Terataner piceus (Menozzi 1942)

Terataner piceus Menozzi, 1942a PDF: 173 (w.) EQUATORIAL GUINEA. Afrotropic. AntCat AntWiki HOL

Taxonomic history

[Also listed as new in Eidmann, 1944 PDF: 469.].See also: Bolton, 1981b PDF: 293.

Terataner piceus Menozzi , 1942: 173. Holotype worker, Equatorial Guinea: Rio Benito, 1939 40 (H. Eidmann) (holotype not found in IE, Bologna; presumed lost).

Worker. TL 4.6 - 5.5, HL 1.12 - 1.28, HW 1.06 - 1.20, CI 94 - 98, SL 0.64 - 0.70, SI 59 - 62, PW 0.75 - 0.84, AL 1.38 - 1.54 (9 measured).

Mandibles smooth with scattered large pits, those nearest the apical (masticatory) margin frequently elongate. Frontal carinae straight, close together and approximately parallel, fading out between the level of the posterior margins of the eyes and the occiput. Maximum diameter of eyes 0.26 - 0.30, about 0.25 - 0.27 x HW. Pronotum marginate laterally and more weakly so anteriorly, the pronotal angles bluntly denticulate and prominent. Sides of pronotum somewhat convergent posteriorly. Mesonotum marginate laterally, the propodeal dorsum separated from the sides by a blunt angle, not nearly so sharply marginate as the pronotum. Promesonotal suture absent from dorsum except laterally where it forms a break between the pronotal and mesonotal marginations. With the alitrunk in profile the metanotal area shallowly impressed. Propodeum unarmed or at most with a pair of minute low blunt tubercles where the sloping dorsum meets the declivity proper. Metapleural lobes large and rounded. Petiole node in profile appearing as a broad-based short triangular tooth, tapering to a point apically and slightly curved backwards. In anterior view the dorsum of the petiole quite broadly and deeply impressed, the portion on each side of the impression projecting as a blunted tooth which is directed slightly outwards. Postpetiole in dorsal view with the arch of the posterodorsal surface narrow and narrowly rounded. Dorsum and sides of head above eyes covered with fine reticulate-punctulate ground-sculpture which is usually weaker between the frontal carinae than elsewhere. Superimposed on this are a few weak fine longitudinal rugulae between the frontal carinae and some stronger rugulae on the sides of the head above the eye. In this latter position cross-meshes are frequently developed between the longitudinal components, more strongly so in front of the level of the eye than behind it. Dorsal alitrunk finely and densely reticulate-punctulate, without trace of rugular sculpture on the promesonotum. Pedicel segments and gaster similarly but more lightly sculptured. Basigastral costulae very reduced, short and inconspicuous, restricted to the small area immediately behind the postpetiolar-gastral junction. Hairs on dorsal surfaces of body very sparse, present on mouthparts and gastral apex but otherwise the fullest complement seeming to be 3 - 4 pairs on head along the lines of the frontal carinae, 1 pair each on mesonotum and propodeum (but none on pronotum in any specimens seen), 1 - 2 pairs on petiole behind node, 2 - 3 pairs on postpetiole, none on first gastral tergite. Outer surfaces of middle and hind tibiae and antennal scapes without standing hairs. Colour uniform mid-brown to blackish brown.

Of the luteus-complex of species two, piceus and velatus , are diagnosed by the shape of the postpetiole which in dorsal view is narrow and narrowly rounded posteriorly, rather than being broad and broadly evenly rounded posteriorly as is the case in elegans and luteus , compare Figs 40 and 4 L T. piceus is separated from velatus by its lack of rugular sculpture on the promesonotum and lack of hairs on the first gastral tergite.

Material examined

Ghana: Sajimasi (D. Leston); Aburi (D. Leston); Mampong (P. Room). Nigeria: Gambari {B. Bolton). Cameroun: Nkoemvon (D. Jackson).