The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 06 (of 10)Sharp, David
Science
The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 06 (of 10)
Sharp, David
Animals
CLASSIFICATION OF ANTS.—Ants are considered by many entomologists to form a
series called Heterogyna. They can, however, be scarcely considered as more
than a single family, Formicidae, so that the serial name is superfluous.
Their nearest approach to other Aculeates is apparently made, by
_Amblyopone_, to certain Mutillides (_e.g._ _Apterogyna_) and to the
Thynnides, two divisions of Scoliidae. Emery considers Dorylides rather
than Amblyoponides to be the most primitive form of ants, but we are
disposed to consider Forel's view to the effect we have above mentioned as
more probably correct. The point is, however, very doubtful. The condition
of the peduncle is in both the sub-families we have mentioned very
imperfect compared with that of other ants. Both these sub-families are of
very small extent and very imperfectly known. We shall also follow Forel in
adopting six sub-families, Camponotides, Dolichoderides, Myrmicides,
Ponerides, Dorylides, and Amblyoponides. Emery rejects the Amblyoponides as
being merely a division of the Ponerides. This latter group displays the
widest relations of all the sub-families, and may be looked on as a sort of
central form. The Camponotides and Dolichoderides are closely allied, and
represent the highest differentiation of the families in one direction. The
Myrmicides are also highly differentiated, but are not allied to the
Camponotides and Dolichoderides.[62]
SUB-FAM. 1. CAMPONOTIDES.—_Hind body furnished with but one constriction,
so that only a single scale or node exists on the pedicel. Poison-sac
forming a cushion of convolutions, on which is situate the modified
sting, which forms merely an ejaculatory orifice for the poison._
The members of this very extensive division of ants can be readily
distinguished from all others, except the Dolichoderides, by the absence of
a true sting, and by the peculiar form of the hind body; this possesses
only a single scale at the base, and has no {145}constriction at all on the
oval, convex and compact mass of the abdomen behind this. The cloacal
orifice is circular, not, as in other ants, transverse. These characters
are accompanied by a difference in habits. The Camponotides, though they do
not sting, produce poison in large quantity, and eject it to some distance.
Hence, if two specimens are confined in a tube they are apt to kill one
another by the random discharges they make. Janet suggests that in order to
neutralise the effect of this very acid poison, they may have some means of
using, when they are in their natural abodes, the alkaline contents of a
second gland with which they are provided. We shall mention the characters
by which the Camponotides are distinguished from the small sub-family
Dolichoderides when we deal with the latter.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account