42 replies to this topic

[M_Ants]

I might be able to get microscope pics.

[gcsnelling]

Since it seems as if you may have access to a microscope I would very strongly suggest that you get a hold of a copy of the recent revision of the Camponotus festinatus group and learn a bit of ant taxonomy. Even without a scope there is a good bit of useful information in it that would be helpful.

Edited by gcsnelling, August 1 2020 - 5:29 AM.

[YsTheAnt]

In terms of distribution I was going off of this reference from AntWiki:

Westernmost records of C. festinatus are from central Arizona: Maricopa Co. (Mazatzal Mts.), Pinal Co. (Queen Creek Canyon) and Yavapai Co. (Lynx Lake).

Assuming this description (2006) still holds true I think it is either C. fragilis or C. absquatulator. The former is more often collected in SoCal so that would be my guess but you would have to get up close pictures of the head, clear enough to count hairs to get a solid ID.

[sirjordanncurtis]

https://pdfs.semanti...2819f8693c0.pdf

 

Above is a key used to identify the differences between festinatus, absquatulator, and fragilis. It points out that "Separation of C. festinatus and C. fragilis is no easy matter as the two are distressingly similar in virtually every feature." However, C. festinatus are definitely larger than both fragilis and absquatulator. You can determine whether it's fragilis or absquatulator by getting closeup or perhaps microscope pictures of the area in-between the antennal scapes. 

[B_rad0806]

This is Fragilis. Festinatus is not in CA

[M_Ants]

It has an egg!

[dspdrew]

In terms of distribution I was going off of this reference from AntWiki:

Westernmost records of C. festinatus are from central Arizona: Maricopa Co. (Mazatzal Mts.), Pinal Co. (Queen Creek Canyon) and Yavapai Co. (Lynx Lake).

Assuming this description (2006) still holds true I think it is either C. fragilis or C. absquatulator. The former is more often collected in SoCal so that would be my guess but you would have to get up close pictures of the head, clear enough to count hairs to get a solid ID.

 

I read a lot about these a few years ago, and I can't remember if C. fragilis was more common or not, but it would certainly seem so since that always seems to be the assumed ID. From what I remember, the only way to tell the different between C. fragilis and C. absquatulator was to examine their hairs under a microscope.

[M_Ants]

Would a male work? Don't want to kill a queen to get an id.

Edited by M_Ants, August 5 2020 - 8:23 PM.

[M_Ants]

Got even more eggs. One queens gaster got fatter and it looks even more like a fraggle. 

[gcsnelling]

Would a male work? Don't want to kill a queen to get an id.

Not likely

[M_Ants]

Here are pics of a worker. Can't say for sure this actually is the same species as the queen but I'm pretty sure. I even caught another queen right after catching the worker. 

Let me know if these are good enough for an Id.

Edited by M_Ants, August 15 2020 - 8:19 AM.

[Solenoqueen]

If these are indeed the same species, the workers are C. fragilis due to the hairs shown between the antennae. Absquatulator have no such hairs between the antennae, thus making that the sole difference between C. fragilis and C. absquatulator. Now, if you could get the same angle of pictures with your queen, we could ID her for sure.

[M_Ants]

How would I do that without killing her? 

[Solenoqueen]

I mean, you don’t necessarily have to take a picture, just key it yourself. It’ll take patience

[M_Ants]

I think I got a pic...

Also I think she has a mite on her. Is it bad?

 

Edited by M_Ants, August 15 2020 - 10:08 AM.

[M_Ants]

You can see the mite in the second pic.

[sirjordanncurtis]

Those are ocelli not mites. They're secondary eyes for the ants. I assume they help the queens for flight. I wouldn't ID by the queen, since I'm not sure if the gynes are on the ID key. The best way to ID is to wait for minor workers.

[M_Ants]

I think their is a mite on the ocelli. 

[AnthonyP163]

If these are indeed the same species, the workers are C. fragilis due to the hairs shown between the antennae. Absquatulator have no such hairs between the antennae, thus making that the sole difference between C. fragilis and C. absquatulator. Now, if you could get the same angle of pictures with your queen, we could ID her for sure.

Both C. fragilis and C. absquatulator have hair between their antennae/eyes. The difference is that sometimes fragilis has short, often flat setae between the antennae/eyes, while absquatulator does not.

 

That being said, the photos taken don't show the region of the face we need to see in order to differentiate the two using the "hair between antennae" strategy. One specimen on the fragilis antweb page doesn't show these small setae, so we cannot even be sure that it's a way to differentiate.

 

If anyone can explain why I could be wrong or how to tell the two apart using hair between antennae, please do.

 

The C. fragilis antwiki says that fragilis is discerned from absquatulator by: "...erect setae present along entire head margin; minor workers with at least a few setae along head margins". 

 

This is what I have used to identify specimens of fragilis from absquatulator, and from what I've seen it's the only viable way to do so. C. absquatulator also tends to have longer hair on its face from profile view (which matches with this specimen).

 

I cannot see hair along the sides of the head, which would indicate absquatulator, but the photos are also taken at an awkward angle for seeing these hairs. I would encourage the original poster of this thread to take a straight on head view photo of specimens.

Edited by AnthonyP163, August 15 2020 - 1:33 PM.

[M_Ants]

 

If these are indeed the same species, the workers are C. fragilis due to the hairs shown between the antennae. Absquatulator have no such hairs between the antennae, thus making that the sole difference between C. fragilis and C. absquatulator. Now, if you could get the same angle of pictures with your queen, we could ID her for sure.

Both C. fragilis and C. absquatulator have hair between their antennae/eyes. The difference is that sometimes fragilis has short, often flat setae between the antennae/eyes, while absquatulator does not.

 

That being said, the photos taken don't show the region of the face we need to see in order to differentiate the two using the "hair between antennae" strategy. One specimen on the fragilis antweb page doesn't show these small setae, so we cannot even be sure that it's a way to differentiate.

 

If anyone can explain why I could be wrong or how to tell the two apart using hair between antennae, please do.

 

The C. fragilis antwiki says that fragilis is discerned from absquatulator by: "...erect setae present along entire head margin; minor workers with at least a few setae along head margins". 

 

This is what I have used to identify specimens of fragilis from absquatulator, and from what I've seen it's the only viable way to do so. C. absquatulator also tends to have longer hair on its face from profile view (which matches with this specimen).

 

I cannot see hair along the sides of the head, which would indicate absquatulator, but the photos are also taken at an awkward angle for seeing these hairs. I would encourage the original poster of this thread to take a straight on head view photo of specimens.

 

Kind of tricky with a live queen but I'll try...I can definitely get a better one of the worker though.