To cite this page, please use the following:
· For print: Citation: AntWeb. Version 8.86.1. California Academy of Science, online at https://www.antweb.org. Accessed .
· For web:
Ponera sinuosa BernardHNS, 1953: 204, fig. 3E. LECTOTYPE worker (by present designation), GUINEA: ravin 1 de la forêt du Mont Tô, 21.ii. (Lamotte) (MNHN) [examined]. [Combination in HypoponeraHNS: Bolton, 1995: 216.] (See note.)
NOTE. Bernard’s original syntype series of sinuosaHNS consisted of one worker and one queen from Guinea, mounted on a single pin with the locality data given above, and a separate worker with the data: Ivory Coast: Banco, H 31, 30.viii.1945 (Delamare-Deboutteville). The Guinea pin bears a secondary label: “ Lectotype worker, paralectotype queen Ponera sinuosa Ber. Det. R.W.HNS Taylor, 11 July 63 ”. This information was never published by Taylor so the worker is formally designated as lectotype here. The queen is omitted from the type-series as its petiole and gaster are missing and confirmation of its conspecificity with the worker cannot be assured. The gaster of the lectotype worker is detached and mounted separately and most of its legs are missing. The single Ivory Coast worker is a teneral of punctatissimaHNS; the cuticle of its head and gaster is much collapsed and very pale in colour. This specimen is excluded from further consideration of sinuosaHNS. Bernard’s description of sinuosaHNS appears to be a mixture of the Guinea ( sinuosaHNS) and Ivory Coast ( punctatissimaHNS) workers.
LECTOTYPE WORKER. Measurements: HL 0.52, HW 0.43, HS 0.475, SL 0.37, PrW 0.33, WL 0.74, HFL 0.38, PeNL 0.14, PeH 0.30, PeNW 0.22, PeS 0.220. Indices: CI 83, SI 86, PeNI 67, LPeI 47, DPeI 157.
Eyes at first glance absent, but appropriate lighting conditions and viewing angle reveal a blister-like minute ommatidium, about 0.11 from the anterolateral clypeal margin. Apex of scape, when laid straight back from its insertion, just touches the midpoint of the posterior margin in full-face view; SL/HL 0.71. Funiculus with 5 enlarging segments. Mesonotal-mesopleural suture entirely absent. Anterior margin of mesopleuron obtusely angulate, almost rounded, without a projecting angle or tooth. Metanotal groove distinct on dorsum, transverse; in profile not impressed. Sides of propodeum in dorsal view bilaterally pinched just posterior to the metanotal groove. In profile the pinched side appears as a broad, shallow depression that extends from the posterior margin of the mesopleuron about half-way to the propodeal spiracle. Propodeal declivity and side meet in a distinct angle, but no carina is present. In profile base of lateral margin of propodeal declivity curves anteriorly to metapleural gland bulla. Petiole node in profile with anterior and posterior faces markedly convergent dorsally, the dorsal surface narrowly rounded; in profile the dorsal length of the node is less than half the length just above the anterior tubercle of the petiole. In dorsal view the petiole node broader than long, with posterior face transverse and anterior face convex. Posterior surface of node smooth, without vertical cuticular ridges above the peduncle. First gastral tergite with quite dense decumbent pubescence and apparently with a few short, standing setae also present (condition of gaster is poor). Disc of second gastral tergite microreticulate. In dorsal view second gastral tergite at its midlength is broader than the maximum width of the first tergite. Full adult colour yellow.
Only a single damaged worker specimen of this strange little species is known and no other specimen that approaches the sinuosaHNS lectotype has been seen. In general there is some resemblance to workers of coecaHNS and inaudaxHNS, but in those common species there is never a developed metanotal groove on the dorsal mesosoma. Bernard's description is misleading on several counts. His fig. 3E, showing a widely sinuate propodeal declivity, is inaccurate as only its lateral margin curves in towards the metapleural gland bulla at its base. He also says that the mandible has six spaced teeth where in reality the left mandible has a total dental count of 9 and the right mandible has 8. The petiole in profile is not shaped as indicted in his fig. 3E. In reality the anterior and posterior faces are markedly convergent dorsally and the LPeI is 47; in the figure the faces are nearly parallel and the LPeI obtained from the sketch is about 39.
The position of sinuosaHNS in the key is conjectural. In the single worker available, the base of the cinctus of the second gastral tergite cannot be seen. The tergites of gastral segments one and two are jammed very tightly together and disturbing them could cause even more damage to the unique lectotype. However, because of its overall similarlity to punctatissimaHNS and ragusaiHNS, cross-ribs are assumed to be absent. Thus two assumptions are made to place sinuosaHNS in the key. First, that the detached and separately mounted gaster is actually associated with the head and mesosoma, and second, that because cross-ribs are absent in related species on the tergal cinctus, they will also be absent here.
Type specimens: Lectotype of Ponera sinuosa: casent0915476