Additions to the taxonomy of Neotropical Strumigenys (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): description of new species, terminology alignment, and etymology of the generic epithet

ABSTRACT

Strumigenys is a pantropical distributed ant genus, consisting mostly of leaf-litter inhabitants. In the Neotropical region, species are most abundant in rainforests, but they are also found in mesic habitats. We provide additions to the taxonomy of Neotropical Strumigenys, along with terminological and etymological considerations for the genus. Six species new to science, with ranges within the Brazilian territory, are described: S. aline sp. nov., S. carol sp. nov., S. jaqueline sp. nov., S. mboehara sp. nov., S. paloma sp. nov., and S. vitoria sp. nov. All newly described species exhibit clear morphological affinities with other Neotropical taxa assigned to well-defined species groups. Illustrated identification keys are provided for all species within the designated Neotropical species groups. We also provide a table of the aligned terms containing lexical pairs, their corresponding pair schema, the RCC-5 articulation defined for the alignment, the respective preferred term, and the criteria used to define it.

Keywords:
Miniature trap-jaw ants; New species; Taxonomic treatment; Terminological alignment

Introduction

The hyperdiverse Strumigenys Smith, 1860 is a pantropical genus of ants with more than 881 described species (Bolton, 2025), with notable variation in body form and, specifically, in mandibular morphology (Baroni Urbani and Andrade, 2007; Bolton, 2000; Booher et al., 2021). While many species inhabit temperate regions and mesic habitats, the genus is most diverse in tropical rainforests, where it is often an abundant component of the leaf litter community (Bolton, 1998; Ward, 2000). Most Strumigenys species are considered cryptobiotic predators, primarily preying on microfauna in the leaf litter, with a particular preference for entomobryid collembolans (Wilson, 1954; Brown Junior and Wilson, 1959; Dejean, 1985a, 1985b, 1987; Gronenberg, 1996; Masuko, 1985, 2009). Given its high morphological diversity (Baroni Urbani and Andrade, 1994, 2007), Strumigenys has undergone substantial generic reclassifications from the late 20th to the early 21st centuries (Bolton, 1999; Baroni Urbani & Andrade, 2007).

It is currently believed that a significant portion of Strumigenys' diversity likely remains unexplored and undescribed. Over the past 20 years, approximately 60 new species have been described all over the world (Zhou and Xu, 2003; Xu and Zhou, 2004; Longino, 2006; Baroni Urbani and Andrade, 2007; Yoshimura and Onoyama, 2007; Rigato and Scupola, 2008; Sosa-Calvo et al., 2010; Bharti & Akbar, 2013; Lattke and Aguirre, 2015; Booher et al., 2019; Sarnat et al., 2019; Longino and Booher, 2019; Dong & Kim, 2020; Booher, 2021; Chaul, 2023; Tang and Guénard, 2023; Santos-Neto et al., 2024) reflecting a steady ongoing discovery rate. In the Neotropical region alone, roughly 210 valid species have been documented, with many more likely awaiting formal description (Silva et al., 2022; AntWiki, 2025; Bolton, 2025).

Quite recently, there have been additions and revaluations to the sets of terms used to describe structural aspects of Strumigenys specimens (Silva & Feitosa, 2019; Tang and Guénard, 2023). Despite that, some researchers working with the group tend to prefer to use sets of terms that are considered traditional in the literature of miniature trap-jaw ants (Booher et al., 2019; Booher, 2021; Chaul, 2023; Santos-Neto et al., 2024). This approach normally privileges “terminological stasis” as a way to improve communication within a community that privileges less inclusive levels of generalization; concept-based approaches (Silva & Feitosa, 2019; Tang and Guénard, 2023), on the other hand, privilege terminological change as a way to bridge descriptive demands on finer levels of generalization with more inclusive levels of generalization (via comparative morphology and/or anatomy). Although having standards for anatomical terms can be useful for communicating knowledge in highly formalized settings (Silva & Feitosa, 2019), different researchers can opt to use traditional terminologies to communicate their findings, depending on their descriptive and explanatory demands. However, having multiple (equally valid) terminologies can add an additional layer of “communicative dissonance” (i.e., a lack of compatibility in communication that arises from different beliefs, opinions or viewpoints among different enunciators, caused by different experiences, norms, backgrounds, cultural values, etc.) in specialized communication.

Etymology is a branch of linguistics that is interested in the study of the origin and evolution of words, including their constituent units of sound and meaning, being tied to other disciplines and methods in linguistics, including philology, semiotics, pragmatics, and phonetics (Merriam-Webster, 2025). Its importance in taxonomy is fundamental, because even though etymological endeavours do not provide insights into the species being studied, it provides hints on the author’s motivations that lead to the description of that species. Additionally, the provision of etymologies for the studied groups can expose the intentions of the authors for the original pronunciation of the genus’ or species’ names, having important implications for oral communication among researchers from different linguistic backgrounds (for example, identifying the intended original pronunciation of Strumigenys while exposing the struggle faced by many researchers worldwide to pronounce the alveolar trill /r/ when communicating discoveries involving the genus through oral discourse).

Motivated by the questions exposed above, our goals were: (1) to formally describe these new species and contribute to the growing understanding of Strumigenys diversity; (2) to provide a consistent and comparative framework for terminography alignment, beyond the compulsory need to establish a standardized set of terms for anatomical entities in Strumigenys; and (3) to clarify the etymology of the generic name, providing a clarification of the underlying conceptual motivations needed for name composition of the genus and giving hints to its possible intended original pronunciation. As an operational outcome, we provide updated identification keys to facilitate future research and identification of species within the studied groups. This work contributes to ongoing efforts into the systematics of this taxonomically complex ant genus, highlighting the importance of continued exploration of poorly known leaf-litter faunas in tropical ecosystems.

Material and methods

Taxonomic treatment framework

Species descriptions follow the “Taxonomic treatments” format proposed by Silva et al. (2022) with amendments to include the ‘habitat’ and ‘comments’ subsections — i.e., (i) nomenclature (i.e., species name, species name history, and type designations); (ii) diagnosis [i.e., universal statements describing the morphological defining properties shared by all instances of the kind the statement refers to, presented in the genusdifferentia format (e.g., “With characteristics of the alberti species group, in addition to…)]; (iii) measurements and description (i.e., assertional statements that document empirical observations about particular entities); (iv) morphology (i.e., morphological contingent statements of sorts, that ascribe predicates to a class that may or may not be true for all its members); (v) habitat (i.e., universal statements describing habitat defining properties); and (vi) comments (i.e., comparative statements about conditions/features between individuals belonging to different species). Diagnoses and descriptions of the species are elaborated following Oliveira and Feitosa (2019) and Ladino and Feitosa (2020); i.e., they follow an anterior-posterior axis of description, with sculpture and setae being described first, followed by body structures. Sculpture and body structures terms follow Silva and Feitosa (2019), while setae shape terms follow Tang and Guénard (2023). Diagnoses of species groups can be found in Bolton (2000); newly described species were considered new when compared to all other members of the species groups to which they were assigned. The specimens were examined with a Leica MZ9.5 stereomicroscope at magnifications up to 80x at Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo (MZSP) in the Laboratório de Sistemática, Evolução e Biologia de Hymenoptera and with a Zeiss Discovery.V8 stereomicroscope at magnifications up to 80x at Coleção Entomológica Padre Jesus Santiago Moure (DZUP) in the Laboratório de Sistemática e Biologia de Formigas.

Terminology alignment framework

Terminology alignment (also referred to as thesauri mapping) can be considered as a kind of “translation” of the terms between two or more terminologies to support the communication among people coming from different domains or expertise (Axaridou et al., 2018). Contrary to terminological standardisation and other ‘correctionist’ approaches, terminology alignment reconciles sets of terms, defined in ways that support problem-solving in specific situations, that are considered equally valid but non-mutually understandable by people from different backgrounds. A term (or a terminological unit), in this sense, is understood as a multi-dimensional unit (Cabré, 2003), composed of three interrelated dimensions: a linguistic dimension (i.e., lexical), a cognitive dimension (i.e., conceptual), and a communicative dimension (i.e., situational). In summary, terminological alignment matches distinct lexicons (i.e., linguistic dimension), each applied to a different setting (i.e., situational dimension) via inter-connection (or “formal crosswalks”) of different representations of abstractions (i.e., concept dimension).

To align terms that are used differently among different sources, we first build a corpus of diagnoses, taxonomic descriptions, and anatomic descriptions for Strumigenys retrieved from Bolton (2000), Silva and Feitosa (2019), and Tang and Guénard (2023). We established a set of rules to identify candidate terms for alignment in our corpus, namely: (i) we used phrasal position correspondence to obtain lexical pairs between Bolton (2000) and Silva and Feitosa (2019) (B-SF schema), and Bolton (2000) and Tang and Guénard (2023) (B-TG schema) candidate terms; (ii) we used morphological (entity-quality) position correspondence to validate lexical pairs obtained for the B-SF and B-TG schemas.

After that, term alignment—the establishment of a set of articulations specifying the relationships among concepts (classes) belonging to different taxonomies (i.e., sets of terms arranged in a hierarchical configuration through existential relationships; subClass is_a Class), was performed through algebraic articulations given as RCC-5 constraints (Randell et al., 1992). Region Connection Calculus (RCC) is used for qualitative representation and reasoning and can be seen as a decidable fragment of first-order predicate logic (Cohn and Renz, 2008). This approach supports representation of incomplete knowledge through explicit disjunctive relationships between classes (e.g., class A is either disjoint from, or included in class B) (Thau et al., 2008). RCC-5 provides five basic articulations for defining congruence, proper inclusion, inverse proper inclusion, partial overlap, and exclusion among pairs of sets or concepts (Chen et al., 2014), which are intuitive relations for taxonomic experts who assert them and who may also express ambiguity in their assessment among concept pairs by using disjunctions of articulations—i.e., when the exact relation is unknown to the expert, they can choose disjunctions of the five basic relations, giving rise to up to 31 articulations, to capture partial knowledge (Chen et al., 2014). For example, A {congruence, partial overlap} B means the class A can be equivalent to or partially overlaps the class B. We did not, however, employ reasoning to merge the taxonomies belonging to each schema; instead, we opted to establish three “preference criteria” for term usage.

Preferred terms were chosen based on the following criteria modified from Brito et al. (2021): (i) a term that unambiguously defines and/or points to the intended structure, containing explicit (intensional and/or ostensive) definitions; (ii) the newest proposition of the term; (iii) more widely used term in the scientific community. Justification for the criteria are:

1. Morphological terms defined through intentional definitions have their concepts positioned in a hierarchy of classes, in which the term (=class) being defined is subsumed to a class in a higher level of the hierarchy (class-subclass relation), allowing the user to identify the structure in question by its definition (i.e., genus differentia definition). Additionally, ostensive definitions directly convey the meaning of the term by pointing to some iconographic representational artifact (i.e., a photograph or illustration), discretionarily used as a “support” definition for a given term.

2. Newest propositions of terms result from recent discoveries or elucidations in the discipline in question, most of the time being the result of reconsideration of boundaries of the concepts being defined and named.

3. Considering that terms are also the result of conventionalization about perceived states and/or qualities of some observed phenomena, lexical units often circulate and “precipitate” in the scientific community in question, being mostly ostensively defined and mutually understood.

Aligned lexical pairs and preferred terms are available in Table 1.

Table 1
List of lexical pairs, pair schema, RCC-5 articulations, preferred terms and criteria used to establish preferred terms, following Brito et al. (2021) criteria with modifications.

Lexical pairs	Pair schema	RCC-5 articulation	Preferred term	Criteria
alitrunk/mesosoma	B-SF	congruence	mesosoma	(i), (ii)
anepisternum/anepisternum	B-SF	partial overlap	anepisternum	(i)
antennal insertion/antennal insertion	B-SF	partial overlap	antennal insertion	(i)
antennal scrobe/antennal scrobe	B-SF	partial overlap	antennal scrobe	(i), (iii)
antennomere/antennomere	B-SF	partial overlap	antennomere	(i), (iii)
apical fork/apical fork	B-SF	partial overlap	apical fork	(i), (iii)
apicoscrobal/apex of antennal scrobe	B-SF	congruence	apex of antennal scrobe	(ii)
appressed/appressed	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	appressed	(iii)
basigastral costulae/longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite	B-SF	congruence	longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite	(ii)
carina/carina	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	carina	(iii)
cephalic dorsum/frontovertexal area	B-SF	congruence	frontovertexal area	(i), (ii)
cinctus/transverse impression of the abdominal tergite	B-SF	congruence	transverse impression of the abdominal tergite	(ii)
clavate/claviform	B-TG	congruence	claviform	(i), (ii)
decumbent/decumbent	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	decumbent	(iii)
dentate/acute process	B-SF	congruence	acute process	(ii)
denticulate/small acute process	B-SF	congruence	small acute process	(ii)
diastema/diastema	B-SF	partial overlap	diastema	(i), (iii)
disc/medial area	B-SF	congruence	medial area	(ii)
emarginate/with angular margins	B-SF	congruence	with angular margins	(ii)
epistomal suture/epistomal line	B-SF	congruence	epistomal line	(ii)
erect/erect	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	erect	(iii)
facet/ommatidium	B-SF	congruence	ommatidium	(ii)
fenestra/translucent patch	B-SF	congruence	translucent patch	(ii)
filiform/fine	B-TG	congruence	fine	(i), (ii)
flagellate/-	B-TG	NA	flagellate	(iii)
flagellum/flagellum	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	flagellum	(iii)
foramen/foramen	B-SF	congruence	foramen	(iii)
fossa/fossa	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	fossa	(iii)
foveate/alveolate	B-SF	congruence	alveolate	(i), (ii)
frons/frontovertexal area	B-SF	congruence	frontovertexal area	(i), (ii)
frontal carinae/frontal carinae	B-SF	partial overlap	frontal carinae	(iii)
frontal lobes/frontal lobes	B-SF	partial overlap	frontal lobes	(iii)
frontoclypeal suture/epistomal line	B-SF	congruence	epistomal line	(i), (ii)
full-face view/dorsal view	B-SF	congruence	dorsal view	(ii)
gaster/fourth to seventh abdominal sclerites	B-SF	congruence	fourth to seventh abdominal sclerites	(ii)
gena/malar area	B-SF	congruence	malar area	(i), (ii)
genal bridge/postgenal suture	B-SF	congruence	postgenal suture	(i), (ii)
girdling constriction/transverse impression of the abdominal tergite	B-SF	congruence	transverse impression of the abdominal tergite	(ii)
ground pilosity/pubescence	B-TG	congruence	pubescence	(i), (ii)
helcium/anterosclerite	B-SF	congruence	anterosclerite	(ii)
humerus/pronotal corner	B-SF	congruence	pronotal corner	(ii)
katepisternum/katepisternum	B-SF	partial overlap	katepisternum	(iii)
labrum/labrum	B-SF	partial overlap	labrum	(iii)
lamella/translucent carina	B-SF	congruence	translucent carina	(ii)
leading edge/anterior margin	B-SF	congruence	anterior margin of the scape	(ii)
malar area/malar area	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	malar area	(i), (iii)
marginate/angular margin	B-SF	congruence	angular margin	(ii)
mesonotum/mesonotum	B-SF	partial overlap	mesonotum	(i), (iii)
mesopleuron/mesopectus	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	mesopectus	(i), (ii)
mesosoma/mesosoma	B-SF	partial overlap	mesosoma	(i), (iii)
metacoxa/metacoxa	B-SF	partial overlap	metacoxa	(iii)
metanotal groove/metanotal impression	B-SF	congruence	metanotal impression	(ii)
metapleural gland/metapleural gland	B-SF	partial overlap	metapleural gland	(iii)
metapleural lobe/propodeal lobe	B-SF	congruence	propodeal lobe	(i), (ii)
metapleuron/metapectus	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	metapectus	(i), (ii)
metasoma/metasoma	B-SF	partial overlap	metasoma	(iii)
metatibial gland/translucent patch of the metatibia	B-SF	congruence	translucent patch of the metatibia	(ii)
node/petiolar node	B-SF	partial overlap	petiolar node	(ii)
occipital corners/posterolateral corners	B-SF	congruence	posterolateral corners	(ii)
occipital foramen/occipital foramen	B-SF	partial overlap	occipital foramen	(iii)
occipital margin/occipital carina	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	occipital carina	(ii)
ommatidium/ommatidium	B-SF	partial overlap	ommatidium	(iii)
orbicular/orbicular	B-TG	partial overlap	orbicular	(i), (ii)
pedicel/pedicel	B-SF	partial overlap	pedicel	(iii)
peduncle/petiolar peduncle	B-SF	partial overlap	petiolar peduncle	(ii)
petiole/petiole	B-SF	partial overlap	petiole	(iii)
pilosity/pilosity	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	pilosity	(iii)
postsclerite/posterosclerite	B-SF	congruence	posterosclerite	(i), (ii)
poststernite/posterosternite	B-SF	congruence	posterosternite	(i), (ii)
posttergite/posterotergite	B-SF	congruence	posterotergite	(i), (ii)
presclerite/anterosclerite	B-SF	congruence	anterosclerite	(i), (ii)
presternite/anterosternite	B-SF	congruence	anterosternite	(i), (ii)
promesonotal suture/pronoto-mesonotal suture	B-SF	congruence	pronoto-mesonotal suture	(ii)
promesonotum/pronoto-mesonotal area	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	pronoto-mesonotal area	(ii)
pronotum/pronotum	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	pronotum	(iii)
propodeal lobe/propodeal lobe	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	propodeal lobe	(iii)
propodeum/propodeum	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	propodeum	(i), (iii)
prosternite/probasisternum	B-SF	congruence	probasisternum	(i), (ii)
punctulate/areolate	B-SF	congruence	areolate	(i), (ii)
remiform/claviform	B-TG	congruence	claviform	(i), (ii)
remiform/remiform	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	remiform	(i), (ii)
remiform/shoehorn-shaped	B-TG	congruence	shoehorn-shaped	(i), (ii)
reticulate-punctate/areolate	B-TG	congruence	areolate	(i), (ii)
reticulate-rugose/foveolate-rugose	B-TG	congruence	foveolate-rugose	(ii)
ruga/ruga	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	ruga	(iii)
rugoreticulate/areolate	B-SF	congruence	areolate	(ii)
scape/scape	B-SF	partial overlap	scape	(iii)
scrobe/scrobe	B-SF	partial overlap	scrobe	(iii)
seta/seta	B-SF	congruence, partial overlap	seta	(iii)
simple/acicular	B-TG	congruence	acicular	(i), (ii)
simple/fine	B-TG	congruence	fine	(i), (ii)
spatulate/acicular	B-TG	congruence	acicular	(i), (ii)
spatulate/elliptic	B-TG	congruence	elliptic	(i), (ii)
spatulate/linear	B-TG	congruence	linear	(i), (ii)
spatulate/oblanceolate	B-TG	congruence	oblanceolate	(i), (ii)
spatulate/oblong	B-TG	congruence	oblong	(i), (ii)
spatulate/ovate	B-TG	congruence	ovate	(i), (ii)
spatulate/plank-like	B-TG	congruence	plank-like	(i), (ii)
spatulate/spatulate	B-TG	congruence, partial overlap	spatulate	(i), (ii)
spatulate/stout and truncated	B-TG	congruence	stout and truncated	(i), (ii)
spatulate/subsplatulate	B-TG	congruence	subspatulate	(i), (ii)
spongiform tissue/areolate process	B-SF	congruence	areolate process	(i), (ii)
spoon-shaped/spoon-shaped	B-TG	partial overlap	spoon-shaped	(i), (ii)
squamate/obovate	B-TG	congruence	obovate	(i), (ii)
suborbicular/suborbicular	B-TG	partial overlap	suborbicular	(i), (ii)
vertex/frontovertexal area	B-SF	congruence	frontovertexal area	(i), (ii)
waist/petiole+third abdominal sclerites	B-SF	congruence	petiole+third abdominal sclerites	(i), (ii)

Etymology framework

To discuss the possible origins and meanings of the generic epithet Strumigenys, we consulted historical documentation and examined its phonological similarity across Ancient Greek, Classical Latin, and Modern English (Received Pronunciation). Standard phonetic symbols are based on the most recent version of the chart from the International Phonetic Association (IPA, 2015). The phonological implications of the generic epithet are discussed based on the putative phonological processes of Ancient Greek and Classical Latin, considered here as the source languages for name composition.

Measurement framework

All measurements were taken using the stereomicroscopes described previously with an ocular micrometer scaled in 0.1 mm and are given in millimeters (minimum-maximum). Descriptions of measurements are summarized below:

• HL Head Length: the length of the head capsule excluding the mandibles, measured in dorsal view in a straight line from the mid-point of the anterior clypeal margin to the mid-point of the posterior cephalic margin. In species where one or both margins are concave, the measurement is taken from the midpoint of a transverse line that spans the apices of the projecting portions.

• HT Head Thickness: the thickness of the head in lateral view, with maximum distance measured between two parallel lines, one tangent with the dorsal-most point of the head and the other tangent with the ventral-most point of the head. If ventral margin concave upward, then measured from the lower line tangent to the uppermost portion of the curve.

• HW Head Width: the maximum head width in dorsal view, excluding the eyes.

• ML Mandible Length: the straight-line length of the mandible at full closure, measured in dorsal view from the mandibular apex to the external mandibular base.

• SL Scape Length: the maximum straight-line length of the scape, excluding the basal constriction that occurs distal of the condylar bulb.

• EL Eye Length: the maximum diameter of the compound eye in lateral view. In cases where unpigmented ommatidia are present (generally located at the outer rim of the compound eye), the measure is taken considering these structures. In cases where the eye is reduced to a single ommatidium, the maximum diameter of this structure alone should be taken.

• WL Weber’s Length: diagonal length of mesosoma in lateral view, measured from the point at which the pronotum meets the cervical shield to the posterior basal angle of the metapectus.

• PW Pronotal Width: the maximum width of the pronotum in dorsal view. In cases where the lower pronotum expands laterally, the measurement is taken from each outermost margin of the lower pronotum. Projecting spines, tubercles or other cuticular prominences at the pronotal corners are ignored.

• PL Petiolar Length: the length of the petiole in lateral view, measured from the propodeal foramen to the posterior margin of the petiole (i.e., the rim of the petiolar foramen). If the articulation with the propodeal foramen is obscured by the propodeal lobe, then the measurement is taken from the propodeal lobe to the posterior margin of the petiole.

• PH Petiolar Height: maximum distance measured between two parallel lines, one tangent with the node apex and the other tangent with the ventral-most point of the petiole in lateral view. If the ventral margin is concave upward, then it is measured from the lower line tangent to the uppermost portion of the curve. If present, areolate processes are ignored.

• DPW Dorsal Petiolar Width: the width of the petiolar node measured in dorsal view.

• AB3L Abdominal posterotergite III Length: maximum length of the third abdominal posterotergite in lateral view, measured from the anterior margin to the posterior margin. If present, areolate processes are ignored.

• AB4L Abdominal posterotergite IV Length: the length of the fourth abdominal posterotergite in lateral view, measured from the posterior margin of the third abdominal posterotergite (i.e., the rim of the third posterotergite foramen) to the posterior margin of the fourth posterotergite.

Indices:

• CI Cephalic Index: HW/HL × 100

• HTI Head Thickness Index: HT/HW × 100

• SI Scape Index: SL/HW × 100

• OI Ocular Index: EL/HW × 100

• MI Mandibular Index: ML/HW× 100

• DPI Dorsal Petiolar Index: DPW/PL × 100

• LPI Lateral Petiolar Index: PH/PL× 100

Depository institution abbreviations

Entomological collections are referred to by the following abbreviations:

• CASC California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California, USA.

• CELC Coleção Entomológica do Laboratório de Coleoptera, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil.

• DZUP Coleção Entomológica Pe. Jesus Santiago Moure, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

• MZSP Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Image processing framework

High-resolution images presented here were obtained with a Leica M205 C stereomicroscope with coupled camera Leica MC190 HD and the software LAS V4.12 at the Laboratório de Sistemática, Evolução e Biologia de Hymenoptera, MZSP, and a Zeiss Stereo Discovery V20 stereomicroscope with coupled camera Zeiss Axiocam 305 and the software ZEN Pro at the Laboratório de Sistemática e Biologia de Formigas, DZUP. Images were edited using Photoshop CS6 and plates were prepared using Inkscape ver. 1.3. Maps were prepared using QGIS ver. 3.34.11, with the occurrence records for each species imported as vector layers along with the South America territorial boundaries (IBGE, 2021), Brazilian territorial boundaries (IBGE, 2022), and Brazilian Biomes (MMA, 2005) vectors. Specimens without coordinates documented in their occurrence records were associated with the standard coordinate value of the locality where they were recorded.

Results and Discussion

Taxonomic treatments

Genus Strumigenys Smith

Strumigenys Smith, 1860: 72. Type species: Strumigenys mandibularis Smith, 1860: 72, by monotypy (orig. des.).

Strumigenys alberti species group

Strumigenys alberti Forel, 1893

Strumigenys conspersa Emery, 1906

Strumigenys fridericimuelleri Forel, 1886

Strumigenys furtiva (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys nigrescens Wheeler, 1911

Strumigenys paloma sp. nov.

Strumigenys panamensis (Sosa-Calvo et al., 2006)

Strumigenys parsauga (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys sublucida (Brown, 1953)

Strumigenys paloma sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:09B2F637-043D-44E8-93A7-AE4D54547DFA

Figs. 1A-C, 7

Figure 1
Holotype worker of Strumigenys paloma. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 2
Holotype worker of Strumigenys aline. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 3
Holotype worker of Strumigenys carol. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 4
Holotype worker of Strumigenys jaqueline. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 5
Holotype worker of Strumigenys mboehara. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 6
Holotype worker of Strumigenys vitoria. A. Whole body in lateral view. B. Dorsal view of head. C. Whole body in dorsal view.

Figure 7
Distribution map of the newly described Strumigenys species on the Brazilian Biomes.

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the alberti species group, in addition to: setae on pronotal corners, lateral margin of mesonotum, petiolar node, third posterotergite, and fourth posterotergite flagellate and erect. Presence of a pair of suberect setae on posterior half of frontovertexal area; long and claviform. Setae on apex of antennal scrobe present; they are long, claviform, suberect, and directed dorsally. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost two times the length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node wider than long (DPI 58.506). Longitudinal carinae of the fourth posterotergite restricted to basal third of the posterotergite.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.619; HT 0.306; HW 0.350; ML 0.200; SL 0.356; EL 0.069; WL 0.619; PW 0.270; PL 0.301; PH 0.126; DPW 0.176; AB3L 0.144; AB4L 0.562; CI 56.565; HTI 87.500; SI 101.785; OI 19.643; MI 57.143; DPI 58.506; LPI 41.909.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: frontovertexal area areolate. Antennal scrobe areolate. Pronotomesonotal area areolate. Mesopectus almost entirely smooth; line adjacent to mesepisternal carina and dorsal area of anepisternum areolate. Propodeum dorsally areolate. Metapectopropodeal area almost entirely smooth; area near propodeal lobe and line dorsal to propodeal spiracle areolate. Petiole mostly areolate; presence of smooth patch on anterior and dorsal areas of node. Third posterotergite (=postpetiole) smooth. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae restricted to basal third of the posterotergite. Setae: Setae on clypeus small relative to the setae on the frontovertexal area, spatulate to subspatulate, appressed, and directed anteriorly; setae on clypeal margins large, spoon-shaped, decumbent, and directed anteriorly. Setae on head small, spatulate, decumbent, and directed anteromedially. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe present; setae are long, claviform, suberect, and directed dorsally. Presence of a pair of suberect setae on posterior half of frontovertexal area; setae long and remiform. Setae on anterior margin of scape large, spatulate to subspatulate, erected, and directed towards the base of scape or away from the longitudinal axis of the scape. Setae on pronotal corners, lateral margin of mesonotum, petiolar node, third posterotergite, and fourth posterotergite flagellate and erect. Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus absent. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible triangular in dorsal view, with 10 to 12 small teeth on internal margin, followed by the basal process of the mandible; diastema absent; apical fork absent. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex to straight. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible parallel to ventral margin. In lateral view, head thick (HTI 87.500). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus convex. In dorsal view, frontal lobe not laterally enlarged, not concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina does not expand laterally; frontal carina constricted posterior to frontal lobe; lateral margin of frontal carina convex. Preocular carina more than two times the length of the eye. Pronotal corner carinate; presence of a pair of intumescences from which the flagellate setae arise. Mesonotum with a pair of intumescences from which the flagellate setae arise. Propodeal spine long and translucent, longer than the propodeal translucent carina; carina small. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora ellipsoid and located at distal region. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node; process almost half the size of the node, in lateral view. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost two times the height of the petiolar peduncle; process appears thick, opaque. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost two times the length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node wider than long (DPI 58.506). Anterior margin of third posterotergite, seen in dorsal view relative to this structure, straight. Presence of areolate process at lateral and posterior margins and ventral surface of third posterotergite; areolate process extends posteriorly over the anterior margin of the fourth posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite straight. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible and antenna dark yellow. Legs dark yellow with dark areas. Head, mesosoma, petiole, and third posterotergite dark brown to black. Fourth posterotergite black.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brasil, Ceará, Crateús, RPPN Serra das Almas 25.vi.2011 Pitfall - Solo 08 Caatinga preservada Nunes, FA. col. CTD-25/vi/2011 PFS-08-MF 125 (DZUP 560617) [DZUP].

Distribution. The distribution of the species is, so far, restricted to the state of Ceará, Northeast Brazil (Fig. 7).

Etymology. Named in honor of myrmecologist Paloma L. de Andrade, whose work has greatly contributed to the curation of the myrmecological section at the Coleção Entomológica Padre Jesus Santiago Moure (DZUP). Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. Considering that this species is described based only on one specimen, commentaries about variation could not be made.

Habitat. The type locality of the species, Serra das Almas, is an environmental preservation area located in Brazil's semi-arid region, within the Caatinga biome, a typical vegetation formation of northeastern Brazil. The local vegetation consists of xerophytic and deciduous species. The Serra das Almas is characterized as a mountain range and plateau, with average altitudes ranging from 700 to 800 meters. This makes it a climatic refuge, as higher-altitude areas tend to have milder temperatures and greater moisture retention compared to the surrounding plains. The semi-arid region has low annual rainfall, averaging around 400 to 800 mm per year. However, due to the altitude of the mountain range, there is a slight increase in local rainfall, which is essential for maintaining pockets of denser vegetation (Associação Caatinga, 2024). The holotype was collected in an epigaeic pitfall trap.

Comments. This species has very long erect setae scattered throughout its body, most notably at the metasoma, which is a condition not found in other species belonging to the species-group and it is not frequently found in Strumigenys as a whole—although several other species have relatively long setae (for example, S. cygarix and S. thaxteri), S. paloma appears to have proportionately the longest setae recorded for the genus so far.

Strumigenys lygatrix species group

Strumigenys aline sp. nov.

Strumigenys lygatrix (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys aline sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:BE10D734-7A4E-409A-851C-C65D0BE2CB82

Figs. 2A-C, 7

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the lygatrix species group, in addition to: in dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus bilobate. Eye large (EL 0.076; OI 23.194–23.461). In dorsal view, petiolar node wider than long (DPI 66.443–66.892). In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite concave.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.438; HT 0.243; HW 0.329; ML 0.136; SL 0.174; EL 0.076; WL 0.478; PW 0.216; PL 0.186; PH 0.108; DPW 0.124; AB3L 0.106; AB4L 0.400; CI 75.142; HTI 74.144; SI 52.852; OI 23.194; MI 41.445; DPI 66.443; LPI 57.720.

Paratype measurements. (n=1) HL 0.444; HT 0.238; HW 0.325; ML 0.144; SL 0.188; EL 0.076; WL 0.45; PW 0.206; PL 0.185; PH 0.111; DPW 0.124; AB3L 0.113; AB4L 0.406; CI 73.240; HTI 73.078; SI 57.692; OI 23.461; MI 44.231; DPI 66.892; LPI 60.135.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: Body smooth, except for: areolate line above the eye, from anterior area of antennal scrobe to apicoscrobal area; elongate-areolate line along the frontal carina; faint longitudinal carinae in the pronotomesonotal area. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae restricted to basal third of the posterotergite. Setae: Setae on head minute to small posteriorly, fine, appressed to decumbent posteriorly, and directed anteriorly. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe present; setae are fine, curved, semierect, and directed dorsally. Setae on anterior margin of scape minute, fine, appressed, and directed towards the apex of the scape. Setae on pronotal corners, lateral margin of mesonotum, petiolar node, and fourth posterotergite fine, curved and erect. Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus fine and erect. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible triangular in dorsal view, with 10 to 12 small teeth on internal margin, without an apical fork. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible diverging from ventral margin towards its apex. In lateral view, head thick (HT 0.243; HTI 74.144). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus bilobate. In dorsal view, frontal lobe laterally enlarged, partially concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina expands laterally forming the dorsal margin of the deep antennal scrobe; lateral margin of frontal carina straight. Presence of translucent patch on frontal lobe. Presence of two large translucent patches on frontal carina; these patches are almost indistinguishable from the translucent patch in the frontal lobe. Preocular carina almost the same length of the eye. In dorsal, pronotal corner curved. Propodeal spine long and translucent; at least three times longer than the propodeal translucent carina. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora absent. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost half the height of the petiolar peduncle; process appears thick, opaque. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost a third the length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node wider than long (DPI 66.443). In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite concave. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin and ventral surface of third posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite weakly concave. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible, antenna, legs, and body light brown.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brasil, Ceará, Crateús, RPPN Serra das Almas 05.vi.2011 Pitfall - Solo 01 Carrasco degradado Nunes, FA. col. CRD 05/6/2011 PFS-01 MF.131 (DZUP 560618) [DZUP]. PARATYPE: 1 worker, same data as holotype (DZUP 560619) [MZSP].

Distribution. The distribution of the species is, so far, restricted to the state of Ceará (Fig. 4).

Etymology. Named in honor of myrmecologist Aline M. Oliveira, whose contributions have advanced global ant systematics and the curation of scientific collections. Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. Since this species is described based only on two specimens, little to no variation was observed.

Habitat. For the description of the type-locality refer to the comments on Strumigenys paloma section. The mention of “Carrasco degradado” in the label of the holotype worker indicates that the specimen was collected in epigaeic pitfall trap installed in a disturbed area of Caatinga.

Comments. This species has a very distinguishing feature among all Strumigenys species, which is the anterior margin of the clypeus bilobate. This distinguishing feature easily separates it from S. lygatrix, the only other species in the lygatrix species group. With the description of this species, it is possible to observe a distribution pattern that privileges humid refuges in arid/semi-arid localities among members of the lygatrix species group—there are records from the Chaco Salteño (type locality of S. lygatrix) to the Caatinga at Serra das Almas (type locality of S. aline)—, with additional records in Atlantic Forest remnants in southern Brazil. Species belonging to this species group are rarely collected, with most records being restricted to one to two specimens.

Strumigenys splendens species group

Strumigenys abditivata (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys carol sp. nov.

Strumigenys comis (Kempf, 1959)

Strumigenys dentinasis (Kempf, 1960)

Strumigenys inusitata (Lattke, 1992)

Strumigenys jaqueline sp. nov.

Strumigenys kompsomala (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys moloch (Bolton, 2000)

Strumigenys rugithorax (Kempf, 1959)

Strumigenys splendens (Borgmeier, 1954)

Strumigenys villiersi (Perrault, 1986)

Strumigenys carol sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:06122C17-58BC-443F-9D5D-ED9174BB5335

Figs. 3A-C, 7

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the splendens species group, in addition to: presence of a convex process at the dorsum of the clypeus. Presence of large translucent patches on frontal carinae. Head thick (HT 0.389–0.409; HTI 65.598–67.159). Pronotal corners angular.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.732; HT 0.399; HW 0.601; ML 0.196; SL 0.315; EL 0.06; WL 0.899; PW 0.269; PL 0.486; PH 0.251; DPW 0.123; AB3L 0.184; AB4L 0.595; CI 82.103; HTI 66.389; SI 52.412; OI 8.197; MI 32.613; DPI 25.308; LPI 51.646.

Paratype measurements. (n=3) HL 0.725–0.739; HT 0.389–0.409; HW 0.593–0.609; ML 0.142–0.256; SL 0.306–0.324; EL 0.05–0.08; WL 0.89–0.908; PW 0.261–0.277; PL 0.474–0.498; PH 0.245–0.257; DPW 0.116–0.13; AB3L 0.177–0.191; AB4L 0.587–0.603; CI 81.793–82.408; HTI 65.598–67.159; SI 51.602–53.201; OI 6.831–10.929; MI 23.946–42.946; DPI 24.472–26.104; LPI 51.606–51.687.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: Body completely smooth, including the antennal scrobe. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae almost reaching midlength of the posterotergite. Setae: Setae on head minute, fine, appressed, and directed anteriorly, except setae present at the dorso-posterior margin of antennal scrobe, which are longer, fine, erect, and directed laterally. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe absent. Setae on anterior margin of scape minute, fine, appressed, and directed towards the apex of the scape. Setae on pronotal corners, lateral margin of mesonotum, petiolar node, and fourth posterotergite fine and erect (but see Commentaries section). Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus fine and erect. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible triangular in dorsal view, with 18 small teeth on internal margin, without an apical fork. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible diverging from ventral margin towards its apex. In lateral view, head thick (HTI 66.389). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus convex; in lateral view, an enlarged convex process extends throughout the entire clypeal length. In dorsal view, frontal lobe laterally enlarged, completely concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina expands laterally forming the dorsal margin of the deep antennal scrobe; lateral margin of frontal carina convex. Presence of translucent patch on frontal lobe. Presence of two large translucent patches on frontal carina; these patches are almost indistinguishable from the translucent patch in the frontal lobe. Preocular carina almost two times the length of the eye. Pronotal corner angular. Propodeal spine long and translucent; longer than the propodeal translucent carinae. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora spherical and located at distal region. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost the same as the petiolar peduncle; process appears thin, fully translucent throughout. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost half the length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node longer than wide (DPI 25.308). In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite concave. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin and ventral surface of third posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite weakly concave. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible, antenna, and legs dark yellow. Body dark brown.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brazil, São Paulo, Piedade, P.E. de Jurupará, 23°57.054' S 47°24.495' W, 208m, Winkler T2, ii.2008, A.G.D. Bieber col. [MZSP]. PARATYPES: 4 workers, same data as holotype (2 workers) [DZUP], same data (1 worker) [MZSP], same data (1 worker) [CASC].

Distribution. The distribution of the species is, so far, restricted to the state of São Paulo (Fig. 7).

Etymology. Named in honor of the myrmecologist Ana Carolina A. Neundorf, for her contributions to fungus-growing ants’ systematics, fungus-ant interaction, education, and teaching. Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. The only variation observed in the studied specimens was the total size of the mandibles (ML 0.142–0.256) and the size of the mandibles relative to the head (MI 23.946–42.946).

Habitat. The Jurupará State Park, type-locality of this species, is a protected area spanning 26,250 hectares within the Atlantic Forest biome. It encompasses a transitional zone between dense ombrophilous forest and semideciduous seasonal forest, hosting a rich biodiversity. The region's mountainous terrain (around 700m a.s.l.), combined with local rainfall and climate, supports the preservation of dense vegetation in several parts of the park (WikiParques, 2024). The specimen described here was found in a leaf-litter sample submitted to the Winkler extractor, sampled in the vegetation surrounding the Juquiá River.

Comments. In the Neotropical region, only S. carol and S. inusitata have a longitudinal convex projection on the dorsum of the clypeus. However, in the latter, the head is dorso-ventrally flattened, the clypeal projection has a deep medial ridge, there is a translucent carina in the anterior face of the petiolar node, there is no areolate process at the third posterosternite, and the body setae are relatively longer. Apart from them, only the Indo-Australian Strumigenys euryale (Bolton, 2000), from the Strumigenys leptothrix species group, has the longitudinal convexity in the clypeus; although, in this case, the projection is greatly reduced when compared to those found in S. carol and S. inusitata. Additionally, another interesting fact is that S. inusitata has been recorded only for the Amazon Forest, while S. carol appears to be restricted to the southern parts of the Atlantic Forest. Finally, a noteworthy feature found in specimens belonging to this species is that the ventral areolate process in the petiole appears to be very thin, appearing like a high translucent carina.

Strumigenys jaqueline sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:95970503-0517-40A9-8D39-54917C2C8FED

Figs. 4A-C, 7

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the splendens species group, in addition to: in lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible parallel to ventral margin. Head flat (HT 0.263; HTI 54.791-55.029). Presence of a minute acute process at the dorsum of the clypeus. Presence of faint patches of areolate sculpture in each antennal scrobe, dorsal to eyes. Propodeal spines short and translucent; in lateral view almost the same length of the propodeal translucent carinae. In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight. Longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite reaching midlength of the posterotergite.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.608; HT 0.263; HW 0.478; ML 0.145; SL 0.254; EL 0.055; WL 0.646; PW 0.268; PL 0.301; PH 0.154; DPW 0.136; AB3L 0.193; AB4L 0.539; CI 78.618; HTI 55.029; SI 53.138; OI 11.506; MI 30.334; DPI 45.182; LPI 51.162.

Paratype measurements. (n=1) HL 0.61; HT 0.263; HW 0.48; ML 0.205; SL 0.257; EL 0.057; WL 0.647; PW 0.269; PL 0.303; PH 0.156; DPW 0.269; AB3L 0.195; AB4L 0.542; CI 78.688; HTI 54.791; SI 53.541; OI 11.875; MI 42.708; DPI 88.778; LPI 51.485.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: Body completely smooth; presence of faint patches of areolate sculpture in each antennal scrobe, dorsal to eyes. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae reaching midlength of the posterotergite. Setae: Setae on head minute, fine, appressed, and directed anteriorly. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe absent. Setae on anterior margin of scape minute, fine, appressed, and directed towards the apex of the scape. Setae on pronotal corners, lateral margin of mesonotum, petiolar node, third posterotergite, and fourth posterotergite fine and erect. Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus fine and erect. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible triangular in dorsal view, with 10 to 12 small teeth on internal margin, without an apical fork. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible parallel to ventral margin. In lateral view, head flat (HTI 55.029). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus convex; in lateral view, presence of a minute acute process at the dorsum of the clypeus. In dorsal view, frontal lobe laterally enlarged, completely concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina expands laterally forming the dorsal margin of the deep antennal scrobe; lateral margin of frontal carina convex. Presence of translucent patch on frontal lobe. Presence of two translucent patches on frontal carina; these patches are clearly distinguishable from the translucent patch in the frontal lobe. Preocular carina almost two times the length of the eye. Pronotal corner angular. Propodeal spine short and translucent, in lateral view almost the same length of the propodeal translucent carina. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora spherical and located at distal region. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost the same as the petiolar peduncle; process appears thick, opaque. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost half the length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node longer than wide (DPI 45.182). In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight. In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite straight. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin and ventral surface of third posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite weakly concave. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible, antenna, and legs light yellow. Body light brown.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brazil, Minas Gerais, Parque Estadual do Rio do Doce, 19°47'49”S 42°34'38”W, elev. 280m. 23-24.viii.2005, TEAM exped. col. Trilha da Garapa Torta, Floresta Atlântica Estacional Semidecidual, TGT 2-9 Mini-Winkler (MZSPHYM0148175) [MZSP]. PARATYPE: 1 worker, Brazil, Minas Gerais, Viçosa, Floresta Secundária, ii.1994. Sperber, Louzada & Lopes (UFV-LABECOL-000097) [CELC].

Distribution. This species is recorded from Minas Gerais (Fig. 7).

Etymology. Named in honor of the myrmecologist Jaqueline A. Paes, for her contributions in army-ants’ taxonomy, ant anatomy, and natural history of army ants. Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. There is little to no variation in the two specimens observed in this study. Small variations in size of the propodeal spines occur, although they are negligible. Given the overall resemblance of this species with S. dentinasis (see Comments section), we expected to see variations in the size of the clypeal process, which would indicate that the two specimens studied here would represent two populations of S. dentinasis with a drastic morphological variation. However, no variations in the clypeal process were observed. The same can be said from the longitudinal carinae of the fourth posterotergite and shape of the petiolar node.

Habitat. Regarding the habitat from where the type-specimens were recovered, the Rio Doce State Park is one of the largest remnants of the Atlantic Forest in Brazil. Covering an area of approximately 35,970 hectares, with average altitude ranging from 230 to 500 m a.s.l., the park hosts rich biodiversity and diverse landscapes, including dense semideciduous forests, hills, and an extensive lacustrine system. The terrain is characterized by hills and plains, typical of the so-called “sea of hills” (“mares de morros”). The climate is hot and humid, with annual rainfall contributing to stable environmental conditions throughout the year. Additionally, the park plays a crucial role in conserving water resources within the Rio Doce basin (IEF, 2024). The holotype specimen was collected in a leaf-litter sample submitted to the Winkler extractor while the paratype specimen was sampled in a baited pitfall trap.

Comments. Among all species in the splendens species group, S. jaqueline is most similar to S. dentinasis, sharing several features with this species (i.e., type and abundance of setae throughout the body, shape of head and mesosoma, smooth body, presence of an acute projection on the clypeus), which could be a source of confusion during identification. However, differences in size of the propodeal translucent carina, length of longitudinal carina of the fourth posterotergite, size of acute projection on the clypeus are enough to differentiate both species.

Strumigenys lilloana species group

Strumigenys lilloana (Brown, 1950)

Strumigenys mboehara sp. nov.

Strumigenys minuscula (Kempf, 1962)

Strumigenys mboehara sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:99EBC464-B849-4235-A12E-5C91C8A83F37

Figs. 5A-C, 7

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the lilloana species group, in addition to: antennae with six antennomeres. Presence of a single pair of laterally projecting fine setae on the apex of the antennal scrobes. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible diverging from ventral margin towards its apex. In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus convex.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.434; HT 0.228; HW 0.368; ML 0.145; SL 0.171; EL 0.024; WL 0.422; PW 0.192; PL 0.171; PH 0.116; DPW 0.108; AB3L 0.127; AB4L 0.36; CI 84.792; HTI 61.956; SI 46.467; OI 6.521; MI 33.402; DPI 63.157; LPI 67.836.

Paratype measurements. (n=9) HL 0.427–0.441; HT 0.218–0.238; HW 0.36–0.376; ML 0.138–0.152; SL 0.162–0.18; EL 0.016–0.032; WL 0.413–0.431; PW 0.184–0.2; PL 0.159–0.183; PH 0.11–0.122; DPW 0.101–0.115; AB3L 0.12–0.134; AB4L 0.352–0.368; CI 84.309–85.260; HTI 60.555–63.297; SI 45–47.872; OI 4.444–8.51; MI 32.318–34.467; DPI 62.841–63.522; LPI 66.666–69.182.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: Body completely smooth, including antennal scrobes. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae reaching midlength of the posterotergite. Setae: Setae on head small, fine, erect to suberect. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe present; these erect setae are hardly differentiated from setae from rest of head. Setae on dorsal margin of antennal scrobes small, fine, decumbent, and directed anteriorly. Setae on anterior margin of scape minute, fine, decumbent, and directed towards the apex of the scape. Setae on pronotal corners flagellate, long, and projecting laterally. Setae on lateral margin of pronotum and mesonotum, petiolar node, third posterotergite, and fourth posterotergite fine to flagellate and erect to suberect; these setae are long except on petiolar node and third posterotergite. Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus fine and erect. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible triangular in dorsal view, with 12 small teeth on internal margin, without an apical fork. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible diverging from ventral margin towards its apex. In lateral view, head thick (HTI 61.956). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus convex. In dorsal view, frontal lobe laterally enlarged, partially concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina expands laterally forming the dorsal margin of the deep antennal scrobe; lateral margin of frontal carinae sinuous. Presence of translucent patch on frontal lobe. Presence of two translucent patches on frontal carina; these patches are distinguishable from the translucent patch in the frontal lobe. Preocular carina almost two to three times the length of the eye. Pronotal corner angular. Propodeal spine short and translucent; in lateral view, almost the same length of the propodeal translucent carina. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora spherical and located at distal region. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost half the height of petiolar peduncle; process appears thick, opaque. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost same size of dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node as long as wide (DPI 63.157). In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight. In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite straight. Presence of areolate process at lateral margin and ventral surface of third posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite straight. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible, antenna, and legs light yellow. Body light brown.

Type specimens. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brazil, Paraná, Tunas, Parque das Lauráceas, 21-29.ii.2001, 24°51'16”S 48°43'00.4”W, Silva & Eberhardt cols. Transecto I, Winkler 36 (MZSPHYM0148176) [MZSP]. PARATYPES: 12 workers, same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 02 (2 worker) (MZSPHYM0148177) [DZUP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 12 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148178) [DZUP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 22 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148179) [DZUP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 28 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148180) [DZUP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 28 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148181) [MZSP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 33 (3 workers) (MZSPHYM0148182) [MZSP], same data as holotype, Transecto I, Winkler 36 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148183) [MZSP].

Other material examined. 26 workers: Brazil, Santa Catarina, São Bonifácio, P.E. Serra do Tabuleiro, 27°49'06”S 48°54'41”W, 08-13.iii.2004, Silva, R.R.; Dietz, B.H. & Albuquerque, N. cols. Winkler # 39 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148184) [MZSP], Brazil, São Paulo, Cunha, P.E. Serra do Mar, 23°15'03”S 45°00'26”W, 21-22.iv.2001, Tavares, AA. & Silva, R.R. cols. Winkler # 3 (4 workers) (MZSPHYM0148185) [MZSP], same data as preceding, Winkler # 19 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148186), same data as preceding, Winkler # 20 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148187), same data as preceding, Winkler # 21 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148188), same data as preceding, Winkler # 28 (3 workers) (MZSPHYM0148189), same data as preceding, Winkler # 30 (3 workers) (MZSPHYM0148190), same data as preceding, Winkler # 32 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148191), same data as preceding, Winkler # 34 (3 workers) (MZSPHYM0148192), same data as preceding, Winkler # 39 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148193), same data as preceding, Winkler # 41 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148194), same data as preceding, Winkler # 44 (1 worker) (MZSPHYM0148195), same data as preceding, Winkler # 46 (2 workers) (MZSPHYM0148196) [MZSP].

Distribution. This species has been, so far, recorded only in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, from São Paulo to Santa Catarina states (Fig. 7).

Etymology. From Guarani mbo’ehára (pronounced [ᵐbo.ʔeˈha.ɾa]), singular noun, literally meaning “the agent of teaching” or “teacher”. Named in honor of those who teach, whether formally or not, human or more-than-human. Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. We noticed variations in mandibular shape and anterior clypeal margin in the examined specimens. In some specimens, the medial portion of the anterior clypeal margin appears to be slightly more anteriorly projected, conferring a subtriangular aspect to the clypeus in dorsal view. Also, in some specimens, the frontal carina slightly diverges posteriorly to the antennal insertion, forming a more abrupt angulation. The smaller specimens are paler and, possibly, represent callow apterous from newly founded colonies.

Habitat. This species has been collected in the leaf litter of dense ombrophilous forests and mixed ombrophilous forests in the southern portion of the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, always in areas of high altitude.

Comments. Within the lilloana species group, S. mboehara mostly resembles S. minuscula, but it can be easily differentiated from it by the number of antennomeres. Apart from that, the frontal carinae, when seen in dorsal view, form an anterior lobe in S. minuscula that appears to be well-defined when compared to S. mboehara. Additionally, the appressed minute setae in S. minuscula (as seen in the specimen CASENT0281948, in Antweb) appears to be much smaller than in S. mboehara, with each seta being much smaller than the diameter of the translucent patch in the former and roughly the same size in the latter. This same comparison can be extended to the appressed setae at the pronotomesonotal area of both species. Finally, the body coloration of S. minuscula appears darker.

Despite those differences, given the overall resemblance of both species, the presence of only one additional S. minuscula specimen sampled since its description (based on one specimen), and the overlap in distribution among both species, one might wonder if the specimens of S. minuscula do not correspond to specimens of S. mboehara with fused antennomeres. Although species with four antennomeres are not unheard of in the genus, it is not a frequent condition among the Neotropical fauna—only five species (including the exotic S. emmae), among the almost 200 species recorded for the region, have four antennomeres. Further sampling in forest remnants at the southern portion of the Atlantic Forest, not restricted to Brazil, along with microstructural comparative studies of antennae in Strumigenys are needed in order to shed light on the matter.

Strumigenys thaxteri species group

Strumigenys reticeps (Kempf, 1969)

Strumigenys thaxteri (Wheeler, 1916)

Strumigenys vitoria sp. nov.

Strumigenys vitoria sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:27D73B45-7175-4A26-9234-9EBB27D441DC

Figs. 6A-C, 7

Diagnosis. With the characteristics of the thaxteri species group, in addition to: anterior margin of clypeus straight. Medial area of clypeus devoid of setae. Eyes small (EL 0.039–0.054; OI 10.877–17.551). Setae on clypeus flagellate.

Holotype measurements. HL 0.464; HT 0.281; HW 0.381; ML 0.150; SL 0.200; EL 0.056; WL 0.512; PW 0.219; PL 0.262; PH 0.150; DPW 0.137; AB3L 0.151; AB4L 0.461; CI 82.210; HTI 73.770; SI 52.459; OI 14.754; MI 39.344; DPI 52.381; LPI 57.143.

Paratype measurements. (n=6) HL 0.431–0.456; HT 0.256–0.287; HW 0.306–0.364; ML 0.150–0.177; SL 0.191–0.201; EL 0.039–0.054; WL 0.462–0.501; PW 0.219–0.247; PL 0.219–0.265; PH 0.127–0.140; DPW 0.122–0.137; AB3L 0.115–0.139; AB4L 0.400–0.427; CI 67.123–84.348; HTI 71.930–87.755; SI 53.684–65.306; OI 10.877–17.551; MI 42.268–48.980; DPI 46.226–59.459; LPI 52.632–59.459.

Description. Worker.Sculpture: Clypeus smooth. Frontovertexal area areolate-rugose; presence of a smooth area posterior to epistomal line. Presence of a longitudinal carina medially at the posterior half of the frontovertexal area. Antennal scrobe completely areolate. Mesosoma mostly smooth; presence of longitudinal carina at dorsum of mesonoto-propodeal area (see Morphology section). Petiole areolate. Third and fourth posterotergite smooth. Presence of longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae); carinae restricted to basal area of posterotergite. Setae: Setae on body long, flagellate (=silky), erect to suberect; medial area of clypeus with sparse setae. Setae on lateral areas of clypeus and head curved posteriorly; setae on anterior half of dorsal margin of antennal scrobes decumbent and curved anteriorly. Setae on anterior margin of scapes long, flagellate (=silky), decumbent, and directed towards the apex of the scapes. Presence of one pair of longer, flagellate (=silky), erect setae that project laterally on the apex of antennal scrobes; one additional pair of longer, flagellate (=silky), erect setae that project laterally on the dorsal margin of antennal scrobe. Presence of two pairs of longer, flagellate (=silky), erect setae that project dorsolaterally on pronotal corners. Presence of two pairs of longer, flagellate (=silky), erect setae on lateral margins of mesonotum. Setae on anteroventral notch of the mesopectus fine and erect. Structures: Antenna with six antennomeres. Mandible subtriangular in dorsal view, each with 12 to 13 small teeth on internal margin, without an apical fork; basal eight to nine teeth larger than those situated distally; apical tooth larger than those immediately preceding it. In dorsal view, external margin of the mandible convex. In lateral view, dorsal margin of mandible diverging from ventral margin towards its apex. In lateral view, head thick (HT 0.281; HTI 73.770). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus straight. In dorsal view, frontal lobe laterally enlarged, completely concealing preocular carina. In dorsal view, frontal carina expands laterally forming the dorsal margin of the antennal scrobe. Preocular carina almost the same length of the eye. Pronotal corner angular, with a small intumescence. Propodeal spine short and translucent; in lateral view almost two times the length of the propodeal translucent carina. Translucent patches on dorsal surface of femora spherical and located at distal region. Presence of small areolate process at lateral margin of petiolar node. Ventral areolate process of petiole as long as petiole; its height almost the same as the petiolar peduncle; process appears relatively thin, fully translucent anteriorly, gradually opaque posteriorly. In lateral view, the anterior margin of petiolar node almost the same length of the dorsal margin; in dorsal view, node wider than long (DPI 52.381). In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight to concave. In dorsal view, anterior margin of third posterotergite concave. Presence of small areolate process at lateral margin and ventral surface of third posterotergite. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite weakly concave. Presence of a transverse patch of setae at the fourth posterosternite. Color: Mandible, antenna, and legs dark yellow. Head dark brown. Mesosoma and metasoma light brown.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: 1 worker, Brasil: GO, Jataí. Mta Açude. 17°51'31.0”S 51°43'37.0”W. 21-XII-2005 Gilmar G. dos Santos-col. M. Winkler, parcela 15. Coll. Diniz (DZUP 560620) [DZUP]. PARATYPES: 3 workers, same data as holotype (DZUP 560621, DZUP 560623, DZUP 560624) [DZUP], 1 worker, same data as holotype (DZUP 560622) [MZSP]; 2 workers, Brasil: GO, Jataí, Faz. Ariranha. 11-II-2009. 17°57'34.0”S 51°51'34.0”W, 797m. G. G. Santos - col. Frag. 02, M.W. Ponto 05. Coll. Diniz (DZUP 560625, DZUP 560626) [DZUP].

Distribution. This species is recorded from Goiás (Fig. 4).

Etymology. Named in honor of the myrmecologist Vitória V. Brunetta, for her contributions in ant taxonomy, ant distribution, and bionvasion dynamics. Following ICZN’s (2005) Article 11.9.1.2, the name of this species should be treated as a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name.

Morphology. Most of the variation found in this species was restricted to size; variations observed related to size of head (CI 67.123–84.348), thickness of head (HTI 71.930–87.755), size of scape (SI 53.684–65.306), and petiolar proportions (DPI 46.226–59.459). A longitudinal irregular carina is present around the mesonoto-propodeal area, although it varied in length among the observed specimens.

Habitat. All the specimens known come from leaf-litter samples collected in two localities within the municipality of Jataí, located in the southwest of the state of Goiás, Central Brazil. Jataí is situated within the Brazilian Cerrado biome and features typical vegetation formations of this region, such as open fields, cerrado sensu stricto, and riparian forests. Originally, its landscape was composed of shrubland and tree vegetation characteristic of the Cerrado, with species adapted to poor soils and dry periods. The region's terrain is varied, with flat or gently rolling areas known as “chapadões” (plateaus), particularly in higher altitude zones ranging from 700 to 1,100 meters. There are also some elevations and tabular surfaces in the eastern and northeastern parts of the municipality. The climate is tropical mesothermal, with two distinct seasons: a rainy one from October to March and a dry one from April to September. The average annual rainfall ranges from 1,500 to 1,700 mm, and temperatures can fluctuate between 11°C and 35°C throughout the year. These conditions support both native vegetation and intensive agricultural activity, which today occupies much of the municipal territory (Queiroz, 2003). According to the label coordinates, specimens were found in small fragments of forest surrounded by modified landscape; one locality near the urban perimeter and the other locality near crop and grazing areas.

Comments. This species is currently the smallest one in the thaxteri species group. Despite having some resemblance to S. thaxteri at a first glance, most body features (i.e., mandible and head shape, abundance of flagellate setae, shape of setae on clypeus and head, shape of anterior margin of clypeus) are completely different and can be used to easily separate the two species.

Identification of the new species under their respective species groups

Following Bolton’s (2000)magnum opus for the global fauna of Strumigenys, the newly described species would run through completely different couplets in the identification key for the Neotropical “Pyramica” species. Hence, we split the couplets of the original key and adjusted them to make smaller identification keys for the species groups treated in this work. Some of the couplets are only slightly modified from the original. Species belonging to the Strumigenys lilloana group, Strumigenys lygatrix group, Strumigenys splendens group, and Strumigenys thaxteri group were not grouped together in the original key, forcing us to completely overhaul the original couplets, starting from the first couplet that would lead to the first member of corresponding species group.

Identification key for the species belonging to the Strumigenys alberti species group

1. [Couplet 44 of Bolton’s (2000) original key] Setae on the apex of the antennal scrobes stout (Fig. 8A), curved, or clavate (Fig. 8B); these contrast with the longer setae at the pronotal corners and the pair on the mesonotal dorsum . . . . . 2

   

   Figure 8
   Differences in shape of setae on the apex of the antennal scrobes. A. Stout. B. Clavate. C. Fine. D. Flagellate or Looped.
   

   • Setae on the apex of the antennal scrobes fine (Fig. 8C), flagellate, or looped (Fig. 8D); these similar in length and shape to the setae at the pronotal corners and the pair on the mesonotal dorsum . . . . . 5

2. Propodeal spines, in lateral view, apically acute; carina ventral to the spine reduced and opaque, not translucent (Fig. 9A; arrow). In lateral view, posterior half of frontovertexal area with a transverse row of two to four suberect, fine to clavate, setae that are longer than the surrounding setae. Species with longer scapes (SI 79-102) . . . . . 3

   

   Figure 9
   Differences in size of the carina ventral to the propodeal spine (marked with an arrow). A. Carina ventral to the spine reduced and opaque, not translucent. B. Carina ventral to the spine broad and translucent, completely connected to the spine’s apex.
   

   • Propodeal spines, in lateral view, broadly triangular; carina ventral to the spine broad and translucent, completely connected to the spine’s apex (Fig. 9B; arrow). In lateral view, posterior half of frontovertexal area with a transverse row of two suberect remiform setae that are almost the same size of the surrounding setae. Species with short scapes (SI 65-67). . . . . Strumigenys furtiva (Bolton, 2000)

3. Dorsum of mesosoma and side of pronotum smooth and shining, without areolate areas.. . . . . Strumigenys sublucida(Brown, 1953)

   • Dorsum of mesosoma and side of pronotum with areolate sculpture. . . . .4

4. Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe long, clavate, suberect, and directed dorsally. Erect setae on pronotal corners and mesonotum long and flagellate…Strumigenys paloma sp. nov.

   • Erect setae on apex of antennal scrobe short, remiform, erect, and directed laterally. Erect setae on pronotal corners and mesonotum short and remiform…Strumigenys conspersaEmery, 1906

5. Basal translucent carina of mandible followed distally by a second translucent that extends anteriorly about half the length of the internal margin of the mandible (Fig. 10A; arrow); the two carinae are separated by a minute diastema. Mandibles long (MI 27-33). . . . . . Strumigenys albertiForel, 1893

   

   Figure 10
   Differences in teeth pattern on the internal margin of the mandible (marked with an arrow). A. Basal translucent carina of mandible followed distally by a second translucent that extends anteriorly about half the length of the internal margin of the mandible. B. Basal translucent carina of mandible followed distally by the tooth-row.
   

   • Basal translucent carina of mandible followed distally by the tooth-row (Fig. 10B; arrow); without a second translucent carina that extends anteriorly about half the length of the internal margin of the mandible. Mandibles short (MI 19-24).....6

6. Eyes small; with only four ommatidia in total. Pronoto-mesonotal area without a median longitudinal carina. Pronotum smooth and shining; mesonotum mostly areolate. Propodeal dorsum smooth and shining. In dorsal view, anterior clypeal margin narrowly convex. . . . . Strumigenys parsauga (Bolton, 2000)

   • Eye large; with 10 or more ommatidia in total. Pronoto-mesonotal area with a median longitudinal carina through most or all of its length. Pronotum partially to mostly sculptured. Propodeal dorsum weakly to strongly areolate. In dorsal view, anterior clypeal margin straight to shallowly convex. . . . . 7

7. Basal tooth-row of mandible consisting only of narrowly triangular acute teeth of the same size. Petiole node, in dorsal view, as long as wide; lateral margins of the node converging anteriorly. . . . . . Strumigenys fridericimuelleriForel, 1886

   • Basal tooth-row of mandible consisting of alternating narrowly triangular, longer acute teeth and bluntly rounded, smaller obtuse teeth; tooth 4 from base particularly obtuse and rounded. Petiole node, in dorsal view, wider than long; lateral margins of the node do not converge anteriorly.. . . . . Strumigenys nigrescens Wheeler, 1911

Identification key for the species belonging to the Strumigenys lygatrix species group

1. [Couplet 81 of Bolton’s (2000) original key] Anterior margin of clypeus, in dorsal view, straight. Petiolar node, in dorsal view, longer than wide. Setae at the apex of the antennal scrobe, pronotal corners, and mesonotum flagellate…Strumigenys lygatrix (Bolton, 2000)

• Anterior margin of clypeus, in dorsal view, bilobate; anterior margin medially concave. Petiolar node, in dorsal view, wider than long. Setae at the apex of the antennal scrobe, pronotal corners, and mesonotum fine…Strumigenys aline sp. nov.

Identification key for the species belonging to the Strumigenys splendens species group

1. [Couplet 76 of Bolton’s (2000) original key] In dorsal view, frontal carina (=dorsal margin of antennal scrobe) posterior to the level of the eye with laterally projecting setae present; at least one setae at the apex of the scrobe, but often more along the margin . . . . . 2

• In dorsal view, frontal carina (=dorsal margin of antennal scrobe) posterior to the level of the eye without laterally projecting setae present; any setae that do occur are minute and appressed, not projecting laterally. . . . . 7

2. In lateral view, dorsal margin of the mandible diverging anteriorly from ventral margin of the mandible. Dorsum of the clypeus with a longitudinal convex projection.. . . . . 3

• In lateral view, dorsal margin of the mandible parallel to ventral margin of the mandible. Dorsum of the clypeus without a longitudinal convex projection…. . . . . 4

3. In lateral view, anterior margin of petiolar node with a longitudinal translucent carina (Fig. 11A; arrow). Areolate process on the third abdominal sternite absent. Erect setae on head plank-like; presence of a transverse, curved row of erect setae on the posterior half of the frontovertexal area….Strumigenys inusitata (Lattke, 1992)

Figure 11
Differences in shape of petiolar node (marked with an arrow). A. Anterior margin of petiolar node with a longitudinal translucent carina. B. Anterior margin of petiolar node without a longitudinal translucent carina.

• In lateral view, anterior margin of petiolar node without a longitudinal translucent carina; at most, with small, opaque carinae arising anterolaterally at each side of the anterior margin of the petiolar node (Fig. 11B; arrow). Areolate process on the third abdominal sternite present. Erect setae on head fine; absence of transverse rows of erect setae on the frontovertexal area….Strumigenys carol sp. nov.

4. Erect setae on apex of the antennal scrobe plank-like. Presence of erect plank-like setae on posterolateral corners of head. Dorsum of the mesosoma completely smooth and shining…Strumigenys moloch (Bolton, 2000)

• Erect setae on apex of the antennal scrobe flagellate. Presence of erect to suberect, fine to flagellate setae on posterolateral corners of head. Dorsum of mesosoma mostly sculptured; if smooth patches present, they are restricted to the medial area of the pronotomesonotal area…5

5. Medial area of metanotum with an erect truncated short projection just anterior to the metanotal impression.….Strumigenys kompsomala (Bolton, 2000)

• Medial area of metanotum without an erect truncated short projection just anterior to the metanotal impression.…6

6. In lateral view, anterior portion of the clypeus sloping down toward the dorsal margin of the mandible (Fig. 12A; asterisk). In dorsal view, junction of preocular carina with clypeus visible. Frontal carina (=dorsal margin of scrobe) continuous with the posterolateral corners of head; carina not curving medially towards frontovertexal area (Fig. 12A; arrow). Frontal carina (=dorsal margin of scrobe) at level of eye with a laterally projecting flagellate seta that is longer than the scape; posterior to this is a flagellate seta at the apex of the antennal scrobe. . . . . Strumigenys villiersi (Perrault, 1986)

Figure 12
Differences in shape of clypeus (marked with an asterisk) and orientation of the frontal carina (marked with an arrow). A. Anterior portion of the clypeus sloping down toward the dorsal margin of the mandible and frontal carina continuous with the posterolateral corners of head. B. Anterior portion of the clypeus curving upwards (=dorsally) away from the dorsal margin of the mandible and frontal carina not continuous with the posterolateral corners of head.

• In lateral view, anterior portion of the clypeus curving upwards (=dorsally) away from the dorsal margin of the mandible (Fig. 12B; asterisk). In dorsal view, junction of preocular carina with clypeus not visible. Frontal carina (=dorsal margin of scrobe) not continuous with the posterolateral corners of head; carina curving medially towards frontovertexal area (Fig. 12B; arrow). Frontal carina (=dorsal margin of scrobe) at level of eye without a laterally projecting flagellate seta that is longer than the scape; only a flagellate seta at the apex of the antennal scrobe is present…Strumigenys rugithorax (Kempf, 1959)

7. Setae on pronotal corners present. In dorsal view, pronotal corners with angular margins. In lateral view, dorsal margin of petiolar node almost the same length as the anterior margin. In dorsal view, basal translucent carina of the mandible occupying less than one-quarter of the internal margin of the mandible…8

Pronotal humeral hair absent; humerus rounded in dorsal view. Pronotal dorsum not marginate anteriorly, angular or broadly rounded laterally. With petiole in profile the dorsal length of the node much greater than the height of its anterior face. With head in full-face view and mandibles fully closed the basal lamella occupying half or more of the exposed length of the masticatory margin . . . . . 10

8. In lateral view, dorsum of clypeus with a large to minute acute anteromedian projection that is inclined anteriorly (Fig. 13A). In dorsal view, frontal carina with two large translucent patches posterior to the small patch in the frontal lobe, dorsal to the antennal insertion…9

Figure 13
Differences in presence of projections in the dorsum of the clypeus. A. Dorsum of clypeus with a large or minute acute anteromedian projection that is inclined anteriorly. B. Dorsum of clypeus flat anteromedially, without any anteromedian projections.

• In lateral view, dorsum of clypeus flat anteromedially, without any anteromedian projections (Fig. 13B). In dorsal view, frontal carina with one small translucent patches posterior to the small patch in the frontal lobe, dorsal to the antennal insertion….Strumigenys comis (Kempf, 1959)

9. In lateral view, anteromedian projection on the dorsum of the clypeus large; anteromedian projection longer than the pedicel (Fig. 14A; asterisk). Propodeal spines, in lateral view, apically acute; carina ventral to the spine large and translucent, but never entirely connected to the spine’s apex (Fig. 14A; arrow). In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node convex. In dorsal view, longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae) restricted to the basal third of the posterotergite…Strumigenys dentinasis(Kempf, 1960)

Figure 14
Differences in size of projections in the dorsum of the clypeus (marked with an asterisk) and size of carina ventral to propodeal spine (marked with an arrow). A. Dorsum of clypeus with a large acute anteromedian projection and carina ventral to the spine large and translucent, but never entirely connected to the spine’s apex. B. Dorsum of clypeus with a minute acute anteromedian projection and carina ventral to the spine broad and translucent, completely connected to the spine’s apex.

• In lateral view, anteromedian projection on the dorsum of the clypeus minute; anteromedian projection smaller than the pedicel (Fig. 14B; asterisk). Propodeal spines, in lateral view, broadly triangular; carina ventral to the spine broad and translucent, completely connected to the spine’s apex (Fig. 14B; arrow). In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight to concave. In dorsal view, longitudinal carinae at the proximal area of the fourth posterotergite (=basigastral costulae) extending beyond the midlength of the posterotergite…Strumigenys jaqueline sp. nov.

10. In dorsal view, preocular carinae not visible; carinae concealed by the frontal lobes. In dorsal view, frontal carinae wide; translucent patches on frontal carinae present. Dorsum of propodeum and petiolar node smooth and shining. Dorsum of mandibles sculptured and opaque…. Strumigenys abditivata (Bolton, 2000)

• In dorsal view, preocular carinae visible; carinae not concealed by the frontal lobes. In dorsal view, frontal carinae narrow; translucent patches on frontal carinae absent. Dorsum of propodeum and petiolar node areolate. Dorsum of mandibles smooth and shining…….Strumigenys splendens (Borgmeier, 1954)

Identification key for the species belonging to the Strumigenys lilloana species group

1. [Couplet 1 of Bolton’s (2000) original key] Antenna with 4 antennomeres; pedicel not separated from the 2-segmented apical club…Strumigenys minuscula (Kempf, 1962)

• Antenna with 6 segments; pedicel separated from the 2-segmented apical club by two small segments . . . . . 2

2. In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node straight. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite straight. In dorsal view, junction of preocular carina with clypeus visible; carina partially concealed by the frontal lobe (Fig. 15A; circle). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus broadly convex (Fig. 15A; arrow). In dorsal view, pronotum narrow (PW 0.184–0.2)...Strumigenys mboehara sp. nov.

Figure 15
Differences in visibility of preocular carina in relation to the frontal lobe (marked with a circle) and shape of anterior margin of clypeus (marked with an arrow). A. Preocular carina partially concealed by the frontal lobe and anterior margin of clypeus broadly convex. B. Preocular carina completely concealed by frontal lobe and anterior margin of clypeus narrowly convex.

• In dorsal view, anterior margin of petiolar node weakly concave. In dorsal view, anterior margin of fourth abdominal posterotergite deeply concave. In dorsal view, junction of preocular carina with clypeus not visible; carina completely concealed by the frontal lobe (Fig. 15B; circle). In dorsal view, anterior margin of clypeus narrowly convex (Fig. 15B; arrow). In dorsal view, pronotum wide (PW 0.34–0.38)...Strumigenys lilloana(Brown, 1950)

Identification key for the species belonging to the Strumigenys thaxteri species group.

1. [Couplet 31 of Bolton’s (2000) original key] Frontovertexal area mostly foveolate-rugose. Anterior margin of the scape with a row of conspicuous projecting setae, of which one or more distinctly curves toward the antennal insertion; these setae are fine and decumbent. . . . . Strumigenys thaxteri(Wheeler, 1916)

• Frontovertexal area mostly areolate. Anterior margin of the scape with a row of conspicuous projecting setae, of which one or more distinctly curves toward the antennal apex; these setae flagellate and decumbent….. 2

2. In dorsal view, midpoint of anterior margin of clypeus produced into a sharp triangular tooth that projects anteriorly over the mandibles (Fig. 16A; arrow). Dorsum of clypeus with plank-like setae that are oriented posteriorly. In dorsal view, pronotomesonotal area with a longitudinal median carina…..Strumigenys reticeps (Kempf, 1969)

Figure 16
Differences in shape of the anterior margin of clypeus (marked with an arrow). A. Midpoint of anterior margin of clypeus produced into a sharp triangular tooth that projects anteriorly over the mandibles. B. Midpoint of anterior margin of clypeus not produced into a sharp triangular tooth that projects anteriorly over the mandibles.

• In dorsal view, midpoint of anterior margin of clypeus not produced into a sharp triangular tooth that projects anteriorly over the mandibles (Fig. 16B; arrow); anterior margin of clypeus straight. Dorsum of clypeus with flagellate setae that are oriented anteromedially. In dorsal view, pronotomesonotal area without a longitudinal median carina…..Strumigenys vitoria sp.nov.

Etymology of Strumigenys: origins of the word and possible meanings

The first part of the name is composed of the element ‘strumi-’, which is believed to come from Classical Latin and would be used as an alternative to the Ancient Greek word μύρμηξ (múrmēx, pronounced as /mýr.mɛːks/) in ant studies. The word ‘strumi-’ probably derived from ‘strūma’ in Classical Latin, a first declension noun, meaning ‘a scrofulous tumor’ (Lewis and Short, 1879). In turn, ‘strūma’ is derived from the verb ‘struō’ meaning ‘to place one thing on top of another; to pile up; join together’, coming from the Proto-Italic verb ‘strowō’, meaning ‘to pile up; to construct; build’ (De Vaan, 2008). Given the posterior history of the word usage in myrmecology, it is possible that Smith (1860) opted to maintain the nominative singular case of the word (strūma), only changing the last morpheme (-a to -i) of the element for composition purposes, despite sharing morphological similarities with its ablative and dative cases (strūmīs). The word ‘struma’ has been consistently used throughout ant taxonomy in nominal compositional — e.g., Chelystruma, Colobostruma, and Octostruma — as a reference noun to “ant”.

The possible Classical Latin origin for the element ‘strumi-’ have important phonological implications that might affect communication among researchers in settings involving meaning mobilization via oral discourse, especially regarding the pronunciation of the /r/ phoneme. Although standard pronunciation of the genus epithet in international settings privilege the pronunciation of the consonant as an approximant, either as a postalveolar /ɹ̠/ (English ‘Standard R’) or, to a lesser extent, as a retroflex /ɻ/ (English ‘Retroflex R’), the possible intended pronunciation, based on the putative Classical Latin phonology would be akin to a voiced alveolar trill /r/, which could be considered a challenge in pronunciation for researchers from particular linguistic scenarios.

The second part of the name is composed of the element ‘-genys’, which is believed to come from the Proto-Indo-European ‘*ǵénu-, *ǵénus’ (De Vaan, 2008), to Proto-Italic ‘*gena’ and, finally, used as ‘gĕna’ in Classical Latin (Lewis and Short, 1879). The change in the declension of the word ‘*ǵénus’ was probably to agree in gender with the cognate γένυς (Attic Greek: génus /ɡé.nyːs/), found in Ancient Greek, and maybe also under the influence of ‘māla’ (De Vaan, 2008), thus assuming the feminine gender. The meaning of the word would be ‘the upper part of the face, from the cheekbones to the eyelids; cheek’. Alternatively, ‘-genys’ comes from the Cornish as a cognate of the Classical Latin ‘gignō’, meaning “to create; engender; to be born” (De Vaan, 2008); however, given the overall diffusion of the Latinized binomial naming system at the time Smith described the genus, it is improbable that he made use of the word in that sense. The word ‘-genys’ is frequently used in nomenclatural composition in myrmecology, especially for genus names — such as Asketogenys Brown Junior, 1972, LeptogenysRoger, 1861, and GnamptogenysRoger, 1863 — as a reference to some notable quality of the mandibles of specimens belonging to those groups. It is also extremely common in other groups of insects — such as LiogenysGuérin-Méneville, 1831 — and other zoological groups — such as GlyptogenysGao and Fox, 1991. Interestingly, the presence of the morpheme ‘-y’ would point to a preference for the Attic Greek form of the word, although with distinct phonological implications — i.e., pronounced as a close front rounded vowel /y/ (similar to the English new /njuː/), instead of a close front unrounded vowel /i/ (as in English leaf /liːf/), or as the mid central vowel /ə/ (as in English genus /ˈdʒiːnəs/). Possibly the morpheme ‘-y’ was used just to maintain written similarity with the original spelling and as a standard for the phoneme /i/ (as in English happy /ˈhæpi/, but not as in English nymph /ˈnɪmf/) when the genus was described, given that the front and central vowels in Modern English are unrounded.

In the genus’ description (Smith, 1860) there is no evidence of the author's original intent when naming the group. It is consensual, however, that Smith referred to some quality of the species’ mandibles being described along with the genus (i.e., Strumigenys mandibularis). However, the author scarcely states any unusual condition found in the mandible of the genus or species being described, mentioning only that “... (the) mandibles (are) porrect, tridentate” (Smith, 1860: 72) and “the mandibles (are) produced, with their apex curved inwards, forming an acute, stout tooth” (Smith, 1860: 72) respectively. One possible explanation for the meaning of the name would be related to the over-imposed teeth in the mandibles, recovering the original meaning of the verb ‘struō’ to point out this condition. Another possibility would be the literal meaning of the word strūma, pointing to the presence of areolate processes in the type species, giving it a “scrofulous” appearance.

Acknowledgments

Ana Carolina A. Neundorf, Jaqueline A. Paes, and Vitória V. Brunetta greatly helped with advice on preparation of illustrations for the keys. Vitória V. Brunetta also helped with discussions on criteria for the choice of preferred terms and preparation of the map.

Funding

This work was supported by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior — CAPES, under the program CAPES/PRINT (grant number 88887.892274/2023-00) and the Brazilian Council of Research and Scientific Development (CNPq grant 304012/2023-8).

References

• AntWiki, 2025. Neotropical Region Species List - Strumigenys Available in: https://www.antwiki.org/wiki/Neotropical_Region_Species_List#Strumigenys (accessed 11 August 2025).
  » https://www.antwiki.org/wiki/Neotropical_Region_Species_List#Strumigenys
• Associação Caatinga, 2024. Reserva Natural Serra das Almas. Informações sobre conservação e biodiversidade local. Available in: https://www.acaatinga.org.br (accessed 08 December 2024).
  » https://www.acaatinga.org.br
• Axaridou, A., Konsolaki, K., Theodoridou, M., Kozlov, A., Haase, P., Doerr, M. 2018. VisTA: Visual Terminology Alignment Tool for Factual Knowledge Aggregation. SW4CH@ ESWC. 2094, 1-10.
• Baroni Urbani, C., Andrade, M.L., 1994. First description of fossil Dacetini ants with a critical analysis of the current classification of the tribe (Amber Collection Stuttgart: Hymenoptera, Formicidae. VI: Dacetini). Stutt. Beitr. Naturkd., B. 198, 1-65.
• Baroni Urbani, C., Andrade, M.L., 2007. The ant tribe Dacetini: limits and constituent genera, with descriptions of new species (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. Giacomo Doria 99, 1-191.
• Bharti, H., Akbar, SA., 2013. Taxonomic studies on the ant genus Strumigenys Smith, 1860 (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) with report of two new species and five new records including a tramp species from India. Sociobiology 60 (4), 387-396. http://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v60i4.387-396
  » http://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v60i4.387-396
• Bolton, B., 1998. Monophyly of the dacetonine tribe-group and its component tribes (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. Entomol. Ser. 67. 1, 65-78.
• Bolton, B., 1999. Ant genera of the tribe Dacetonini (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J. Nat. Hist. 33 (11), 1639-1689. http://doi.org/10.1080/002229399299798
  » http://doi.org/10.1080/002229399299798
• Bolton, B., 2000. The ant tribe Dacetini. Mem. Am. Entomol. Inst. 65, 1-1028.
• Bolton, B., 2025. An Online Catalog of the Ants of the World. Available in: https://antcat.org (accessed 11 August 2025).
  » https://antcat.org
• Booher, DB., 2021. The ant genus Strumigenys Smith, 1860 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in western North America north of Mexico. Zootaxa 5061 (2), 201-248. PMid:34810629. http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5061.2.1
  » http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5061.2.1
• Booher, DB., Prebus, M.M., Lubertazzi, D., 2019. A taxonomic revision of the Strumigenys nitens and simulans groups (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), two Caribbean radiations of leaf litter ants. Zootaxa 4656 (2), 335-358. PMid:31716828. http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4656.2.7
  » http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4656.2.7
• Booher, DB., Gibson, J.C., Liu, C., Longino, J.T., Fisher, B.L., Janda, M., Narula, N., Toulkeridou, E., Mikheyev, A.S., Suarez, A.V., Economo, E.P., 2021. Functional innovation promotes diversification of form in the evolution of an ultrafast trap-jaw mechanism in ants. PLoS Biol. 19 (3), e3001031. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001031
  » http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001031
• Borgmeier, T., 1954. Two interesting dacetine ants from Brazil (Hym., Formicidae). Braz. J. Biol. 14, 279-284.
• Brito, C.D.D., Lanes, G.D.O., Azevedo, C.O., 2021. Anatomic glossary of mesopleural structures in Bethylidae (Hymenoptera: chrysidoidea). Pap. Avulsos Zool. 61, e20216152. http://doi.org/10.11606/1807-0205/2021.61.52
  » http://doi.org/10.11606/1807-0205/2021.61.52
• Brown Junior, W.L., 1950. Revision of the ant tribe Dacetini: II. Glamyromyrmex Wheeler and closely related small genera. Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 76, 27-36.
• Brown Junior, W.L., 1953. Revisionary studies in the ant tribe Dacetini. Am. Midl. Nat. 50 (1), 1-137. http://doi.org/10.2307/2422158
  » http://doi.org/10.2307/2422158
• Brown Junior, W.L., 1972. Asketogenys acubecca, a new genus and species of dacetine ants from Malaya (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche. 79, 23-26.
• Brown Junior, W.L., Wilson, E.O., 1959. The evolution of the dacetine ants. Q. Rev. Biol. 34 (4), 278-294. http://doi.org/10.1086/402828
  » http://doi.org/10.1086/402828
• Cabré, M.T., 2003. Theories of terminology: their description, prescription and explanation. Terminology 9 (2), 163-199. http://doi.org/10.1075/term.9.2.03cab
  » http://doi.org/10.1075/term.9.2.03cab
• Chaul, J.C.M., 2023. A new ant species of Strumigenys Smith, 1860 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Taxonomy. 3 (2), 221-231. http://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy3020016
  » http://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy3020016
• Chen, M., Yu, S., Franz, N., Bowers, S., Ludascher, B., 2014. Euler/X: a toolkit for logic-based taxonomy integration. arXiv. 1402.1992, 1-8. http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.1992.
• Cohn, A.G., Renz, J., 2008. Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning. Found. Artif. Intell. 3, 551-596. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-6526(07)03013-1
  » http://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-6526(07)03013-1
• Dejean, A., 1985a. Microévolution du comportement de captures des proies chez les dacetines de la sous-tribu des Strumigeniti (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae). Actes des Colloques. Insectes Soc. 2, 239-247.
• Dejean, A., 1985b. Étude éco-éthologique de la prédation chez les fourmis du genre Smithistruma (Formicidae - Myrmicinae - Dacetini). II. Attraction des proies principales (collemboles). Insectes Soc. 32 (2), 158-172. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02224230
  » http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02224230
• Dejean, A., 1987. Étude du comportement de prédation dans le genre Strumigenys (Formicidae - Myrmicinae). Insectes Soc. 33 (4), 388-405. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223947
  » http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223947
• De Vaan, M., 2008. Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Vol. 7. Brill, Leiden, Boston.
• Dong, M., Kim, S.K., 2020. A taxonomic study on the genus Strumigenys Smith, 1860 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Korea with a description of new species. Asian Myrmecol. 12, e012001.
• Emery, C., 1906. Studi sulle formiche della fauna Neotropica. XXXVII. Boll. Soc. Entomol. Ital. 37, 107-194.
• Forel, A., 1886. Einige Ameisen aus Itajahy (Brasilien). Mitt. Schweiz. Entomol. Ges. 7, 210-217.
• Forel, A., 1893. Formicides de l’Antille St. Vincent, récoltées par Mons. H. H. Smith. Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 1893, 333-418.
• Gao, K., Fox, R.C., 1991. New teiid lizards from the Upper Cretaceous Oldman Formation (Judithian) of southwestern Alberta, Canada, with a review of the Cretaceous record of teiids. Ann. Carnegie Mus. 60 (2), 145-162. http://doi.org/10.5962/p.330465
  » http://doi.org/10.5962/p.330465
• Gronenberg, W., 1996. The trap-jaw mechanism in the dacetine ants Daceton armigerum and Strumigenys sp. J. Exp. Biol. 199 (Pt 9), 2021-2033. PMid:9319931. http://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.199.9.2021
  » http://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.199.9.2021
• Guérin-Méneville, F.E., 1831. Magasin de Zoologie. Vol. 1. Lequien, Paris.
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE, 2021. Base cartográfica contínua do Brasil: limites territoriais da América do Sul. Available in: https://www.ibge.gov.br/ (accessed 12 October 2024).
  » https://www.ibge.gov.br/
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística - IBGE, 2022. Base Cartográfica Contínua do Brasil. Limites territoriais do Brasil. Available in: https://www.ibge.gov.br/ (accessed 12 October 2024).
  » https://www.ibge.gov.br/
• International Code of Zoological Nomenclature – ICZN, 2005. Fourth Edition. Available in: https://www.iczn.org/the-code/the-international-code-of-zoological-nomenclature/ (accessed 24 November 2024).
  » https://www.iczn.org/the-code/the-international-code-of-zoological-nomenclature/
• Instituto Estadual de Florestas - IEF, 2024. Parque Estadual do Rio Doce. Available in: https://liferay.meioambiente.mg.gov.br/web/ief/w/parque-estadual-do-rio-doce (accessed 08 December 2024).
  » https://liferay.meioambiente.mg.gov.br/web/ief/w/parque-estadual-do-rio-doce
• International Phonetic Association - IPA, 2015. The International Phonetic Alphabet and the IPA Chart. Available in: http://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/content/ipa-chart (accessed 27 November 2024).
  » http://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/content/ipa-chart
• Kempf, W.W., 1959. Two new species of Gymnomyrmex Borgmeier, 1954 from southern Brazil, with remarks on the genus (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Braz. J. Biol. 19, 337-344.
• Kempf, W.W., 1960. Miscellaneous studies on Neotropical ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Stud. Entomol. 3, 417-466.
• Kempf, W.W., 1962. Miscellaneous studies on neotropical ants. II. (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Stud. Entomol. 5, 1-38.
• Kempf, W.W., 1969. Miscellaneous studies on Neotropical ants. V. (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Stud. Entomol. 12, 273-296.
• Ladino, N., Feitosa, R.M., 2020. Taxonomic revision of the genus Prionopelta Mayr, 1866 (Formicidae: Amblyoponinae) for the Neotropical region. Zootaxa 4821 (2), 201-249. PMid:33056319. http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4821.2.1
  » http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4821.2.1
• Lattke, J.E., 1992. Trichoscapa inusitata n. sp., a remarkable dacetine ant from the Orinoco watershed (Hymenoptera Formicidae). Trop. Zool. 5 (2), 141-144. http://doi.org/10.1080/03946975.1992.10539188
  » http://doi.org/10.1080/03946975.1992.10539188
• Lattke, J.E., Aguirre, N., 2015. Two new Strumigenys F. Smith (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae) from montane forests of Ecuador. Sociobiology 62 (2), 175-180. http://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v62i2.175-180
  » http://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v62i2.175-180
• Lewis, C., Short, C., 1879. A Latin Dictionary. Clarendon, Oxford.
• Longino, J.T., 2006. New species and nomenclatural changes for the Costa Rican ant fauna (Hymenoptera: formicidae). Myrmecol. News 8, 131-143.
• Longino, J.T., Booher, DB., 2019. Expect the unexpected: a new ant from a backyard in Utah. West. N. Am. Nat. 79 (4), 496-499. http://doi.org/10.3398/064.079.0403
  » http://doi.org/10.3398/064.079.0403
• Masuko, K., 1985. Studies on the predatory biology of oriental dacetine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). I. Some Japanese species of Strumigenys, Pentastruma, and Epitritus, and a Malaysian Labidogenys, with special reference to hunting tactics in short-mandibulate forms. Insectes Soc. 31 (4), 429-451. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223658
  » http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223658
• Masuko, K., 2009. Studies on the predatory biology of Oriental dacetine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) II. Novel prey specialization in Pyramica benten. J. Nat. Hist. 43 (13-14), 13-14, 825-841. http://doi.org/10.1080/00222930802610543
  » http://doi.org/10.1080/00222930802610543
• Merriam-Webster, 2025. Etymology. Available in: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etymology (accessed 04 May 2025).
  » https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etymology
• Ministério do Meio Ambiente – MMA, 2005. Base Cartográfica MMA/IBGE. Limites dos Biomas Brasileiros. Available in: https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/informacoes-ambientais/vegetacao/15842-biomas.html?=&t=downloads (accessed 12 October 2024).
  » https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/informacoes-ambientais/vegetacao/15842-biomas.html?=&t=downloads
• Oliveira, A.M., Feitosa, R.M., 2019. Taxonomic revision of the genus Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae) for the Neotropical Region. Zootaxa 4614 (1), 61-94. PMid:31716387. http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4614.1.3
  » http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4614.1.3
• Perrault, G.H., 1986. Gymnomyrmex villiersi, nouvelle espèce de Guyane (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Ann. Soc. Entomol. Fr. 8, 1-4.
• Queiroz, D.S. 2003. O Cerrado Goiano: Análise da Ocupação no Município de Jataí-GO para Proposta de Gerenciamento Ecologicamente Sustentável. Doctoral thesis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção.
• Randell, DA., Cui, Z., Cohn, A.G., 1992. A spatial logic based on regions and connection. In: KR’92: International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 3, 1992, Cambridge, MA. Proceedings. San Francisco, United States: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., pp. 165-176.
• Rigato, F., Scupola, A., 2008. Two new species of the Pyramica gundlachi-group from Ecuador (Hymenoptera Formicidae). Biodivers. S. Am. I. Mem. Biodivers. 1, 477-481.
• Roger, J., 1861. Die Ponera-artigen Ameisen (Schluss). Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 5, 1-54.
• Roger, J., 1863. Die neu aufgeführten Gattungen und Arten meines Formiciden-Verzeichnisses nebst Ergänzung einiger früher gegebenen Beschreibungen. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 7, 131-214.
• Santos-Neto, EA., Chaul, J.C.M., Delabie, J.H.C., 2024. New Species and New Records of Strumigenys Smith, 1860 (Formicidae: Myrmicinae) from the Neotropical schulzi Species Group. Taxonomy. 4 (3), 633-648. http://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy4030032
  » http://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy4030032
• Sarnat, E.M., Hita Garcia, F., Dudley, K., Liu, C., Fischer, G., Economo, E.P., 2019. Ready species one: exploring the use of augmented reality to enhance systematic biology with a revision of Fijian Strumigenys (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insect Syst. Divers. 3 (6), 1-43. http://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixz005
  » http://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixz005
• Silva, T.S.R., Chaul, J.C.M., Feitosa, R.M., 2022. Lectotype designation and redescription of four commonly collected Neotropical species of Strumigenys (Hymenoptera: formicidae). Eur. J. Taxon. 798, 103-126. http://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.798.1673
  » http://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.798.1673
• Silva, T.S.R., Feitosa, R.M., 2019. Using controlled vocabularies in anatomical terminology: A case study with Strumigenys (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Arthropod Struct. Dev. 52, 100877. PMid:31357032. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2019.100877
  » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2019.100877
• Smith, F., 1860. Descriptions of new genera and species of exotic Hymenoptera. J. Entomol. 1, 65-84.
• Sosa-Calvo, J., Schultz, T.R., LaPolla, J.S., 2010. A review of the dacetine ants of Guyana (Formicidae: myrmicinae). J. Hymenopt. Res. 19, 12-43.
• Tang, K.L., Guénard, B., 2023. Further additions to the knowledge of Strumigenys (Formicidae: Myrmicinae) within South East Asia, with the descriptions of 20 new species. Eur. J. Taxon. 907, 1-144. http://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.907.2327
  » http://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.907.2327
• Thau, D., Bowers, S., Ludäscher, B., 2008. Merging taxonomies under RCC-5 algebraic articulations. In: International workshop on Ontologies and information systems for the semantic web, 2, 2008, Napa Valley, California, USA. Proceedings. New York, NY, United States: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 47-54. http://doi.org/10.1145/1458484.1458492
  » http://doi.org/10.1145/1458484.1458492
• Ward, P. S., 2000. Broad-scale patterns of diversity in leaf litter ant communities. In: Agosti, D., Majer, J.D., Alonso, L.E., Schultz, T.R. (Eds.), Ants: Standard Methods for Measuring and Monitoring Biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp. 99-121.
• WikiParques, 2024. Parque Estadual do Jurupará. Available in: https://www.wikiparques.org/wiki/Parque_Estadual_do_Jurupar%C3%A1 (accessed 8 December 2024).
  » https://www.wikiparques.org/wiki/Parque_Estadual_do_Jurupar%C3%A1
• Wilson, E. O., 1954. The ecology of some North American dacetine ants. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 46, 479-495.
• Xu, Z.-H., Zhou, X.-G., 2004. Systematic study on the ant genus Pyramica Roger (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of China. Acta Zootax. Sin. 29, 440-450.
• Yoshimura, M., Onoyama, K., 2007. A new sibling species of the genus Strumigenys, with a redefinition of S. lewisi Cameron. In: Snelling, R.R., Fisher, B.L., Ward, P. S. (Eds.), Advances in Ant Systematics (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Homage to E.O. Wilson – 50 years of Contributions, Vol. 80. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, Philadelphia, pp. 664-690.
• Zhou, S.-Y., Xu, Z.-H., 2003. Taxonomic study on Chinese members of the ant genus Strumigenys F. Smith (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from the mainland of China. Acta Zootax. Sin. 28, 737-740.

*

Corresponding author. E-mail:[e-mail] (T.S.R. Silva).

Associate Editor:

Luiz Roberto Faria Jr.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  28 Nov 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  28 Jan 2025
• Accepted
  04 Sept 2025