersi
26 Triangular mandibles armed with denticles (Fig. 36A); antenna with 6 segments, head and mesosoma with few appressed hairs (Fig. 36D); petiole and post-petiole with spongiform tissue (Fig. 36E) Strumigenys membranifera
– Mandibles in appearance curved and short, armed with an apical fork (Fig. 33D); antenna with four segments (Fig. 33C); head and mesosoma with appressed spatulate hairs (Fig. 33E); petiole and post-petiole without spongiform tissue Strumigenys emmae
27 Head in frontal view with the antennal insertions hidden under the frontal lobes, which are exceptionally broad or expanded (Figs 18C, 20A, D); promesonotum tuberculated and propodeum unarmed by spines (Figs 18D; 19C, 20C); first segment of the gaster covered with appressed hairs, dull and opaque (Figs 19E, 20E) (Cyphomyrmex) 28
– Head in full face view with the antennal insertions partly visible (Fig. 43A); frontal lobes not distended; promesonotum not tuberculated (Fig. 43D); propodeum armed with a pair of acute spines (Fig. 43D); first segment of the gaster smooth and shiny with few erect setae (Fig. 43F) (Wasmannia) Wasmannia auropunctata
28 Pair of tubercles absent in the anterior median region of the pronotum (Fig. 18E); dark brown (Fig. 18B) Cyphomyrmex nesiotus
– Pair of tubercles present in the anterior median region of the pronotum (Figs 19D, 20E) 29
29 In dorsal view, propodeal declivity with a pair of tubercles located at the level of spiracles (Fig. 20E, F); head and body black (Fig. 20B) Cyphomyrmex sp. hh04
– In dorsal view, propodeal declivity without a pair of tubercles situated at level of spiracles (Fig. 19C, D); head and gaster brown, mesosoma and legs pale brown (Fig. 19B) Cyphomyrmex rimosus

Genus Adelomyrmex Emery, 1897

Adelomyrmex longinoi Fernández, 2003

Fig. 14

Remarks. Misidentification in Herrera and Longino (2008). Cited in Longino (2012) and Herrera (2015, 2019) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 14. 

Adelomyrmex longinoi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C propodeum, petiole and postpetiole in profile D antennae in front view E mandibles in front view F head in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Central America.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela Island (Herrera et al. 2014).

Genus Cardiocondyla Emery, 1869

Cardiocondyla emeryi Forel, 1881

Fig. 15

Remarks. Cited in Lubin (1984), Lubin (1985), Pezzatti et al. (1998), Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), McMullen (2007), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ; RBINS]. Probably C. minutior or C. emeryi in Peck (1994a) and Peck (1994b).

Figure 15. 

Cardiocondyla emeryi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in dorsal view E mesosoma in profile F propodeum, petiole and postpetiole in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Albany, Bainbridge #1, Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #4, Bainbridge #5, Bainbridge #6, Bainbridge #8, Bar, Cousin, Darwin, Eden, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Genovesa, Gran Felipe, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Mariela Grande, Mao, Marchena, Pinta, Pinzón, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé, Wolf (Herrera et al. 2020).

Cardiocondyla minutior Forel, 1899

Fig. 16

Remarks. Cited as Cardiocondyla nuda in Lubin (1984), Lubin (1985), [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ]. Cited as C. nuda in Causton et al. (2006). Probably C. minutior in McMullen (1993). Cardiocondyla minutior or C. emeryi in Peck (1994a, 1994b). Cardiocondyla minutior in Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 16. 

Cardiocondyla minutior worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in full-face view E head in profile F mesosoma in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #1, Cousin, Daphne Mayor, Darwin, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE), Mariela Grande, Marchena, Pinta, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Wolf (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Crematogaster Lund, 1831

Crematogaster crinosa Mayr, 1862

Remarks. Cited as Crematogaster (Orthocrema) brevispionsa chatamensis in Wheeler (1933), Kempf (1972), Linsley and Usinger (1966). Crematogaster chatamensis in Lubin (1984). Crematogaster crinosa in Longino (2003) [CAS], Herrera et al. (2014), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Uncertain: San Cristóbal (Wheeler 1933).

Genus Crematogaster Lund, 1831

Crematogaster JTL-022

Fig. 17

Remarks. First published record Herrera et al. (2014), cited also in Traveset et al. (2013), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , JTLC].

Figure 17. 

Crematogaster JTL-022 worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C petiole and postpetiole in profile D head in full-face view E view in profile.

Distribution. Introduced: San Cristóbal Island (Herrera et al. 2014, 2020).

Genus Cyphomyrmex Mayr, 1862

Cyphomyrmex nesiotus Snelling & Longino, 1992

Fig. 18

Remarks. Cited in Snelling and Longino (1992), Herrera and Longino (2008), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , JTLC].

Figure 18. 

Cyphomyrmex nesiotus worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C antennae in front view D mesosoma in profile E mesosoma in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Probably endemic: Isabela (Snelling and Longino 1992).

Cyphomyrmex rimosus (Spinola, 1851)

Fig. 19

Remarks. First published record Herrera and Longino (2008) [ICCDRS ]. Cited also in Dekoninck et al. (2014), Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ]. Probably C. rimosus in Lubin (1984) and Brandão and Paiva (1994).

Figure 19. 

Cyphomyrmex rimosus worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head and mesosoma in profile D propodeum in dorsal view E dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic and Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (SN), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Cyphomyrmex sp. hh04

Fig. 20

Remarks. First published record as dark form of C. rimosus in Herrera and Longino (2008). Cited as Cyphomyrmex sp. hh04 in Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , RBINS].

Figure 20. 

Cyphomyrmex sp. hh004 worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in full-face view E dorsal view F mesosoma in dorsal view.

Distribution. Origin uncertain: Isabela (SN) Pinzón, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Santiago Island.

Genus Monomorium Mayr, 1855

Monomorium floricola (Jerdon, 1851)

Fig. 21

Remarks. Originally cited as Atta floricola in (Jerdon, 1851). Cited as Monomorium floreanun in Stitz (1932). Monomorium floricola in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Monomorium floreanun in Kempf (1972). Monomorium floricola in Kempf (1972), Clark et al. (1982), Lubin (1984) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (1993), Meier (1994) [ICCDRS ], Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], de la Vega (1994), Peck (1994a), Peck et al. (1998), Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (2012), Chamorro et al. (2012) [ICCDRS ], Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 21. 

Monomorium floricola worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in full-face view E mesosoma in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #5, Baltra, Bartolomé, Bayas, Bowditch South, Champion, Cousin, Daphne Mayor, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Genovesa, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD), Mariela Grande, Mariela Mediana, Marchena, Pinta, Plaza Norte, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Sombrero Chino.

Monomorium pharaonis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fig. 22

Remarks. Originally cited as Formica pharaonis in (Linnaeus, 1758). Galápagos first published record in Wheeler (1919). Cited also in Linsley and Usinger (1966), Kempf (1972), Lubin (1984) [ICCDRS ], Brandão and Paiva (1994), Peck et al. (1998), Causton et al. (2006), Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 22. 

Monomorium pharaonis worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in profile E mesosoma in dorsal view F petiole and postpetiole in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Baltra, Isabela (SN), Pinta, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Monomorium cf. pharaonis

Fig. 23

Remarks. First record in Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ]. Cited also in Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Wauters et al. (2016) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 23. 

Monomorium sp. nr. pharaonis worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in dorsal view E mesosoma in profile F petiole and postpetiole in profile.

Distribution. Undetermined origin: Baltra, Fernandina, Floreana, Isabela (SN), Marchena, Pinta, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Pheidole Westwood, 1839

Pheidole flavens Roger, 1863

Fig. 24

Remarks. Cited in Wheeler (1919), Clark et al. (1982), Herrera et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 24. 

Pheidole flavens worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in full-face view E head in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VW), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Pheidole megacephala (Fabricius, 1793)

Fig. 25

Remarks. Originally cited as Formica megacephala (Fabricius, 1793). Cited in Herrera et al. (2013) [ICCDRS ], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020).

Figure 25. 

Pheidole megacephala worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in profile E petiole and postpetiole in dorsal view F petiole and postpetiole in profile (spp = subpetiolar process).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela (SN), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2013).

Pheidole williamsi Wheeler, 1919

Fig. 26

Remarks. Cited as Pheidole williamsi in (Wheeler 1919). Pheidole williamsi var. seymourensis in Wheeler (1924), Linsley and Usinger (1966). Pheidole williamsi williamsi in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Pheidole williamsi in Clark et al. (1982), Lubin (1984, 1985), Espadaler (1997), Wilson (2003), Herrera et al. (2014) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 26. 

Pheidole williamsi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C petiole and postpetiole in profile D mesosoma in profile E head in profile F petiole and postpetiole in profile (spp = subpetiolar process).

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Possibly endemic: Albany, Bainbridge #1, Bainbridge #2, Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #4, Bainbridge #5, Bainbridge #6, Baltra, Bowditch South, Daphne Mayor, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (SN, VA, VD, VW), Mariela Grande, Mariela Mediana, Pinta, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé, Tortuga (Herrera et al. 2020).

New records. Bartolomé and Beagle.

Pheidole sp. hh01

Fig. 27

Remarks. In Herrera et al. (2014), Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 27. 

Pheidole sp. hh01 worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in profile E view in profile.

Distribution. Origin uncertain: Bowditch South, Eden, Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Logie, Pinzón, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Rogeria Emery, 1894

Rogeria curvipubens Emery, 1894

Fig. 28

Remarks. Galápagos first published record (Herrera and Longino 2008), cited also in Dekoninck et al. (2014), Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 28. 

Rogeria curvipubens worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D head in profile E mesosoma in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela (SN), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Solenopsis Westwood, 1840

Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius, 1804)

Fig. 29

Remarks. Originally cited as Atta geminata in (Fabricius, 1804). Cited as Solenopsis geminata in Emery (1893). Solenopsis geminata galapageia in Wheeler (1919), Linsley and Usinger (1966), and Kempf (1972). Solenopsis geminata in Lubin (1984), Williams (1987), Trager (1991), Williams and Whelan (1991), Brandão and Paiva (1994), Meier (1994), de la Vega (1994), Peck et al. (1998), Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch and Cherix (2005) [ICCDRS ], Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Pacheco et al. (2007), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera and Longino (2008), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera et al. (2013), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2014) [RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016), [RBINS] Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 29. 

Solenopsis geminata worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C antennae funiculi in profile D head in full-face view E view in profile.

Taxonomic history. Trager (1991), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Albany, Bainbridge #1, Baltra, Bayas, Champion, Cuevas, Eden, Enderby, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (CA, SN, VA), Mariela Grande, Mao, Mariela Mediana, Plaza Sur, Santa Fé, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte (Herrera et al. 2020).

Solenopsis globularia (Smith, 1858)

Fig. 30

Remarks. Originally cited as Myrmica globularia pacifica in (Smith, 1858). Cited as Solenopsis globularia pacifica in Wheeler (1919, 1924). Solenopsis globularia pacifica var. rubida in Wheeler (1919, 1924), Solenopsis globularia pacifica in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Solenopsis globularia rubida in Linsley and Usinger (1966). Solenopsis globularia pacifica and Solenopsis globularia pacifica var. rubida in Kempf (1972). Solenopsis globularia in Clark et al. (1982). Solenopsis pacifica in Lubin (1984). Solenopsis globularia in Lubin (1985) [ICCDRS ], Meier (1994), Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], Peck et al. (1998), (Pezzatti et al. (1998), Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006), Causton et al. (2006), Pacheco et al. (2007), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], McMullen (2012), Pacheco and Mackay (2013), Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 30. 

Solenopsis globularia worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D petiole and postpetiole in dorsal view E head and mesosoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006), Pacheco and Mackay (2013).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Albany, Bainbridge #1, Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #5, Bainbridge #7, Bainbridge #8, Baltra, Bowditch South, Champion, Daphne Mayor, Darwin, Eden, Enderby, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Española), Gardner (next to Floreana), Genovesa, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Mariela Grande, Mao, Mariela Pequeña, Marchena, Pinta, Pinzón, Plaza Sur, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé, Tortuga (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Sombrero Chino.

Solenopsis gnoma Pacheco, Herrera & Mackay, 2007

Fig. 31

Remarks. Cited also in Dekoninck et al. (2014), Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 31. 

Solenopsis gnoma worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in profile E head in full-face view.

Taxonomic history. Pacheco and Mackay (2013), Bolton (2014).

Distribution. Probably endemic: Albany, Bowditch South, Española, Floreana, Isabela (SN, VA, CA), Marchena, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Pacheco et al. 2007; Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Santiago.

Solenopsis saevissima (Smith, 1855)

Remarks. Originally cited as Myrmica saevissima (Smith, 1855). Doubtful record for Galápagos (Herrera et al. 2020). Cited in Wheeler (1919, 1924), Linsley and Usinger (1966) and Brandão and Paiva (1994), probably misidentification in Peck et al. (1998). Cited also from literature in Causton et al. (2006).

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Uncertain: Santa Cruz Island (Wheeler 1919; Peck et al. 1998).

Solenopsis cf. basalis (hh06)

Fig. 32

Remarks. First record in Herrera et al. (2014), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 32. 

Solenopsis sp. basalis (hh06) worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma in profile D head in profile E head in full-face view.

Distribution. Origin uncertain: Bainbridge #5, Santa Cruz, Santiago (Herrera et al. 2014).

Genus Strumigenys Smith, 1860

Strumigenys eggersi Emery, 1890

Fig. 33

Remarks. Galápagos first published record in Herrera et al. (2014). Cited also in Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 33. 

Strumigenys eggersi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on mandibles D head in full-face view E mesosoma in dorsal view F head in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Indomalaya, Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2014).

Strumigenys emmae (Emery, 1890)

Fig. 34

Remarks. Originally cited as Epitritus emmae in (Emery, 1890). Cited as Quadristruma emmae in Pezzatti et al. (1998) and Causton et al. (2006). Also, in Herrera et al. (2014). Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera et al. 2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 34. 

Strumigenys emmae worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in profile D close-up of mandibles E close-up of spatulate setae.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Isabela (SN, VA), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Strumigenys louisianae Roger, 1863

Fig. 35

Remarks. Cited in Lubin (1984), (Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Herrera et al. (2014), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016), Herrera et al. (2020), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 35. 

Strumigenys louisianae worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on mandibles D head in full-face view E mesosoma in dorsal view F close-up on spatulate setae.

Taxonomic history. In Kempf (1972), Brandão (1991), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Santiago.

Strumigenys membranifera Emery, 1869

Fig. 36

Remarks. Galápagos first published record in Herrera et al. (2014). Cited in Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 36. 

Strumigenys membranifera worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D head in profile E petiole and postpetiole with developed spongiform tissue.

Taxonomic history. In Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela (VA, VW), Santiago (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Tetramorium Mayr, 1855

Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander, 1846)

Fig. 37

Remarks. Originally cited as Myrmica bicarinatum in (Nylander, 1846). Cited as Tetramorium guineense in Emery (1893), Wheeler (1919) [CAS], Wheeler (1924), Wheeler (1933) [CAS], Linsley and Usinger (1966), Kempf (1972), Clark et al. (1982), Brandão and Paiva (1994). As T. bicarinaum in Lubin (1984), Lubin (1985) [QCAZ], Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], de la Vega (1994), Meier (1994) [ICCDRS ], Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 37. 

Tetramorium bicarinatum worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C petiole and postpetiole in profile D head in profile E head in full-face view F mesosoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Brandão (1991), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #1, Bainbridge #2, Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #4, Bainbridge #5, Bainbridge #6, Bainbridge #8, Baltra, Bar, Bayas, Caldwell, Daphne Mayor, Española, Fernandina, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Gardner (next to Española), Genovesa, Guy Fawkes, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Mariela Grande, Mariela Mediana, Marchena, Pinzón, Plaza Norte, Plaza Sur, Rábida, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé, Sombrero Chino (Herrera et al. 2020).

New records. Beagle #2, Beagle #3, Santiago Island.

Tetramorium caldarium (Roger, 1857)

Fig. 38

Remarks. Originally cited as Tetrogmus caldarium in (Roger, 1857). Cited in Brandão and Paiva (1994), Meier (1994), Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006), Causton et al. (2006), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 38. 

Tetramorium caldarium worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C mesosoma profile D head in full-face view E close-up on the antennal scrobe.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Brandão (1991), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Tetramorium lanuginosum Mayr, 1870

Fig. 39

Remarks. First published record (Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ]. Cited also in Causton et al. (2006), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 39. 

Tetramorium lanuginosum worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on mandibles and clypeus D head in profile E mesosoma in profile F petiole and postpetiole in profile.

Taxonomic history. In Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #3, Bainbridge #8, Baltra, Floreana, Gardner (next to Española), Isabela (VD), Pinzón, Plaza Norte, Plaza Sur, Rábida, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santa Fé, Seymour Norte, Wolf (Herrera et al. 2020).

New records. Bainbridge #1, Bartolomé, Beagle #2, Beagle #3, Champion, Mao, Marchena, Santiago, Sombrero Chino.

Tetramorium simillimum (Smith, 1851)

Fig. 40

Remarks. Originally cited as Myrmica simillimum in (Smith, 1851). First published record in Wheeler (1919). Cited also in Wheeler (1933), Kempf (1972), Linsley and Usinger (1966), Clark et al. (1982), Lubin (1984), Lubin (1985), Brandão and Paiva (1994), Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], Peck et al. (1998), (Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera et al. (2014). Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 40. 

Tetramorium simillimum worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C petiole and postpetiole in profile D head in full-face view E head in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Bainbridge #6, Baltra, Bar, Cousin, Daphne Mayor, Floreana, Gardner (next to Floreana), Isabela (SN, VA), Marchena, Mariela Grande, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Tortuga (Herrera et al. 2020).

New record. Mariela Mediana.

Tetramorium lucayanum Wheeler, 1905

Fig. 41

Remarks. First published record in Herrera et al. (2014), Cited also in Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 41. 

Tetramorium lucayanum worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in profile E head in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Neotropical, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Isabela (CA) (Herrera et al. 2014).

New record. Isabela (SN).

Genus Trichomyrmex Mayr, 1855

Trichomyrmex destructor (Jerdon, 1851)

Fig. 42

Remarks. Originally cited as Atta destructor in (Jerdon, 1851). Cited as Monomorium destructor, in Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006), Causton et al. (2006), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 42. 

Trichomyrmex destructor worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on antennae D close-up on mandibles E head in dorsal view F mesosoma in dorsal view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Malagasy, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Baltra, Floreana, Isabela (SN), Santiago (Herrera et al. 2020).

Genus Wasmannia Forel, 1893

Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger, 1863)

Fig. 43

Remarks. Originally cited as Tetramorium auropunctata in (Roger, 1863). First published record in Silberglied (1972). Cited in Lubin (1983), Lubin (1984) [ICCDRS ], Lubin (1985), McMullen (1987), Williams (1987), Ulloa-Chacón et al. (1991), Coppois and Wells (1987), McMullen (1990), Brandão (1991), Williams and Whelan (1992), McMullen (1993), Brandão and Paiva (1994), Meier (1994), Abedrabbo (1994) [ICCDRS ], Ulloa-Chacón and Cherix (1994), de la Vega (1994), Lundh (1998), Peck et al. (1998), Pezzatti et al. (1998) [ICCDRS ], Roque-Albelo et al. (2000) [ICCDRS ], Boada (2005) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2005) [ICCDRS ], von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), McMullen (2007), Herrera and Causton (2010) [ICCDRS ], Herrera and Longino (2008), (McMullen (2011), Herrera et al. (2013), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [ICCDRS , RBINS], Wauters et al. (2014) [RBINS], Wauters et al. (2016) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 43. 

Wasmannia auropunctata worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in full-face view D mesosoma in profile E head in profile F metasoma in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Afrotropical, Australasia, Indomalaya, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Albany, Bainbridge #1, Baltra, Bowditch South, Champion, Cousin, Eden, Española, Floreana, Gran Felipe, Isabela (SN, VA, VD, VE, VW), Mao, Marchena, Pinzón, Rábida, Santiago, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Santa Fé, Tortuga (Herrera et al. 2020).

Key to the genera and species of the subfamily Ponerinae

1 Mandible elongate and linear (Figs 49C, 50C); petiolar node armed with apical spine (Figs 49D, 50D). (Odontomachus) 2
– Mandibles not elongate (Figs 44D, 47C, 48C); petiole not armed with apical spine (Figs 44C, B, 47A, C) 3
2 Entirely dark brown (Fig. 49A, B); long hairs located below the mandibles, running from the base towards the apex (Fig. 49C); anterior face of the petiole somewhat convex (Fig. 49D) Odontomachus bauri
– Somewhat tricolored: head, antennae and legs orangish, mesosoma reddish brown and gaster dark brown (Fig. 50A, B); ventral face of mandibles with short hairs running from base towards apex (Fig. 50C); anterior face of petiole almost straight or less convex than above (Fig. 50D) Odontomachus ruginodis
3 Mandibles falcate with apical tooth; anterior margin of clypeus triangular with carina conspicuously or slightly visible in median portion (Figs 47C, 48C); anterior legs with finely pectinate tarsal claws (Fig. 48D) (Leptogenys) 4
– Triangular with dentate mandibles; anterior margin of clypeus without median carina (Fig. 44D; 46D); legs with simple tarsal claws (Fig. 44F) (Hypoponera) 5
4 Mandibles with basal margin distant from the anterior margin of clypeus when closed (Fig. 47A, C); in lateral view, mesosoma with numerous hairs and petiole higher than wide (Fig. 47D); ~ 5 mm long; body entirely brown (Fig. 47A, B) Leptogenys santacruzi
– Mandibles with basal margin almost flush with the anterior border of clypeus when closed (Fig. 48A, C); mesosoma smooth and shiny with few setae; lacking longitudinal striae in the pronotum and propodeum; petiole elongated in lateral view (Fig. 48B, E); ~ 4 mm long; body black, mandibles, legs, and antennae brown (Fig. 48A, B) Leptogenys cf. gorgona
5 Color dark red brown to black (Fig. 45A, B); scape of antenna reaching the occipital margin of the head (Fig. 45A); petiolar node quadrate (Fig. 45B, C) Hypoponera opaciceps
– Color red brown to dark brown (Figs 44A, B, 46A, B); scape of antenna never reaching the occipital margin of the head (Figs 44A, 46E); petiolar node never quadrate 6
6 Lateral surface of petiole relatively coarse with the dorsum somewhat rounded, not totally covered with fine appressed hairs (Fig. 44C) Hypoponera beebei
– Lateral surface of petiole somewhat more thick than coarse, with the dorsum somewhat triangular, sometimes covered by many fine appressed hairs (Fig. 46F) Hypoponera opacior

Genus Hypoponera Santschi, 1938

Hypoponera beebei (Wheeler, 1924)

Fig. 44

Remarks. Originally cited as Ponera beebei in Wheeler (1924: 107). Hypoponera beebei in Linsley and Usinger (1966), Kempf (1972), Lubin (1985), Peck (1994a), Peck (1994b), Roque-Albelo et al. (2000), Wauters et al. (2016), Lubin (1984), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 44. 

Hypoponera beebei worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on petiole in profile D close-up on mandibles E head in full-face view F close-up on tarsal claws.

Taxonomic history. Kempf (1972), Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Possibly endemic: Fernandina, Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VW), Marchena, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Seymour Norte, Genovesa (Herrera et al. 2020).

Hypoponera opaciceps (Mayr, 1887)

Fig. 45

Remarks. Originally cited as Ponera opaciceps in (Mayr, 1887). First published record in (Lubin 1983). Cited also in Lubin (1984), Peck (1994b), Dekoninck et al. (2014), Herrera (2015), Wauters et al. (2016), and Herrera et al. (2020).

Figure 45. 

Hypoponera opaciceps worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on petiole in profile D head in full-face view E stinging apparatus.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Australasia, Indomalaya, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oceania, Palearctic.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Baltra, Fernandina, Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD) Marchena, San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz, Santiago (Herrera et al. 2020).

Hypoponera cf. opacior (Forel, 1893)

Fig. 46

Remarks. Originally cited as Ponera opacior (Forel, 1893). In Herrera et al. (2014), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [RBINS], Herrera (2015, 2019), and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 46. 

Hypoponera cf. opacior worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C metasoma in profile D close-up on mandibles E head in full-face view F close-up on petiole in profile.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Fernandina, Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN, VA, VD, VW), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2014).

Genus Leptogenys Roger, 1861

Leptogenys santacruzi Lattke, 2011

Fig. 47

Remarks. Cited in Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [CAS. ICCDRS ].

Figure 47. 

Leptogenys santacruzi worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on mandibles D close-up on petiole in profile E view in profile F head in full-face view.

Taxonomic history. Lattke (2011) and Bolton (2014).

Distribution. Endemic: Isabela (VA), Santa Cruz Islands (Herrera et al. 2020).

Leptogenys sp. gorgona (hh03)

Fig. 48

Remarks. Cited in Lattke (2011), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 48. 

Leptogenys cf. gorgona worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C close-up on clypeus D close-up on tarsal claws E close-up on petiole in profile F head in full-face view.

Distribution. Native: Santa Cruz.

New record. Isabela Island (SN).

Genus Odontomachus Latreille, 1804

Odontomachus bauri Emery, 1892

Fig. 49

Remarks. Cited as O. bauri in Emery (1893), as Odontomachus haematoda bauri in Wheeler (1919) [CAS], Wheeler (1924), Wheeler (1933) [CAS], Kempf (1972) and Odontomachus haematoda in Stitz (1932). Odontomachus bauri in Pezzatti et al. (1998), von Aesch and Cherix (2005), Linsley and Usinger (1966), Lubin (1984), Brandão (1991), Brandão and Paiva (1994), de la Vega (1994), von Aesch and Cherix (2005), von Aesch (2006) [ICCDRS ], Causton et al. (2006), Dekoninck et al. (2014) [RBINS], Wauters et al. (2014), Herrera (2015, 2019) and Herrera et al. (2020) [ICCDRS , ICCDRS ].

Figure 49. 

Odontomachus bauri worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in profile D close-up on petiole in profile E head in full-face view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Floreana, Isabela (CA, SN), San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2020).

Odontomachus ruginodis Wheeler, 1908

Fig. 50

Remarks. First published record in Herrera et al. (2014), see also Herrera (2015, 2019) and (Herrera et al. 2020) [ICCDRS ].

Figure 50. 

Odontomachus ruginodis worker micrographs in A head in full-face view B view in profile, and SEM images of C head in profile D close-up on petiole in profile E head in full-face view.

Taxonomic history. Bolton (1995, 2014), Bolton et al. (2006).

Distribution. Nearctic, Neotropical.

Galápagos distribution. Introduced: Santa Cruz (Herrera et al. 2014).

Acknowledgements

We thank the Galápagos National Park Directorate (GNPD) for providing research and export permits (PC-32-14; PC-37-14; PC-27-15; PC-67-18; PC-41-19), along with the Charles Darwin Foundation (CDF) for their support and providing facilities. We are grateful to all the contributors cited in Herrera et al. (2020) who provided samples or made collections possible. We also thank Brian Fisher and April Nobile who assisted in the visit of the first author to the California Academy of Sciences (CAS). April Nobile (CAS) and Julian Cilies (RBINS) photographed specimens in Auto-Montage and scanning electron microscope. Julien Caudron (RBINS) made the drawings used as guides for the identification of parts of the ants. We also thank Yessenia Campaña and Fernanda Logroño (ESPOCH) for the project’s logistics. Thanks to Thibaut Delsinne, Fernando Fernandez, and anonymous reviewers for their revision of the manuscript. This publication is contribution number 2564 of the Charles Darwin Foundation for the Galápagos Islands and the number 004 under cooperative agreement ESPOCH-FCD/2017-2022, and ESPOCH- GNPD /2018-2021.

Additional information

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Funding

This research was supported by Swiss Friends of Galápagos (Freunde der Galápagos Inseln), Lindblad Expeditions-National Geographic Fund, Galápagos Conservancy, the Lakeside Fund of the California Academy of Sciences, the Leopold III funding, Department Entomology of RBINS and the Belgian Focal Point of the Global Taxonomy Initiative.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: HWH, FH, WD. Data curation: MCCT, HWH, GF. Formal analysis: MCCT, GF. Investigation: HWH. Methodology: MCCT, GF. Supervision: HWH. Visualization: GF, MCCT. Writing – original draft: HWH. Writing – review and editing: FH, GF, CEC, WD, MCCT.

Author ORCIDs

Henri W. Herrera https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1417-4349

María C. Tocora https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5304-4010

Gianpiero Fiorentino https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6948-5032

Charlotte E. Causton https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2861-0025

Wouter Dekoninck https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7065-7310

Frederik Hendrickx https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1176-0318

Data availability

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.

References

  • Abedrabbo S (1994) Control of the little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata, on Santa Fe Island in the Galápagos Islands. In: Williams DF (Ed.) Exotic Ants: Biology, Impact, and Control of Introduced Species. Westview Studies in Insect Biology, Boulder, CO, 9 pp.
  • Boada R (2005) Insects associated with endangered plants in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Entomotrópica 20: 77–88.
  • Bolton B (1994) Identification Guide to the Ant Genera of the World. Mass. : Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 222 pp.
  • Bolton B (1995) New General Catalogue of the Ants of the World. Mass. : Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 504 pp.
  • Bolton B (2014) An Online Catalog of the Ants of the World 2016. http://www.antcat.org [Accessed 7 July 2015]
  • Bolton B, Palacios E, Fernandez F (2003) Morfología y glosario. In: Fernández F (Ed.) Introducción a las hormigas de la región Neotropical. Bogotá: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, xxvi, 221–231. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.11738
  • Bolton B, Alpert G, Ward PS, Naskrecki P (2006) Bolton’s Catalogue of ants of the world: 1758–2005. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, Compact Disk.
  • Brandão CRF (1991) Adendos ao catálogo abreviado das formigas da região Neotropical (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 35: 319–412.
  • Brandão CRF, Paiva RV (1994) The Galápagos ant fauna and the attributes of colonizing ant species. In: Williams DF (Ed.) Exotic ants. Biology, impact, and control of introduced species. Westview Press, Boulder, xvii, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429040795-1
  • Cameron P (1891) Supplementary appendix Hym. Formicidae. In: Whymper E (Ed.) Supplementary appendix to travels amongst the great Andes of the equator. J. Murray, London, 89–95. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.8020
  • Chamorro S, Heleno R, Olesen JM, McMullen CK, Traveset A (2012) Pollination patterns and plant breeding systems in the Galápagos: A review. Annals of Botany 110(7): 1489–1501. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcs132
  • Clark DB, Guayasamin C, Pazmiño O, Donoso C, de Villacis YP (1982) The tramp ant Wasmannia auropunctata: Autecology and effects on ant diversity and distribution on Santa Cruz Island, Galapagos. Biotropica 14(3): 196–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/2388026
  • Crocker T (1933) The Templeton Crocker Expedition of the California Academy of Sciences, 1932, No. 2: Introductory statement. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, 4th Ser 21: 3–9.
  • de la Vega I (1994) Food searching behavior and competition between Wasmannia auropunctata and native ants on Santa Cruz and Isabela, Galápagos Islands. In: Williams DE (Ed.) Exotic Ants Biology, Impact, and Control of Introduced Species. Westview Studies in Insect Biology. Westview Press, 74–79.
  • Dekoninck W, Fernandez F, Herrera HW, Wauters N, Brito G, Jumbo L, Marín-Armijos D, Delsinne T (2014) Results of ant collections on Santa Cruz Island within the framework of the 2012 Global Taxonomy Initiative Ant Course at Galápagos (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Bulletin de la Société Royale Belge d'Entomologie 150: 250–255.
  • Emery C (1893) Notice sur quelques fourmis des îles Galapagos. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 62: 89–92.
  • Emery C (1894) Camponotus sexguttatus Fab. e C. sexguttatus Sm. et auct. Bollettino dei Musei di Zoologia ed Anatomia Comparata della Reale Università di Torino 9(187): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.8049
  • Emery C (1925) Hymenoptera. Fam. Formicidae. Subfam. Formicinae. Genera Insectorum 183: 1–302.
  • Espadaler X (1997) Pheidole williamsi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Parasitized by Myrmiciniosporidium durum (Fungi) on San Salvador Island (Galápagos Islands). Sociobiology 30: 99–102.
  • Fabricius JC (1793) Entomologia systematica emendata et aucta. Secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, adjectis synonimis, locis observationibus, descriptionibus. Tome 2. Hafniae [= Copenhagen]: C. G. Proft, 519. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.125869
  • Forel A (1881) Die Ameisen der Antille St. Thomas. Mitteilungen der Münchener Entomologischen Verein 5: 1–16.
  • Forel A (1892) Die Ameisen Neu-Seelands. Mitteilungen der Schweizerische Entomologische Gesellschaft 8: 331–343.
  • Forel A (1899) Formicidae. Biologia Centrali-americana: Insecta. Hymenoptera 3: 137–160.
  • Harris RA (1979) A glossary of surface sculpturing. Occasional papers of the Bureau of Entomology of the California Department of Agriculture 28: 1–31.
  • Herrera HW, Longino JT (2008) New records of introduced ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Galápagos Islands. Galapagos Research 65: 16–19.
  • Herrera HW, Sevilla CR, Dekoninck W (2013) Pheidole megacephala (Fabricius 1793) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): a new invasive ant in the Galápagos Islands. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist 89(4): 234–243. https://doi.org/10.3956/2013-16.1
  • Herrera HW, Longino JT, Dekoninck W (2014) New records of nine ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) for the Galápagos Islands. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist 90(2): 72–81. https://doi.org/10.3956/2014-90.2.72
  • Herrera HW, Baert L, Dekoninck W, Causton CE, Sevilla CR, Pozo P, Hendrickx F (2020) Distribution and habitat preferences of Galápagos ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Belgian Journal of Entomology 93: 1–60.
  • Jaramillo P, Trigo MM, Ramírez E, Mauchamp A (2010) Insect pollinators of Jasminocereus thouarsii, an endemic cactus of the Galápagos Islands. http://hdl.handle.net/1834/36284
  • Jerdon TC (1851) A catalogue of the species of ants found in southern India. Madras Journal of Literature and Science 17: 103–127.
  • Kempf W (1972) Catálogo abreviado das formigas da região Neotropical (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Studia Entomologica 15: 1–344.
  • Latreille PA (1802) Histoire naturelle générale et particulière des Crustacés et des insectes. Tome 3. Familles naturelles des genres. F. Dufart, Paris, 467 pp.
  • Lattke J (2011) Revision of the new world species of the genus Leptogenys Roger (Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Ponerinae). Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny 69(3): 127–264. https://doi.org/10.3897/asp.69.e31744
  • Linsley EG, Usinger RL (1966) Insects of the Galápagos islands. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 33: 113–196.
  • Lubin YD (1983) Studies of the little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata, in a Niño year. El niño en las Islas Galápagos: El evento de 1983: 473–493.
  • Lubin YD (1984) An ant-eating crab spider from the Galapagos. Noticias de Galápagos 37: 18–19.
  • Lubin YD (1985) Changes in the native fauna of the Galápagos Islands following invasion by the little red fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. Linnean Society of London 21(1–2): 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1984.tb02064.x
  • Lundh JP (1998) Insidious invaders. Noticias de Galápagos. 34: 33–34.
  • Mayr GL (1862) Myrmecologische studien. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien 12: 649–776.
  • Mayr GL (1868) Formicidae novae Americanae collectae a Prof. P. de Strobel. Annuario della Società dei Naturalisti e Matematici, Modena 3: 161–178.
  • McMullen CK (1990) Reproductive biology of Galápagos Islands angiosperms. In: Lawesson JE, Hamann O, Rogers G, Reck G, Ochoa H (Eds) Botanical Research and Management in the Galapagos, St Louis, Missouri Botanical Garden, 35–45.
  • McMullen C (1993) Flower-visiting insects of the Galápagos Islands. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist (USA) 69: 95–106.
  • McMullen CK (2011) Nocturnal and diurnal pollination of Clerodendrum molle (Verbenaceae) in the Galápagos Islands. Plant Systematics and Evolution 292(1–2): 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-010-0395-x
  • Meier RE (1994) Coexisting patterns and foraging behavior of introduced and native ants (Hymenoptera Formicidae) in the Galapagos Islands (Ecuador). In: Williams DF (Ed.) Exotic Ants: Biology, Impact, and Control of Introduced Species. Westview Studies in Insect Biology, Boulder, CO CRC Press, 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429040795-4
  • Nylander W (1846) Additamentum adnotationum in monographiam formicarum borealium Europae. Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae 2: 1041–1062.
  • Pacheco JA, Mackay WP (2013) The systematics and biology of the New World thief ants of the genus Solenopsis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Edwin Mellen Press Lewiston, New York.
  • Pacheco J, Herrera HW, Mackay W (2007) A new species of thief ant of the genus Solenopsis from the Galápagos Islands (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 50: 1075.
  • Peck SB (1994a) Aerial dispersal of insects between and to islands in the Galápagos Archipelago, Ecuador. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 87(2): 218–224. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/87.2.218
  • Peck SB (1994b) Sea-surface (Pleuston) transport of insects between islands in the Galápagos archipelago, Ecuador. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 87(5): 576–582. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/87.5.576
  • Peck SB, Heraty J, Landry B, Sinclair BJ (1998) Introduced insect fauna of an oceanic archipelago: The Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. American Entomologist (Lanham, Md. ) 44(4): 218–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/ae/44.4.218
  • Pezzatti B, Irzan T, Cherix D (1998) Ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of Floreana: Lost paradise? Noticias de Galápagos 59: 11–20.
  • Reich G (1793) Kurze Beschreibung neuen, oder noch wenig bekkanten Thiere, welche Herr Le Blond der naturforschenden Gesellschaft zu Paris aus Cayenne als Geschenk überschikt hat. Magazin des Thierreichs 1: 128–134.
  • Roger J (1860) Die Ponera – artigen Ameisen. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift 4: 278–312.
  • Roger J (1863) Die neu aufgeführten Gattungen und Arten meines Formiciden‐Verzeichnisses nebst Ergänzung einiger früher gegebenen Beschreibungen. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift 7(1–2): 131–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/mmnd.18630070116
  • Roque Albelo L, Causton CE, Mieles A (2000) The ants of Marchena Island, twelve years after the introduction of the little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata. Noticias de Galápagos 61: 17–20.
  • Silberglied R (1972) The little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata, a serious pest in the Galápagos Islands. Notic. Galápagos 19: 13–15.
  • Smith F (1858) Catalogue of hymenopterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. Part VI. Formicidae. British Museum, London, 216 pp.
  • Smith F (1877) VIII. Hymenoptera and Diptera. In: Günther A (Ed.) Account of the zoological collection made during the visit of H. M. S. "Peterel" to the Galápagos Islands. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1877: 64–93.
  • Snelling R, Longino J (1992) Revisionary notes on the fungus-growing ants of the genus Cyphomyrmex rimosus-group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Attini). In: Quintero D, Aiello A (Eds) Insects of Panama and Mesoamerica: selected studies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 479–494. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198540182.003.0030
  • Stitz H (1932) The Norwegian Zoological Expedition to the Galápagos Islands 1925, conducted by Alf Wollebaik. 5. Formicidae. Meddelelser fra det Zoologiske Museum Oslo 31: 367–372.
  • Todokoro H, Ezumi M (1999) Scanning electron microscope. Hitachi, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan. United States Patent and Trademark Office. US-5872358-A. 1996 Oct 18.
  • Trager JC (1991) A revision of the fire ants, Solenopsis geminata group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society 99: 141–198.
  • Traveset A, Heleno R, Chamorro S, Vargas P, McMullen CK, Castro-Urgal R, Nogales M, Herrera HW, Olesen JM (2013) Invaders of pollination networks in the Galápagos Islands: Emergence of novel communities. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Biological Sciences 280(1758): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.3040
  • Ulloa-Chacón P, Cherix D, Meier R (1991) Bibliografía de la hormiga colorada Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Noticias de Galápagos 50: 8–12.
  • Ulloa-Chacón P, Cherix D (1994) Perspectives on Control of the little fire ant (Wasmannia auropunctata) on the Galapagos Islands. In: Williams DF (Ed.) Exotic Ants: Biology, Impact, and Control of Introduced Species. Westview Studies in Insect Biology, Boulder, CO CRC Press, 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429040795-5
  • von Aesch L (2006) Introduced ants in Galápagos (Floreana Island): importance of competition, coexistence and aggressive behaviors. Ph.D. thesis University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • von Aesch L, Cherix D (2005) Introduced ant species and mechanisms of competition on Floreana Island (Galápagos, Ecuador) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 45: 463–481.
  • Wauters N, Dekoninck W, Herrera HW, Fournier D (2014) Distribution, behavioral dominance and potential impacts on endemic fauna of tropical fire ant Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius, 1804) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae) in the Galápagos archipelago. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist 90(4): 205–220. https://doi.org/10.3956/2014-90.4.205
  • Wauters N, Dekoninck W, Hendrickx F, Herrera HW, Fournier D (2016) Habitat association and coexistence of endemic and introduced ant species in the Galápagos Islands. Ecological Entomology 41(1): 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/een.12256
  • Wheeler W (1919) Expedition of the California Academy of Sciences to the Galápagos Islands, 1905–1906. Part 15. The ants of Cocos Island. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 2: 299–308.
  • Wheeler WM (1933) The Templeton Crocker Expedition of the California Academy of Sciences, 1923. No. 6. Formicidae of the Templeton Crocker Expedition. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 21: 57–64.
  • Williams D (1987) Foreign travel report in Galápagos Islands. Attini 18: 16–17. [An International Newsletter on Pest Ants]
  • Williams D, Whelan P (1991) Polygynous colonies of Solenopsis geminata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Galápagos Islands. The Florida Entomologist 74(2): 368–371. https://doi.org/10.2307/3495322
  • Williams DF, Whelan PM (1992) Bait attraction of the introduced pest ant, Wasmannia auropunctata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Galápagos Islands. Journal of Entomological Science 27(1): 29–34. https://doi.org/10.18474/0749-8004-27.1.29
  • Wilson EO (2003) Pheidole in the New World. A dominant, hyperdiverse ant genus. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., [ix] + 794 pp.
login to comment