Research Article |
Corresponding author: Benoit Guénard ( zeroben@gmail.com ) Academic editor: Brian Lee Fisher
© 2016 Mark K.L. Wong, Benoit Guénard.
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:
Wong MKL, Guénard B (2016) Leptanilla hypodracos sp. n., a new species of the cryptic ant genus Leptanilla (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) from Singapore, with new distribution data and an updated key to Oriental Leptanilla species. ZooKeys 551: 129-144. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.551.6686
|
A new species of the cryptic and rarely collected ant genus Leptanilla is described. Leptanilla hypodracos sp. n. is the first Leptanilla recorded from Singapore in over a century since L. havilandi Forel, 1901 and represents the fourth species of Leptanilla known from the Malay Peninsula. An updated key to the Leptanilla of the Oriental region is presented. Taxonomic comparisons between L. hypodracos sp. n. and four morphologically similar species are provided with particular attention given to L. clypeata Yamane & Ito, 2001, for which new measurements and indices are presented. The first report is presented for the Leptanillinae subfamily from the southeastern part of China with a worker of the genus Leptanilla collected in Hong Kong. Finally, the potential of subterranean bait to collect Leptanilla species is discussed.
Leptanilla , Leptanillinae , Singapore, Hong Kong, Asia, hypogaeic
Leptanillines are among the most rarely collected of ant subfamilies due to their minute size and hypogaeic life habits. Although Leptanillinae are widely distributed throughout the Old World and Australian regions, records of the various taxa are remarkably patchy (
The genus Leptanilla Emery, 1870 includes 45 valid species (
In the Malay Peninsula, three species of Leptanilla have been described, and all from the worker caste. Leptanilla havilandi Forel, 1901 was described from Singapore, while L. butteli Forel, 1913 was described from Selangor (Malaysia), and L. thai Baroni Urbani, 1977 was described from Khao Chong in southern Thailand. In this paper we describe the worker caste of a new species, Leptanilla hypodracos sp. n. from Singapore, which is the fourth Leptanilla species from the Malay Peninsula. We also report on a Leptanilla worker collected from Hong Kong, which represents the first record of the Leptanillinae subfamily in southeastern China. An updated key to the Leptanilla species of the Oriental region (
Photographs of specimens were obtained with an incorporated digital camera mounted on a Leica M205C dissecting microscope through the Leica Application Suite V4 software. A total of 24 to 86 images were taken and stacked together. Measurements of specimens were taken in mm (accurate to 0.001mm and rounded to the nearest 0.01mm for presentation) with the Measure Tools function of the Leica Application Suite V4 software on imaged specimens after proper placement for each body part measured.
The abbreviations used for the measurements and indices are as follows:
HW Head Width. Maximum width of head in full-face view excluding the eyes.
HL Head Length. Maximum length of head from the anterior median clypeal margin to the median posterior margin of the cephalic capsule measured along the midline as a straight line.
MaL Mandible Length. Maximum length of mandible from the anterolateral margin of clypeus at outer side of mandibular insertion to mandibular apex.
SL Scape Length. Maximum measurable length of scape, from the proximal point of scape shaft, not including the condyle, to the distal end of scape.
EL Eye Length. Maximum diameter of eye measured in lateral view.
TL Total Length. Maximum length of specimen measured from the tip of the mandibles to the tip of the last abdominal segment, not including sting. Due to the position of the specimen, total length was measured as the sum of head length, mesosoma length, petiole and postpetiole length and gaster length.
WL Weber’s Length of Mesosoma. Maximum diagonal distance in lateral view, from base of anterior slope of pronotum to metapleural lobe.
PNW Pronotal Width. Maximum width of pronotum measured in dorsal view.
PNH Pronotal Height. Maximum height of pronotum measured in dorsal view.
MW Mesonotal Width. Maximum width of the mesonotum measured in dorsal view.
PTL Petiole Length. In dorsal view, maximum length of petiole, along the sagittal plane, and excluding the peduncle (after
PTH Petiole Height. Maximum height of petiole, measured in lateral view from the highest (median) point of the node, orthogonally to the ventral outline of the node (after
PTW Petiole Width. Maximum width of the petiole in dorsal view.
PPL Postpetiole Length. Maximum length of postpetiole, measured in dorsal view and not excluding the peduncle (after
PPH Postpetiole Height. Maximum height of postpetiole, measured in lateral view from the highest point of the node.
PPW Postpetiole Width. Maximum width of the postpetiole in dorsal view.
CI Cephalic Index. Calculated as: HW / HL × 100.
SI Scape Index. Calculated as: SL / HW × 100.
MaI Mandibular Index. Calculated as: MaL / HW × 100.
PI Petiolar Index. Calculated as: PTW / PTL × 100 (after
PPI Postpetiolar Index. Calculated as: PPW / PPL × 100 (after
PPHI Postpetiolar Height Index. Calculated as: PPW / PPH × 100 (modified after
Abbreviations of the type depositories and others are as follows:
LKCNHM Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum, Singapore.
SBSHKU Insect Biodiversity and Biogeography Laboratory, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
Worker from SINGAPORE, Central Catchment Nature Reserve, 1°21.3'N; 103°48.9'E, ca. 55m asl, 15.VI.2015, via subterranean pitfall trap, leg. Mark K. L. Wong, label “MW150615-1.1” deposited in LKCNHM.
Two workers in total, all with the same data as holotype (deposited at SBSHKU), labelled “MW150615-1.2” and “MW150615-1.3”. Unfortunately these specimens were incomplete when collected, with only a head present for one specimen and the second specimen missing part of its antennae and legs. Both specimens were probably damaged by other ants present in the subterranean pitfall trap during collection. The second specimen was very fragile and was damaged during specimen manipulation (breakage at the propodeum/petiole junction). The broken parts were kept in ethanol while the head and mesosoma were mounted for measurements.
Holotype.HL 0.35 mm; HW 0.27 mm; MaL 0.16 mm; SL 0.19 mm; EL 0 mm (eye absent); WL 0.44 mm; PNW 0.18 mm; PNH 0.12 mm; MW 0.11 mm; PTL 0.10 mm; PTW 0.06 mm; PTH 0.10 mm; TL 1.73 mm (stinger not included); PPL 0.09 mm; PPW 0.08 mm; PPH 0.12 mm; CI 78, SI 69, MaI 57, PI 60, PPI 90, PPHI 70.
Paratype (n = 1). HL 0.35 mm; HW 0.27 mm; MaL 0.15 mm; SL 0.19 mm; WL 0.44 mm; PNW 0.18 mm; PNH 0.12 mm; MW 0.11 mm; CI 76, SI 69, MaI 54.
Head. Head longer than wide (CI = 76–78). In full-face view, posterior margin of head straight to slightly concave. Lateral margins of head slightly convex with posterior margins rounded. Eyes absent. Anterior clypeal margin extending forward with two rounded lobes anterolaterally and slightly concave on its anteromedian portion (Fig.
Mesosoma. In lateral view, mesosoma with a continuous straight appearance with the exception of a well-marked interruption of the promesonotal suture (Fig.
Metasoma. In profile view, dorsal and ventral portion of petiolar node markedly convex, rounded without acute portion nor subpetiolar process. Dorsal margin of postpetiole convex and rounded. Dorsal margin of the postpetiolar node lower than the maximal height of the dorsal margin of the petiolar node. Sternopostpetiolar process well developed and rounded. In dorsal view, petiolar node longer than wide (PTL = 0.10 mm, PTW = 0.06 mm) while postpetiole more rounded (PPL = 0.09 mm, PPW = 0.08 mm).
Sculpture. Sculpture absent on most of the body. Most of the body with a slick and shiny appearance with the exception of the neck with clear transversal striae (Fig.
Pubescence. Pubescence present on most of the body, especially on dorsal parts. Antennae and mandibles with numerous erect to suberect long hairs.
Coloration. Head, thorax and fore coxa with a dark amber colour, while petiole, postpetiole and most of the gaster slightly lighter. Antennae, legs (with the exception of the fore coxa) and tip of the gaster with a much lighter yellow coloration.
Castes. Male and female unknown.
The species epithet is derived from a combination of the Latin terms for ‘under’ and ‘dragon’, in reference to the slender, dragon-like appearance of this subterranean predator. The species epithet is a noun, and thus invariant.
Southeast Asia. Only known from Singapore.
Leptanilla hypodracos was collected from a well-shaded patch of tropical low-lying old secondary forest with a high density of leaf litter and woody debris on the forest floor. As with other Leptanillinae, L. hypodracos presents a hypogaeic lifestyle and was collected in a baited subterranean pitfall trap at a depth between 10–15 cm. Colony size and structure is unknown. Although the specimens were collected in a trap containing tuna bait, it is presently unclear as to whether L. hypodracos were recruited to the bait, since other Leptanilla species have previously been suggested to be specialist predators of geophilomorph centipedes (
Based on a morphological examination, L. hypodracos is close to several other Leptanilla from the Oriental region, namely L. escheri Kutter, 1948, L. butteli Forel, 1913, and L. thai, but is most similar to L. clypeata.
Leptanilla hypodracos differs from L. escheri in the anterior margin of the petiole in profile view, which is rounded in L. hypodracos but more angular in L. escheri while in dorsal view, L. hypodracos displays a long and narrow petiole (PI = 47, PPI = 83) that contrasts with the rounded petiole which is as wide as it is long in L. escheri (PI = 87–120, PPI = 117–145). In dorsal view L. hypodracos also has a narrower mesosoma than L. escheri. Furthermore, as records of L. escheri are restricted to southern Indian highlands where the elevation ranges from 1250 to 1775m asl, and L. hypodracos was collected in a tropical lowland forest of Singapore at an elevation of 55m asl, it is conceivable that the two species occupy differing ecological niches.
Similar species reported from the Malay Peninsula include L. butteli from West Malaysia and L. thai from Southern Thailand. However, L. hypodracos is distinguished from these species in having a more rounded petiolar node and a less inflated petiole. In comparison, both L. butteli and L. thai possess square-shaped petiolar nodes with rounded angles and more inflated petioles (
Leptanilla hypodracos presents the most similarities with L. clypeata from Java, Indonesia, but can be distinguished from the latter by a suite of distinct characteristics. We also provide a new set of complete measurements for L. clypeata (see below). The primary difference is observed in dorsal view and pertains to the shape and size of the petiolar node and postpetiole. In L. hypodracos, the petiolar node is nearly twice longer than wide (PI = 60, PTL = 0.10 mm, PTW = 0.06 mm) and the postpetiole is longer than wide, and also more rounded (PPI = 90, PPL = 0.9 mm, PPW = 0.08 mm). However in L. clypeata, the petiolar node is almost as wide as long (PI = 82, PTL = 0.11 mm, PTW = 0.09 mm in
In addition to the characteristics above, there are several other differences between L. hypodracos and L. clypeata, which should be confirmed with future collection of both species. The head of L. hypodracos (CI = 76–78) is slightly narrower than that of L. clypeata (CI = 82 in
The specimen (Figs
Measurements.HL 0.37 mm; HW 0.31 mm; MaL 0.16 mm; SL 0.20 mm; WL 0.48 mm; PNW 0.20 mm; PNH 0.14 mm; MW 0.12 mm; PTL 0.10 mm; PTW 0.10 mm; PTH 0.11 mm; TL 1.79 mm (stinger not included), PPL 0.09 mm; PPW 0.12 mm; PPH 0.15 mm; CI 84; SI 65, MaI 53; PI 100; PPI 133, PPHI 80.
A single worker of a Leptanilla species identified as Leptanilla cf. japonica is reported from Hong Kong. The specimen was collected in leaf litter using the Winkler extractor method in Lung Fu Shan Park (22°16.823'N, 114°8.270'E, 116m), located on Hong Kong Island on November 25th 2014. The specimen is deposited at the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California, U.S.A. under the specimen code CASENT0914941. Photographs of the specimen are available on Antweb.org. While the specimen appears to match the description and characteristics of L. japonica, we are hesitant to formerly identify it as such due to the important disjunction observed in the distribution of this species. To the best of our knowledge this species has been reported only from Honshu Island in Japan (
Leptanilla astylina Petersen, 1968 (Philippines) – described from male only
Leptanilla besucheti Baroni Urbani, 1977 (Sri Lanka)
Leptanilla buddhista Baroni Urbani, 1977 (Nepal)
Leptanilla butteli Forel, 1913 (West Malaysia)
Leptanilla clypeata Yamane & Ito, 2001 (Java, Indonesia)
Leptanilla escheri Kutter, 1948 (South India)
Leptanilla havilandi Forel, 1901 (Singapore)
Leptanilla hunanensis Tang, Li & Chen, 1992 (Hubei, Hunan & Yunnan, China)
Leptanilla hypodracos sp. n. (Singapore)
Leptanilla cf. japonica (Hong Kong)
Leptanilla kebunraya Yamane & Ito, 2001 (Java, Indonesia)
Leptanilla kunmingensis Xu & Zhang, 2002 (China)
Leptanilla lamellata Bharti & Kumar, 2012 (North India)
Leptanilla santschii Wheeler & Wheeler, 1930 (Java, Indonesia) – described from male only
Leptanilla taiwanensis Ogata, Terayama & Masuko, 1995 (Taiwan)
Leptanilla thai Baroni Urbani, 1977 (Thailand)
Leptanilla yunnanensis Xu, 2002 (China)
The key to Oriental Leptanilla species (
Modified after
1 | Mandible with 2 teeth | 2 |
– | Mandible with 3 teeth or more | 3 |
2 | Anterolateral lobes of clypeus present, 3rd antennal segment with a distinct basal peduncle, postpetiole large, promesonotal suture narrow (Java) | L. kebunraya Yamane & Ito |
– | Anterolateral lobes of clypeus absent, 3rd antennal segment without distinct basal peduncle, postpetiole relatively small, promesonotal suture wide (W. Malaysia) | L. butteli Forel |
3 | Mandible with 3 teeth | 4 |
– | Mandible with 4 irregular and with the fourth tooth (preapical) very small and difficult to distinguish (Hong Kong) | Leptanilla cf. japonica |
4 | Metanotal groove present | 5 |
– | Metanotal groove absent | 6 |
5 | In full-face view head approximately rectangular. Clypeus not protruding, anterior margin roundly convex. In profile view dorsum of petiole almost straight. In dorsal view postpetiolar node much wider than petiolar node (S. China) | L. hunanensis Tang, Li & Chen |
– | In full-face view head distinctly narrowed anteriorly. Clypeus protruding, anterior margin concave. In lateral view dorsum of petiole roundly convex. In dorsal view postpetiolar node as wide as petiolar node (S. China) | L. kunmingensis Xu & Zhang |
6 | Anterior margin of clypeus more or less straight or weakly to strongly convex | 7 |
– | Anterior margin of clypeus medially incised, bilobed | 9 |
7 | Petiole longer ≥ 0.13 mm (Sri Lanka) | L. besucheti Baroni Urbani |
– | Petiole shorter ≤ 0.10 mm | 8 |
8 | Clypeus slightly protruding anteriorly and with distinctly convex anterior margin, PPI = 122–138, CI ≥ 82, PI = 111–125 (Nepal) | L. buddhista Baroni Urbani |
– | Clypeus not protruding anteriorly and with straight or weakly convex anterior margin, PPI = 163–171, CI ≤ 81, PI = 138–158 (S. China) | L. yunnanensis Xu |
9 | Petiole, postpetiole and gaster covered with short and long hairs | 10 |
– | Petiole, postpetiole and gaster covered with either short or long hairs | 11 |
10 | Petiole with an anteroventral lamellate subpetiolar process, ventral face of lamellate process weakly rounded; subpetiolar process with anteroventral and posteroventral corner obtusely angled and posterior face of subpetiolar process weakly concave; petiolar and postpetiolar spiracle almost equal in diameter, PPHI = 74–76; posterior head margin concave (N. India) | L. lamellata Bharti & Kumar |
– | Petiole with a weak subpetiolar process without lamella; petiolar process convex and anteriorly and posteriorly oblique; petiolar spiracle large with a diameter of almost 2 times the diameter of postpetiolar spiracle, PPHI = 85–86, posterior head margin almost straight or weakly concave (S. India) | L. escheri Kutter |
11 | Anterior margin of clypeus almost straight with a low median notch (Taiwan) | L. taiwanensis Ogata, Terayama & Masuko |
– | Anterior margin of clypeus medially prominent with deep incision or anteriorly strongly produced and apically distinctly bilobed | 12 |
12 | Anterior margin of clypeus medially prominent with a deep incision at its apical margin, SI ≥ 74 (Singapore) | L. havilandi Forel |
– | Anterior margin of clypeus with a broad median notch that makes it seem almost bilobed in dorsal view, SI ≤ 68 | 13 |
13 | Clypeus strongly produced anteriorly and having a distinctly raised platform which is defined posteriorly; anterior portion of head lacking a pair of whitish markings | 14 |
– | Clypeus not strongly produced anteriorly and lacking a distinctly raised platform which is defined posteriorly; anterior portion of head with a pair of whitish markings (Thailand) | L. thai Baroni Urbani |
14 | In dorsal view petiolar node almost twice as long as wide and postpetiolar node almost as wide as long, PI = 60, PPI = 90 (Fig. |
L. hypodracos sp. n. |
– | In dorsal view petiolar node almost as wide as long and postpetiolar node distinctly wider than long, PI = 82–100, PPI = 133–137 (Fig. |
L. clypeata Yamane & Ito |
The discovery of L. hypodracos represents a second Leptanilla species from Singapore and a fourth species from the Malay Peninsula. Notably, this is the first known record of a Leptanilla species from Singapore in over a century, since Forel’s discovery of L. havilandi in 1901. Leptanilla species are often considered to be rare ants as they are infrequently collected owing to a minute body size, hypogaeic life history and potentially small colony size (
The authors would like to warmly thank Fuminori Ito for providing a specimen of Leptanilla clypeata collected in Java. We also wish to express our gratitude to Theodore Evans for his logistical support for this project, and staff from the National Biodiversity Centre Singapore for their assistance with research permits. We are also grateful to Eli Sarnat, Seiki Yamane and an anonymous reviewer for their useful comments on a previous version of the manuscript. Finally, we would like to thank Lily Ng for her help with the pictures.