identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03F81D2F9001FFB1FF0BB84AC01F67AA.text	03F81D2F9001FFB1FF0BB84AC01F67AA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Dolichoderinae	<div><p>Key to genera of males of Dolichoderinae in the Malagasy region</p><p>This key, based on the character matrix in Table 3, may not apply outside of the Malagasy region, as variations in genus-level characters elsewhere have not been fully explored. Distinctions between two globally distributed genera, Tapinoma and Technomyrmex, are mentioned separately in the remarks for Tapinoma .</p><p>1. In ventral view, harpago greatly expanded mesally, forming a distinct and more or less flat ventral face (Fig. 22).................................................................................................... Technomyrmex</p><p>- In ventral view, harpago narrow, without a distinct ventral face (Figs 23).......................................... 2</p><p>2. Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX broadly spatulate (Fig. 24)....................................... Aptinoma</p><p>- Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed with central margin deeply or shallowly concave (Figs 25–27)........... 3</p><p>3. Masticatory margin of mandible wholly covered with many serrate denticles (Fig. 75)....................... Tapinoma</p><p>- Masticatory margin of mandible with one to several large teeth, not wholly covered with many serrate denticles (Figs 73, 74).................................................................................................... 4</p><p>4. Mandible broadly spatulate, with a single long, acute tooth present on distal apex of mandible (Fig. 74). Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III (Fig. 19). Basal portion of aedeagus with narrow ventral lobe (Figs 36, 41)....... Ravavy</p><p>- Mandible triangular, with several stout teeth present on masticatory margin (Fig. 73). Petiole broadly attached to abdominal segment III (Fig. 18). Basal portion of aedeagus without ventral lobe (Figs 34, 43)......................... Ochetellus 1. Medial hypostoma absent (1); present (0)</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F9001FFB1FF0BB84AC01F67AA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
03F81D2F900FFFBFFF0BBC8BC6526733.text	03F81D2F900FFFBFFF0BBC8BC6526733.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aptinoma Fisher 2009	<div><p>Aptinoma Fisher, 2009</p><p>(Figs 2, 7, 11, 16, 17, 24, 30, 35, 42, 50, 56, 62, 67, 72, 77)</p><p>With characters of Dolichoderinae . All known males alate. Median hypostoma present (Fig. 62). Mandible triangular, but its basal angle indistinct. Basal and masticatory margins of mandible wholly covered with many serrate denticles (Fig. 72). Apical tooth on masticatory margin longer than subapical one. Palpal formula 6,3 (one specimen of A. mangabe dissected: Fig. 77). Third maxillary palpal segment nearly as long as fourth. Labrum not bilobed, with single distal apex and concavity on its distal margin absent (Fig. 67). Antennal scape excluding its basal condyle shorter than length of flagellar segments 1+2 (Fig. 2). Pedicel conical. First and second flagellar segments straight. Axillae on mesonotum medially compressed, anterior and posterior margins not parallel. Petiolar node raised vertically, its anterior margin nearly as long as the posterior margin in lateral view (Fig. 7). Node not much expanded laterally. Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III. Anterior surface of abdominal segment III with indentation that fits posterior surface of petiolar node. Pygostyles present.</p><p>Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX broadly spatulate (Fig. 24). Apicoventral portion of basimere with spine-like projection (Fig. 30). Harpago moderate in size, and widely separated from basimere by membranous region (Figs 30, 35). Harpago narrow in ventral view, without a distinct ventral face (as in Fig. 23). Basal portion of aedeagus without any distinct ventral lobe (Fig. 42). Ventral margin of aedeagus with denticles.</p><p>Forewing not extremely elongate apical to wing stigma, its radial sector reaches costal margin, media and 2rsm recognizable apical to Rs+M, and 1m-cu present (Fig. 50). On hindwing, M+Cu, free sections of radial sector and cubitus almost vestigial, and cu-a weak but still present (Fig. 56).</p><p>Remarks. Genus Aptinoma is endemic to Madagascar and only males of Aptinoma mangabe are presently known. Fisher (2009) proposed the combination of a shorter scape compared with flagellomeres 1+2, a palpal formula of 6,3, and a raised petiolar node as a diagnostic set of characters for Aptinoma in the Malagasy region. Here we propose a character unique to Aptinoma that consistently separates this genus from the other genera and provide additional characters to separate Aptinoma from the other Malagasy dolichoderine genera.</p><p>Males of Aptinoma are distinguished easily from other Malagasy dolichoderine genera by an abdominal sternum IX which is distally broadly spatulate (Fig. 24). This character is so far globally unique to Aptinoma . In the Malagasy region, Technomyrmex and Tapinoma are superficially the most similar to Aptinoma . Aptinoma and Technomyrmex share the following unique characters: basal margin of the mandible wholly covered with serrate denticles and the concavity on the distal margin of the labrum reduced (Figs 72, 76). Aptinoma and Tapinoma share a unique projection on the apicoventral portion of the basimere (Figs 29, 30). The petiolar node in Aptinoma rises almost vertically, although the sternum is thickened posteriorly and the whole shape of the petiole seems to decline anteriorly (Figs 7, 17). Therefore, the petiolar node in Aptinoma is best described as vertical, not as declining anteriorly as described in Fisher (2009).</p><p>The phylogenetic analysis of Ward et al. (2010) gives the intra-tribal relationship of Tapinomini as ((( Aptinoma + Tapinoma) + Liometopum Mayr) + ( Axinidris Weber + Technomyrmex)). They propose two hypotheses for the evolution of the “highly reduced petiole” seen in Aptinoma, Tapinoma, and Technomyrmex . The question is whether the petiole evolved once at the root of Tapinomini or at least twice at the roots of ( Aptinoma + Tapinoma) and Technomyrmex independently. If we limit the discussion to males, the present result, a vertical petiolar node in Aptinoma, supports the theory that an anteriorly-declined and reduced petiolar node evolved independently in Tapinoma and Technomyrmex, and that there has been no reversal in Aptinoma, Axinidris, and Liometopum .</p><p>Additional discussion of characters is included in the remarks for Ochetellus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F900FFFBFFF0BBC8BC6526733	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
03F81D2F900EFFBCFF0BBFCBC1D36169.text	03F81D2F900EFFBCFF0BBFCBC1D36169.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ochetellus Shattuck 1992	<div><p>Ochetellus Shattuck, 1992</p><p>(Figs 1, 8, 12, 18, 20, 25, 31, 34, 43, 46, 51, 57, 63, 68, 73, 78)</p><p>With characters of Dolichoderinae . All known males alate. Median hypostoma present (Fig. 63). Mandible triangular, but its basal angle indistinct. Basal margin of mandible without denticles and smooth, and masticatory margin with several stout teeth and minute denticles (Fig. 73). Apical tooth on masticatory margin longer than subapical one. Palpal formula 6,4 (one specimen of O. glaber from Japan was dissected: Fig. 78). Third maxillary palpal segment longer than fourth, but shorter than combined length of fourth and fifth. Distal margin of labrum widely concave and bilobed, with longest setae located near apices of lobes (Fig. 68). Scape excluding its basal condyle shorter than length of flagellar segments 1+2 (Fig. 1). Pedicel barrel-shaped. Lateral margins of first flagellar segment slightly convex, and those of second segment straight. Axillae not medially compressed, anterior and posterior margins roughly parallel. Petiolar node raised vertically, its anterior margin as long as posterior margin in lateral view. Node strongly expanded laterally so that its posterior attachment conceals anterior portion of abdominal segment III in dorsal view. Petiole broadly attached to abdominal segment III (Fig. 18). Anterior surface of abdominal segment III without indentation (Fig. 20). Pygostyles present.</p><p>Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed, its distal margin widely concave (Fig. 25). Apicoventral portion of basimere without projection (Fig. 31). Harpago moderate in size, widely separated from basimere by membranous region, narrow in lateral view, without distinct ventral face (as in Fig. 23). Basal portion of aedeagus does not bear distinct ventral lobe (Fig. 43). Ventral margin of aedeagus with denticles.</p><p>Forewing not extremely elongate apical to wing stigma, its radial sector reaches costal margin (Fig. 51), media absent apical to 1m-cu, short branch of 2rs-m recognizable, and 1m-cu present. On hindwing, M+Cu and 1rs-m+M present, free sections of radial sector and cubitus vestigial, cu-a present (Fig. 57), clavus larger.</p><p>Remarks. Only males of Ochetellus glaber collected in Japan and Hawaii were available. Males of Ochetellus are distinguished easily from those of the four other Malagasy dolichoderine genera by a barrel-shaped pedicel (not narrowed basally), a laterally expanded petiole broadly attached to abdominal segment III (Fig. 18), and lack of an indentation on the anterior surface of abdominal segment III (Fig. 20). A laterally expanded petiole is found in one species of Tapinoma ( Tapinoma mg11); however, its attachment with the third abdominal segment is narrow. The basal margin of the mandible is completely smooth; the only Malagasy dolichoderine genera that lack dentition on the basal margin are Ochetellus (Fig. 73) and Ravavy (Fig. 74). The posterior margin of mesoscutum is notched, but this character is also found in a species of Tapinoma ( Tapinoma mg10).</p><p>Several of the present results for Ochetellus glaber disagree with those in previous studies. In this study, a median notch was observed on the posterior margin of the medial hypostoma (Fig. 63), while Ochetellus has been assigned by Shattuck (1992a) to a group having the hypostomal margin entire. The third maxillary palpal segment is longer than the fourth but shorter than the fourth plus fifth, while in Shattuck (1992a), Ochetellus has been assigned to a group with the third segment equal in length to the fourth. Abdominal segment III rises vertically in Ochetellus glaber, although this character has been regarded as elongate posteriorly in Shattuck (1995) and Brandão et al. (1999). The distal margin of the ninth abdominal sternum is concave (Fig. 25), while the margin in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is regarded as entire and flat. The cuspis on the volsella is present (Fig. 46), but is recorded as absent in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999).</p><p>Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) proposed many male diagnostic characters to distinguish and analyze the relationships among dolichoderine genera. A number of the characters they provide are useful and have been included in the present study. However, some are more useful for recognizing species than genera. The anteromedial margin of the clypeus, inner margin of the compound eye, relative length of the third maxillary palpal segment compared with the fourth, relative length of the first flagellar segment compared with its width, the degree to which the petiole is concealed by abdominal segment III in dorsal view, and the presence of the cuspis varied considerably even within a single genus. The variation seen for the above characters is shown in Table 4.</p><p>1. Anteromedial margin of the clypeus is never notched or concave (0); broadly and shallowly concave (1); distinctly notched medially (2)</p><p>2. Inner margin of the eye in full-face view convex (2); concave (1); flat (0)</p><p>3. The third maxillary palpal segment is shorter than the fourth (0); equal with the fourth (1); longer than the fourth (2)</p><p>4. The first flagellar segment is three or more times as long as broad (2); less than three times but more than twice as long as broad (1); twice or less long as broad (0)</p><p>5. Indentation of abdominal segment III completely conceals the petiole in dorsal view (1); conceals only base of the petiole (0)</p><p>6. Cuspis of the volsella is absent (1); present (0)</p><p>Some character states proposed in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) were identical among all Malagasy genera examined in the present study and as a result are omitted from the character matrix (Tables 3, 4). In all of the material examined, the following character states were shared across genera: (1) the posterior margin of the clypeus is located anterior to the line drawn through posterior-most points of the antennal condyles; (2) the anterior clypeal setae are short and do not reach the anterior margin of the mandible; (3) the axillae fuse into a single horizontal plate in most cases without any longitudinal suture dividing them; (4) the pygostyle is present; (5) the digitus of the volsella has a down-curved tip; (6) the ventral margin of the aedeagal plate is dentate; (7) the pterostigma is developed without a “pterostigmal appendage” (Wheeler 1934: fig. 2); and (8) the radial sector in the forewing reaches the costal margin. In addition, we omitted a character for the location of posterior clypeal margin relative to the antennal condyle because no dolichoderine genus in the Malagasy region was distinguished by this character. The value of these characters to separate Malagasy genera from those in other regions was not assessed.</p><p>Some diagnostic characters proposed by Shattuck (1992a, 1995) were omitted from the character matrix because they proved difficult to score. The omitted characters include: concavity of the declivity of the propodeum, presence of a petiolar scale, angle of petiolar dorsum, development of the subpetiolar process, and size of the harpago. For example, the dorsal and declivitous margins of the propodeum are often completely continuous and without any divisions and landmarks between them, although only Ravavy miafina has a much longer dorsal margin. In addition, the “ventral lobe of the volsella” (sensu Shattuck 1992a) was not included because it could not be recognized.</p><p>In most males examined, we observed a process in the buccal cavity near the base of the mandible that projected inward. However, it was difficult to judge whether this process is the “anterior hypostomal flange” proposed by Shattuck (1992a, 1995). One species that clearly lacks this process is Ravavy miafina, while others seemed to have at least a weak process. Ward et al. (2010) included the lack of the process as part of their diagnosis of the tribe Leptomyrmecini . However, Ravavy also lacks this process and is a member of the tribe Bothriomyrmecini . In contrast, Ochetellus, which has this process, is a member of the Leptomyrmecini . Therefore, the hypostomal process is not always a useful character to diagnose the Leptomyrmecini .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F900EFFBCFF0BBFCBC1D36169	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
03F81D2F900CFFBAFF0BBED5C65266FB.text	03F81D2F900CFFBAFF0BBED5C65266FB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ravavy Fisher 2009	<div><p>Ravavy Fisher, 2009</p><p>(Figs 3, 6, 13, 19, 21, 26, 32, 36, 41, 52, 58, 64, 69, 74, 79)</p><p>With characters of Dolichoderinae . All known males alate. Median hypostoma absent (Fig. 64). Mandible broadly spatulate (Fig. 74). Basal angle of mandible distinct, basal margin lacking teeth and denticles. Distal apex of mandible with single, long, acute tooth. Palpal formula 6,3 (one specimen of R. miafina dissected: Fig. 79). Third maxillary palpal segment longer than fourth, but shorter than the combined length of fourth and fifth. Distal margin of labrum deeply concave and bilobed, longest setae located near apices of lobes (Fig. 69). Scape excluding its basal condyle shorter than length of flagellar segments 1+2 (Fig. 3). Pedicel conical. First and second flagellar segments slightly bent. Axillae weakly compressed medially, anterior and posterior margins not parallel. Petiolar node raised vertically, its anterior margin nearly as long as posterior margin in lateral view, not much expanded laterally. Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III (Fig. 19). Anterior surface of abdominal segment III with indentation that fits posterior surface of petiolar node (Fig. 21). Pygostyles present.</p><p>Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed, its distal margin widely concave (Fig. 26). Apicoventral portion of basimere without projection (Fig. 32). Harpago moderate in size, visibly distinct but not separated from basimere by a membranous region. Harpago narrow in lateral view, without distinct ventral face (as in Fig. 23). Basoventral portion of aedeagus with long and narrow lobe ventrally (Figs 36, 41). Ventral margin of aedeagus with denticles.</p><p>Forewing elongated apical to wing stigma, its radial sector (Rs) reaches costal margin (Fig. 52), media between Rs+M and 2rs-m unrecognizable, 2rs-m reduced in length, and 1m-cu present. On hindwing, M+Cu, 1rsm+M, and free section of radial sector present, free section of cubitus vestigial, cu-a present (Fig. 58).</p><p>Remarks. Genus Ravavy is endemic to Madagascar and males of Ravavy are known only for R. miafina . These males are distinguished easily from those of the four other Malagasy dolichoderine genera by the absence of the median hypostoma (Fig. 64), a broadly spatulate mandible with a long and acute tooth on its distal apex (Fig. 74), lack of serrate and minute denticles on the masticatory margin of the mandible, the first flagellomere slightly bent, dorsal margin of the propodeum in lateral view much longer than its declivitous margin (Fig. 6) (see also remarks of Ochetellus), the presence of a long and narrow basoventral lobe on the aedeagus (Figs 36, 41), and the forewing elongate apical to the stigma (Fig. 52).Ward et al. (2010) listed a lacking or reduced median hypostoma as a tribal diagnosis of Bothriomyrmecini, to which Ravavy belongs.</p><p>The genus Ravavy was described by Fisher (2009). Although the mandible character proposed by Fisher (2009) distinguishes this genus from all other dolichoderines, our current study allows a more comprehensive comparison of additional characters with genera that do not occur in Madagascar. We offer the following revised and expanded analysis of diagnostic characters. Fisher (2009) proposed the elongate basal margin and reduced masticatory margin of the mandible as unique to Ravavy; however, outside of Madagascar, those two characters can also be seen in a figure of a male Forelius in Shattuck (1992a: fig. 78). The shape of the mandible in Ravavy is better described as broadly spatulate, with a single acute tooth on its apex. The acute tooth is not necessarily the apical tooth, because several vestigial denticles can be seen distal to it (Fig. 74). The attachment between the petiole and abdominal segment III is best described as narrow, since the width is relatively small compared with that in Ochetellus (Fig. 18); the broad attachment between the petiole and abdominal segment III is a unique character of Ochetellus . Though described as absent in the original description (Fisher, 2009), a reexamination of fresh material revealed that an indentation on the anterior face of abdominal segment III is present in Ravavy (Fig. 21). The lack of this indentation in the males examined is limited to Ochetellus (see also Ochetellus) (Fig. 20).</p><p>A male of Leptomyrmex Mayr in Shattuck (1992a: figs 100, 101) may appear superficially similar to a Ravavy male due to its long head, long mesosoma, and non-triangular mandible. Based on descriptions of males of Leptomyrmex provided in previous studies (Wheeler 1934; Shattuck 1992a, 1995; Brandão et al. 1999; and Lucky &amp; Ward 2010), these two genera differ in the following characters: the medial hypostoma is lacking in Ravavy (Fig. 64), while present in Leptomyrmex; palpal formula is 6,3 in Ravavy (Fig. 79), while 6,4 in Leptomyrmex; the mandible has only one or two vestigial denticles in addition to a long tooth in Ravavy (Fig. 74), while it has many serrate denticles in Leptomyrmex; axillae are present in Ravavy, while absent in Leptomyrmex; an indentation is present on the third abdominal segment in Ravavy (Fig. 21), while no indentation or groove is found on the segment in Leptomyrmex; posterior margin of abdominal sternum IX is concave in Ravavy (Fig. 26), while convex to entire in Leptomyrmex; the pterostigma is developed as usual without a “pterostigmal appendage” (Wheeler 1934: fig. 2) in Ravavy, while the pterostigma is reduced in size and the “pterostigmal appendage” is developed in most macro- Leptomyrmex .</p><p>Additional discussion of characters is included in the remarks for Ochetellus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F900CFFBAFF0BBED5C65266FB	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
03F81D2F900BFFBBFF0BBF0EC65264E3.text	03F81D2F900BFFBBFF0BBF0EC65264E3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tapinoma Foerster 1805	<div><p>Tapinoma Foerster 1805</p><p>(Figs 4, 9, 14, 23, 27, 29, 37, 44, 47, 53, 59, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80)</p><p>With characters of Dolichoderinae . All known males alate. Medial hypostoma present (Fig. 65). Mandible triangular, but its basal angle indistinct. Basal margin of mandible partially covered with serrate denticles and with smooth margin on its basal portion (Fig. 75). Masticatory margin of mandible wholly covered with serrate denticles. Apical tooth on masticatory margin longer than subapical one. Palpal formula 6,4 or 6,3 (one specimen each of seven species and morphospecies dissected: Fig. 80: Table 3). Length of third maxillary palpal segment varies from shorter to longer than fourth. Distal margin of labrum deeply concave and bilobed, longest setae located near apices of lobes (Fig. 70). Scape excluding basal condyle longer than flagellar segments 1+2 (Fig. 4). Pedicel conical. First and second flagellar segments straight. Axillae medially compressed, anterior and posterior margins not parallel. Petiolar node strongly inclined anteriorly, its anterior margin much shorter than posterior margin in lateral view. Node not much expanded laterally in most cases. Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III. Anterior surface of abdominal segment III with indentation that fits posterior surface of petiolar node. Pygostyles present.</p><p>Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed, its distal margin widely or narrowly concave (Fig. 27). Apicoventral portion of basimere with projection (Fig. 29). Harpago moderate in size, separated from basimere by membranous region or a suture, and narrow in ventral view without ventral face (Fig. 23). Basal portion of aedeagus without distinct ventral lobe (Fig. 44). Ventral margin of aedeagus with denticles.</p><p>Forewing not extremely elongated apical to wing stigma, radial sector reaches costal margin (Fig. 53), media absent between Rs+M and 2rs-m, and 1m-cu absent in most cases. On hindwing, M+Cu present, 1rs-m+M, free sections of radial sector and cubitus, and cu-a present or absent (Figs 59, 60).</p><p>Remarks. Males of seven species (some of them morphospecies) were examined. Males of Tapinoma are distinguished easily from those of the four other Malagasy genera by an antennal scape which is longer than flagellomeres 1+2, and basal margin of the mandible partially covered with serrate denticles with a smooth basal portion (Fig. 75). In addition to these unique characters, an anteriorly inclined petiolar node is found only in Tapinoma and Technomyrmex and an apicoventral process of the basimere is found only in Tapinoma (Fig. 29) and Aptinoma (Fig. 30).</p><p>The following is a summary of the characters in Table 3 that distinguish between Tapinoma and Technomyrmex: basal margin of the mandible (character 4), apical portion of the labrum (character 7), relative length of the antennal scape (character 8), a process on the basimere (character 19), shape of the harpago (character 20), media on the forewing (character 23), and M+Cu on the hindwing (character 23). These differences hold up even though Technomyrmex is listed as having multiple states for the labrum (characters 7), and Tapinoma with a polymorphism for the scape (character 8). The ambiguity in Technomyrmex is due to an inability to dissect a paratype of Technomyrmex curiosus . Though Tapinoma is polymorphic in scape length, it never overlaps with the status observed in Technomyrmex .</p><p>A reduction of wing venation is observed in two species: T. subtile (Fig. 60) and T. mg07. The hindwings of both species are much narrower than the other males of Tapinoma in the Malagasy region, and 1rs-m+M, free sections of radial sector and cubitus, and also cu-a are weak or absent . In all other species in the Malagasy region, these veins are distinct (as in Fig. 59).</p><p>Several of the present results for Tapinoma disagree with those in previous studies. A median notch on the anterior margin of the median hypostoma is found in all male Tapinoma (Fig. 65) save T. subtile, while the margin in Shattuck (1992a) is regarded as entire. The inner margin of the eye in full-face view is concave in several species, while in Shattuck (1992a) the margin is regarded as flat. Palpal formula is 6,3 in a small species, Tapinoma subtile (Fig. 80), while the formula of Tapinoma in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is regarded as 6,4. Relative length of the third maxillary palpal segment compared with the fourth varies from shorter than to longer than the third (See Table 4). Basal margin of the mandible is partially covered with serrate denticles with a smooth portion on its base (Fig. 75), while the margin in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is recorded as wholly smooth. The length of the antennal scape is longer than that of flagellomeres 1+ 2 in all males of Tapinoma examined, but in some the scapes do not reach the posterior margin of the head in full-face view (as in Fig. 4); by contrast, both Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) regarded the scape in Tapinoma as exceeding the posterior margin of the head. The relative length of the first flagellomere compared with its width varies from less than 1.5 times to more than three times (See Table 4), while the length in Shattuck (1992a) is regarded as less than two times. Posterior margin of the mesoscutum is notched medially in one species (T. mg10), while the character of the margin in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is regarded as entire. A laterally expanded petiole can be seen in a male Tapinoma (T. mg11), although its dorsum is blunter than that in Ochetellus . Abdominal segment III does not always cover the petiole completely by overhanging anteriorly and seems to be nearly vertical in one male (T. mg11), although the segment of Tapinoma in Shattuck (1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is regarded as overhanging the petiole, so that the petiole is invisible in dorsal view. The harpago is not separated from the basimere by a membranous region in two species of Tapinoma (T. mg02 and T. mg11) in the Malagasy region (Fig. 29), while this character of Tapinoma in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is regarded as divided into two parts separated by a membranous region. The cuspis on the volsella can be found in four ( T. melanocephalum, T. mg04, T. mg10, and T. mg11 as in Fig. 47) out of seven Malagasy species, while this character is regarded as absent in Tapinoma by Shattuck (1992a, 1995).</p><p>Additional discussion of characters is included in the remarks for Ochetellus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F900BFFBBFF0BBF0EC65264E3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
03F81D2F900AFFB8FF0BBD06C65267F8.text	03F81D2F900AFFB8FF0BBD06C65267F8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Technomyrmex Mayr 1872	<div><p>Technomyrmex Mayr, 1872</p><p>(Figs 5, 10, 15, 22, 28, 33, 38, 45, 48, 54, 61, 66, 71, 76, 81)</p><p>With characters of Dolichoderinae . Ergatoid males known, but all males in Malagasy region alate. Medial hypostoma present (Fig. 66). Mandible triangular, but its basal angle indistinct. Basal margin and masticatory margin of mandible wholly covered with serrate denticles (Fig. 76). Apical tooth on masticatory margin longer than subapical one. Palpal formula 6,4 (one specimen of each of eight species dissected: Fig. 81). Third maxillary palpal segment shorter than or as long as fourth. Concavity on distal margin of labrum absent in most cases; when visible, it is much reduced in size and longest setae located distant from apices of lobes (Fig. 71). Scape excluding its basal condyle shorter than length of flagellar segments 1+2. Pedicel conical (Fig. 5). First and second flagellar segments straight. Axillae medially compressed, anterior and posterior margins not parallel. Petiolar node strongly inclined anteriorly, its anterior margin much shorter than posterior margin in lateral view, not much expanded laterally. Petiole narrowly attached to abdominal segment III. Anterior surface of abdominal segment III with indentation that fits posterior surface of petiolar node. Pygostyles present.</p><p>Distal portion of abdominal sternum IX bilobed, its distal margin widely concave (Fig. 28). Apicoventral portion of basimere without projection. Harpago moderate in size, separated from basimere only by suture, without membranous region between them (Figs 33, 38), expanded mesally in ventral view, forming distinct and more or less flat ventral face (Fig. 22). Basal portion of aedeagus does not bear distinct ventral lobe (Fig. 45).</p><p>Forewing not extremely elongated apical to wing stigma, its radial sector reaches to costal margin (Fig. 54), media partially absent between Rs+M and 2rs-m, and 1m-cu absent in many cases. On hindwing, M+ Cu absent, M+1m-cu, free sections of radial sector and cubitus, and cu-a absent (Fig. 61).</p><p>Remarks. Males of nine species were examined. They are distinguished easily from those of the four other Malagasy dolichoderine genera by the ventral portion of the harpago, which is expanded mesally to form a ventral face (Fig. 22), and the absence of M+Cu on the hindwing (Fig. 61). Technomyrmex and Aptinoma uniquely share the following characters: the basal margin of the mandible is wholly covered with serrate denticles (Fig. 76) and the concavity on the distal margin of the labrum is reduced (Fig. 71). In Technomyrmex and Tapinoma the petiolar node is inclined. The central notch of the labrum is reduced in size or absent, although it is still visible in several males of Technomyrmex . When the notch is visible in Technomyrmex, the longest setae on the labrum are located distant from the apices of the lobes formed by the central notch, while in the other dolichoderine genera with bilobed labrum, the setae are mostly located on the apex of each lobe (Figs 68–70).</p><p>Several of the present results for Technomyrmex disagree with previous studies. A median notch or groove on the anterior margin of the median hypostoma is found in all males of Technomyrmex (Fig. 66), while the margin in Shattuck (1992a) is regarded as entire. The inner margin of the eye in full-face view is slightly concave in most species, while in Shattuck (1992a) the margin is regarded as flat. The anteromedial margin of the clypeus is not concave in several species ( T. difficilis, T. fisheri, and T. innocens); the margin of Technomyrmex in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) and Brandão et al. (1999) is treated as broadly concave. The relative length of the first flagellomere compared with its width varies from less than two times to three times (see Table 4), while the length in Shattuck (1992a) is regarded as less than two times. Abdominal segment III does not always cover the petiole completely by overhanging it anteriorly in Technomyrmex (e.g. T. mayri), although this segment in Technomyrmex in Shattuck (1992a, 1995) is regarded as overhanging the petiole so that the latter is invisible in dorsal view. The cuspis on the volsella is absent in one species ( T. madecassus: Fig. 48), while regarded as present in Technomyrmex by Shattuck (1992a, 1995).</p><p>Additional discussion of characters is included in the remarks for Ochetellus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F81D2F900AFFB8FF0BBD06C65267F8	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Yoshimura, Masashi;Fisher, Brian L.	Yoshimura, Masashi, Fisher, Brian L. (2011): A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to genera of the subfamily Dolichoderinae. Zootaxa 2794: 1-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.276993
