23 replies to this topic

[Jadeninja9]

Title should say 6/25/19 I posted this two minutes too late whoops lol

 

Queen 1:

 

San Carlos, CA

 

4/24/19 ~11pm

 

In home near chapparal

 

14-15mm

 

True coloration is shown in first 2 photos

 

 

Queen 2:

 

San Carlos, CA

 

4/27/19 ~11pm

 

In home near chapparal

 

14-15mm

 

The shade of red on this queen is the same as queen 1's

 

 

 

Both are C. vicinus right?

Edited by Jadeninja9, June 24 2019 - 11:02 PM.

[AntPhycho]

Queen #2 looks like Camponotus vicinus. The first one is throwing me off only because of the color of her gaster. 

[TennesseeAnts]

First one looks like Camponotus herculeanus.

[EthanNgo678]

Camponotus herculeanus does not occur in California. 

[TennesseeAnts]

Camponotus herculeanus does not occur in California.

Oh. Never mind!

[Jadeninja9]

Queen #2 looks like Camponotus vicinus. The first one is throwing me off only because of the color of her gaster.

I’m wondering what the first one is then

[Somethinghmm]

Camponotus herculeanus does not occur in California. 

Antmaps.org says otherwise

[Jadeninja9]

Though I’ve never seen a vicinus queen with red on part of its thorax and none on the gaster, the head shapes don’t lie and are exactly the same for both queens. Queen 1 has to be vicinus.

[dspdrew]

Second one definitely looks like C. vicinus to me. The first one I think might be C. modoc.

[Jadeninja9]

Second one definitely looks like C. vicinus to me. The first one I think might be C. modoc.

 

Thanks. The first queen has a nanitic with red and black coloration though. 

Edited by Jadeninja9, June 26 2019 - 12:20 PM.

[nurbs]

Both look to be C. vicinus. They come in many different colors.

 

First one is definitely not C. modoc.

[Jadeninja9]

Both look to be C. vicinus. They come in many different colors.

First one is definitely not C. modoc.

Alright sweet thanks

[gcsnelling]

 

Camponotus herculeanus does not occur in California. 

Antmaps.org says otherwise

 

 

Oh bloody hell, as much respect as i have for the folks at antmaps, antmaps is no more accurate than antweb.

[PacificNorthWestern]

 

 

Camponotus herculeanus does not occur in California. 

Antmaps.org says otherwise

 

 

Oh bloody hell, as much respect as i have for the folks at antmaps, antmaps is no more accurate than antweb.

 

 

Considering that locating where ants are is exactly what it is for and that antwiki uses it I think otherwise, They have been checked and are for sure correct identifications. antmaps.org is also always updating there maps to make sure they have the correct information. It's also kinda funny how close a spotting is to California on Ant Web. Of course Those could all be misidentifacations (which is highly unlikely) Ant Web could be right

[gcsnelling]

Actually not all identifications are accurate at antmaps. They pull from museum  records for much of the location data and often there are indeed mis-identifications. Camponotus is a genus that is very prone to bad Ids. I have on several occasions contacted them to correct things. It as well as ant web are both very much works in progress. Not only are identifications sometimes off, esp on older specimens, but it is not at all uncommon for label data to be inaccurate as well, often by many hundreds or thousands  of miles.I have looked at many thousands of museum specimens and know all too well how frustrating these inaccuracies can be. I am not saying do not use these resources, but if you see something in an area well outside its normal range it is time to start questioning things a little bit.

[TennesseeAnts]

I use both antmaps and antweb.

[PacificNorthWestern]

Actually not all identifications are accurate at antmaps. They pull from museum  records for much of the location data and often there are indeed mis-identifications. Camponotus is a genus that is very prone to bad Ids. I have on several occasions contacted them to correct things. It as well as ant web are both very much works in progress. Not only are identifications sometimes off, esp on older specimens, but it is not at all uncommon for label data to be inaccurate as well, often by many hundreds or thousands  of miles.I have looked at many thousands of museum specimens and know all too well how frustrating these inaccuracies can be. I am not saying do not use these resources, but if you see something in an area well outside its normal range it is time to start questioning things a little bit.

and while that is true, and there are going to be misidentifications. And while they could be, I doubt that all 41 sightings of Camponotus Herculeanus in Calafornia are incorrect and are different species.

[nurbs]

 

Actually not all identifications are accurate at antmaps. They pull from museum  records for much of the location data and often there are indeed mis-identifications. Camponotus is a genus that is very prone to bad Ids. I have on several occasions contacted them to correct things. It as well as ant web are both very much works in progress. Not only are identifications sometimes off, esp on older specimens, but it is not at all uncommon for label data to be inaccurate as well, often by many hundreds or thousands  of miles.I have looked at many thousands of museum specimens and know all too well how frustrating these inaccuracies can be. I am not saying do not use these resources, but if you see something in an area well outside its normal range it is time to start questioning things a little bit.

and while that is true, and there are going to be misidentifications. And while they could be, I doubt that all 41 sightings of Camponotus Herculeanus in Calafornia are incorrect and are different species.

 

 

Dude. You kids. Just because it is on the Internet does not mean it is true. I've been anting here in CA for almost 9 years, and not once have I observed or found C. herculeanus in California. They are abundant in Canada where I have observed them. They are a northern ant.

 

Not saying it doesn't 100% exist in CA, but it is highly unlikely. All those 41 "sightings" you are getting on antmaps, I'll bet my left toe those are C. vicinus. While coloring seems to match C. herculeanus, look at the head of the first pic on the post. See how it is as thin or thinner than the thorax? C.  herculeanus heads are WIDER than their thorax, bulkier. C. vicinus heads are not wider but sometimes thinner, with the head being longer than it is wide.

Edited by nurbs, June 27 2019 - 10:58 AM.

[TennesseeAnts]

Actually not all identifications are accurate at antmaps. They pull from museum  records for much of the location data and often there are indeed mis-identifications. Camponotus is a genus that is very prone to bad Ids. I have on several occasions contacted them to correct things. It as well as ant web are both very much works in progress. Not only are identifications sometimes off, esp on older specimens, but it is not at all uncommon for label data to be inaccurate as well, often by many hundreds or thousands  of miles.I have looked at many thousands of museum specimens and know all too well how frustrating these inaccuracies can be. I am not saying do not use these resources, but if you see something in an area well outside its normal range it is time to start questioning things a little bit.

and while that is true, and there are going to be misidentifications. And while they could be, I doubt that all 41 sightings of Camponotus Herculeanus in Calafornia are incorrect and are different species.

 
Dude. You kids. Just because it is on the Internet does not mean it is true. I've been anting here in CA for almost 9 years, and not once have I observed or found C. herculeanus in California. They are abundant in Canada where I have observed them. They are a northern ant.
 
Not saying it doesn't 100% exist in CA, but it is highly unlikely. All those 41 "sightings" you are getting on antmaps, I'll bet my left toe those are C. vicinus. While coloring seems to match C. herculeanus, look at the head of the first pic on the post. See how it is as thin or thinner than the thorax? C.  herculeanus heads are WIDER than their thorax, bulkier. C. vicinus heads are not wider but sometimes thinner, with the head being longer than it is wide.

This is true.

[PacificNorthWestern]

 

 

Actually not all identifications are accurate at antmaps. They pull from museum  records for much of the location data and often there are indeed mis-identifications. Camponotus is a genus that is very prone to bad Ids. I have on several occasions contacted them to correct things. It as well as ant web are both very much works in progress. Not only are identifications sometimes off, esp on older specimens, but it is not at all uncommon for label data to be inaccurate as well, often by many hundreds or thousands  of miles.I have looked at many thousands of museum specimens and know all too well how frustrating these inaccuracies can be. I am not saying do not use these resources, but if you see something in an area well outside its normal range it is time to start questioning things a little bit.

and while that is true, and there are going to be misidentifications. And while they could be, I doubt that all 41 sightings of Camponotus Herculeanus in Calafornia are incorrect and are different species.

 

 

Dude. You kids. Just because it is on the Internet does not mean it is true. I've been anting here in CA for almost 9 years, and not once have I observed or found C. herculeanus in California. They are abundant in Canada where I have observed them. They are a northern ant.

 

Not saying it doesn't 100% exist in CA, but it is highly unlikely. All those 41 "sightings" you are getting on antmaps, I'll bet my left toe those are C. vicinus. While coloring seems to match C. herculeanus, look at the head of the first pic on the post. See how it is as thin or thinner than the thorax? C.  herculeanus heads are WIDER than their thorax, bulkier. C. vicinus heads are not wider but sometimes thinner, with the head being longer than it is wide.

I am not saying that it is impossible that those sightings are wrong, and even said that those could be misidentifications, I could Definitely see how those sightings could be wrong, I am not disagreeing on this.  If Camponotus Herculeanus was in California it would be on the northern side. The Northern ant is a name and doesn't restrict it's boundries and if this ant exists in Oregon is it so far fetched that it has traveled to california over the years. I respect you as an ant keeper and know that you have probably been to a lot of places in California and seen a lot of ants, but there is a possibility of C. Herculeanus in Cali. I never said that queen was C. Herculeanus and don't think it is just because of the coloration.

 

edit: I never said there was C. Herculeanus in Cali, but i think there is a possibility

Edited by PacificNorthWestern, June 27 2019 - 1:53 PM.