18 replies to this topic

[dspdrew]

I found a Lasius sp. alate back around June 22nd 2013, as you can see here in this ID thread. After a month and a half went by with nothing but eggs, I suddenly noticed two larvae. Now it's been about two months since then, and these larvae continue to grow, but VERY, VERY slowly. Here is what I have at this point.




Does anybody know what might be going on with her?

[Crystals]

Considering you are in California and I am in AB, Canada; things may be different.

 

In Alberta the Lasius overwinter their larvae from September until April.  They don't eat or anything.  Even if you leave them on a heating cable the larvae in my colonies still won't develop.  Beats me how they know, but they do.

 

I have noticed that my Lasius are also very slow to grow, the eggs the queen laid in late June barely reached larval stage by mid August.  Once they reached the larval stage they did grow a bit more quickly, but by mid-september mine stopped developing in preparation of winter.

 

As long as they are developing and not dieing, I wouldn't worry too much.  If you are really worried, you could try to find 1-2 pupae and boost her.  I wouldn't add more than 2, as she may neglect her brood.

[uso]

This doesn't look like a Lasius to me, it's really strange-looking. I think it might be Plagiolepis:

 

http://www.antweb.or...project=calants

[dspdrew]

This doesn't look like a Lasius to me, it's really strange-looking. I think it might be Plagiolepis:

 

http://www.antweb.or...project=calants

Just to be sure, you did look at the original ID thread right, there's a lot of pictures? It's actually the one where Doctorant thought it wasn't Lasius, but you actually disagreed with him. Now I'm a little confused. lol

[uso]

I forgot about that, I'm really sorry!

 

Looking back at the old ID thread the mix-up seems to be about the ID of the workers rather than the queen. Those workers are still definitely Lasius. I think all of us made a mistake in glossing over the queen for whatever reason. The smooth shininess, elongated proportions, and shallow thorax, as well as head size and shape, make me believe that Plagiolepis is more suitable of a label for this queen than Lasius. Run that by the people at TAFMF and see if they agree or disagree. Unfortunately I can't access Antweb right now.

[dspdrew]

That queen in that original thread was actually from that same nest that the workers were from, so whatever they are, they certainly should be the same species.  In one of the pictures, you can see all the alates around the entrance. And yeah, Antweb appears to be down right now.

[wook]

I agree with uso, Lasius do not look like that. (As I stated already ); Queen is rather Liometopum than Lasius, but my first idea was *wildcard*lepis.

[dspdrew]

I agree with uso, Lasius do not look like that. (As I stated already ); Queen is rather Liometopum than Lasius, but my first idea was *wildcard*lepis.

Have you not read the original ID thread too?

[wook]

Have you not read the original ID thread too?

/me's too lazy to read bunch of "could be" thingies

[dspdrew]

/me's too lazy to read bunch of "could be" thingies

That would explain.

[uso]

So for the first time this week I'll be able to actually sit down and think this through in more detail. Your queen seems to have 12 (?) antennal segments, while every picture of Plagiolepis allaudi queens and workers I can find has 11. The eyes on your queen also seem to be smaller, and the queen, now that I am able to take my time on this, is also way to big to be Plagiolepis, so sorry about that.

 

What I can't figure out, though, is why her profile looks so long and flattened in all the pictures, which led me to yell Plagiolepis prematurely. Plagiolepis is the only ant I know of in California, not that I've ever been there, that has that sort of weird look. It's in the size range of Lasius and has a Lasius-looking head. Maybe just perspective? There is something weird going on with her head in the picture at the top of this thread though. And in her last picture in the ID thread on TAFMF, her thorax almost looks like something sliced off the top of it or something.

 

So basically, I'm sorry to hijack an antkeeping thread and turn it into an ID thread, and I have barely looked at or thought about ants for months. At the same time, she's a really weird looking queen. I just don't know what to think anymore, and I need to stop trying pull off ID things like this at 2:30 am.

[dspdrew]

So basically, I'm sorry to hijack an antkeeping thread and turn it into an ID thread, and I have barely looked at or thought about ants for months.

Don't worry about it, I never got a proper ID anyways, so it's all good. After looking though the pictures again, I'm pretty sure I can get much better pictures of her now. She also doesn't have wings any more either, so that should help.

[dspdrew]

And here they are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see it seems to be eating well, even without any workers. It's been without workers for almost six months now.

[wook]

I would say it has 11 segments, and I would also say that its thorax is too thin for Lasius. Only Liometopum has such thorax, but mandibles and head is different. My next assumption would be Nylanderia.

[dspdrew]

There's clearly 12 segments (remember the scape is one also). And again, like I mentioned, you might want to check the original ID thread; this queen is 7mm in length.

[wook]

Sorry, 11 funiculus. However, either 7mm or 27mm thorax is too thin for Lasius.

[dspdrew]

After looking at these pictures more, it looks like this thing might have 13 antennal segments.

[dspdrew]

Ok, so after looking at the new pictures, Dr James Trager says this is definitely Lasius, and maybe L. crypticus.

[dspdrew]

This queen died, so hopefully I'll find more next season.