The Ants of Africa
Genus Anoplolepis
Anoplolepis (Zealleyella) vestita (F. Smith)

Anoplolepis (Zealleyella) vestita (F. Smith)


return to key {link to the Hymenoptera Name Server} Type location South Africa (Formica vestita, F. Smith, 1858b: 32, queen; misidentification by Arnold, 1924: 694, major worker & queen) Port Natal - see below
junior synonym braunsi (Plagiolepis Braunsi, n. sp., Forel 1913a: 141, worker; synonymy here) from Willowmore, Cape, Dr H Brauns - see below
.


F Smith's (1858b) description is at {original description}. Arnold (1924: 694) provided an expanded description; this is at - {original description}. Forel's (1913a) description of braunsi is at {original description}. Arnold's (1922) description of braunsi at {original description}.


NOTE: In June 2014, in correspondence over South African specimens, Christian Ludwig drew my attention to the anomaly of the queen shown on Antweb (photomontage below) as F Smith’s type of Formica vestita being an Anoplolepis queen. From the illustrations, it appeared to be a close match to the Anoplolepis custodiens queen in Prins (1982). Ironically, the type worker of A. custodiens came from the same locality, Port Natal, and was described by F Smith, as “Formica custodiens” in his 1858b paper. So where did the error come from? Some taxonomic archaeology took me back to Roger (1863b: 2) where he catalogued Smith's queen under Camponotus but his entry reads “27. ? vestitus Smith. Cat. Brit. Mus. 32. queen”. Jumping on in time, the next appearance was in Emery (1894i: 113) where one finds “Camponotus rufoglaucus Jerdon sottosp. vestitus F. Sm.. Una queen senza indicazione di localita”. So, on the basis of coming from the same locality, Emery gave firm status to what Roger was unsure about. Emery (1895h: 49 and illustration) then jumped from the queen, of which there is no evidence he saw, to the worker, with a key separation and illustration. From that one gets the worker that I matched, from Namibia, on my webpage. I should have spotted the wrongness when first doing the webpage. My Camponotus vestitus queen from Uganda and the available queens of “subspecies” match.

Now, in December 2014, I have examined the fresh specimens shown below.  The queen differs from that of Anoplolepis custodiens in being larger, TL ca mm, HL 2.02, HW 2.32; vs A.c. HL 1.87, HW 2.11. The pronotum has a lower, much less domed profile, but is relatively wider when viewed from above (A. vestita promesonotum W/L = 0.75); A. custodiens promesonotum W/L = 0.70).

The matching form of the workers associated with the fresh queen and the type worker of braunsi is obvious, thus the latter has to be placed as a junior synonym of vestita.


Anoplolepis vestita type queen}The photomontage of the holotype queen is collated from http://www.antweb.org/specimen.do?name=casent0903234


{Anoplolepis braunsi}The photomontage of the braunsi type worker is collated from http://www.antweb.org/specimenImages.do?code=casent0909841.


Oxford University Museum specimens

Anoplolepis (Zealleyella) vestita
B Taylor det.
South Africa
C P Ludwig
28.i.2014

Western Cape
Oudtshoorn
33˚30'39" S
22˚01'20" E
385m
ANSPWC-OH01-02
5 workers from captive colony
1 queen from nuptial flight

6
{album}

{Anoplolepis vestita queen}The photomontage is of a queen from  South Africa, Oudtshoorn, ex Christian Ludwig


{Anoplolepis vestita}The photomontage is of an associated worker


{Anoplolepis vestita}The photomontage is of a second worker from the South Africa, xx, ex Christian Ludwig


{Anoplolepis vestitas}The photomontage is of a third worker from the South Africa, xx, ex Christian Ludwig

Contents
© 2014, 2017 - Brian Taylor CBiol FRSB FRES
11, Grazingfield, Wilford, Nottingham, NG11 7FN, U.K.

href="anoplolepis_vestita.htm"