CHAPTER 01

INTRODUCTION

A. Ants and their ways

1. Diversity

Ants are a dominant force in terrestrial ecosystems due to their universal presence
and significant biomass. They are extremely diverse group of social insects, and play a
crucial role in the ecosystem by improving soil quality and aiding in the decomposition
process. Ants are also recognized as valuable biological indicators due to their mutually
beneficial relationships with both plants and animals. These eusocial insects have evolved
highly interactive and cooperative lifestyles to ensure their survival, exhibiting
remarkable polymorphism. Ants belong to the family Formicidae, which is part of the
superfamily Vesoidea in the order Hymenoptera, and are classified under the class
Insecta within the phylum Arthropoda. With their wide distribution, ants can be found in
almost all terrestrial. ecosystems Ants are a highly diverse group, with an estimated
15,000 species, of which only 11,769 have been formally described. The family
Formicidae encompasses 21 subfamilies and 283 genera, with approximately 15,000
known ant species. In India, there are 633 species of ants from 82 genera and 13
subfamilies, while the state of Karnataka is home to an estimated 226 ant species from 63
genera and 11 subfamilies. The objective of this study was to conduct a survey to
document the ant species diversity in the vicinity of Maharani's Science College in
Mysuru, and to create a partial checklist of ant species in the area. Ants are found in all
kinds of land habitats from subarctic tundra to equatorial rain forests (Brian, 1978), from
marshes to desserts, from sea coastlines to great altitudes and from deep underground to
the apex of the tallest trees (Bolton, 1994), however they are completely absent in some
regions like Iceland, Greenland and Antarctica (Holldobler and Wilson, 1990), and some
Iceland lack native ants (Wilson and Taylor, 1967).
2. Societies

Ant societies are mainly comprised of females. The males, on the other hand, play
no active role in the activities of the colony, and are typically present in the nest for only
a brief period to mate with the young queens. They do not contribute to nest building,
provisioning, guarding, or the feeding of the workers and brood, and are considered the
"sexus sequior" or the subordinate sex. In this sense, ants are reminiscent of certain
mythical human societies such as the Amazons, but unlike these, their activities are
focused entirely on the reproduction and care of future generations (Narendra et al.,
2012).

3. Evolution
Ants have a widespread fossil record that dates back to the mid-Cretaceous period
of the Mesozoic era, as documented by several sources including Carpenter (1992),
Grimaldi and Engel (2005), and Perichot et al. (2008). While ant fossils are rare in the
Cretaceous period, they become increasingly more common in subsequent eras,
suggesting that the ant lineage originated during the Cretaceous period (Folgariat, 1998).
The fossil record of ants offers a valuable glimpse into the changing diversity and
taxonomic status of ants during specific periods in the past, allowing for the classification
of fossils into higher taxa (Ward, 2007).
4. Taxonomy
Ants, specifically the Solenopsis invicta species, are the most dominant
component of the terrestrial ecosystem and are part of the family Formicidae and order
Hymenoptera, comprising a significant portion of the biomass. As a highly diverse group
of social insects, ants are a conspicuous component of terrestrial biodiversity. They are
known to act as ecosystem engineers, playing an essential role in enhancing soil quality
and aiding in the decomposition process (Watanasit et al., 2000). Many ant species also
provide ecosystem provisioning services such as food and medicine, with Formicidae
being used in entomotherapy and as an alternative medicine in various parts of the world.
Ants have a well-developed immune system, and they produce anti-microbial chemicals
for defence against pathogens. These chemicals have the potential to be used in the
treatment of human diseases, making ants a promising source of pharmaceuticals for the
growing global population ( Rastogi, 2011). Ants build their nests in obscure locations
such as cracks in pavements and are interconnected by underground passages over a large
 area. As social insects, ants perform a variety of nest-keeping tasks, and some species
produce short sounds that are inaudible to humans (Esperson, 1994). At the colony level,
social ants exhibit unique features, with the majority of the colony consisting of sterile
workers. They exhibit eusocial behavior and are considered a superorganism (Murdock
and Tschinkel, 2015).
5. Morphology
Ants belong to the family Formicidae, which may be considered either a natural
family or a superfamily, depending on the authority, with five subfamilies (Ponerinae,
Dorylinae, Myrmicinae, Dolichoderinae, and Camponotinae). With about 5,000
described species, subspecies, and varieties, ants are placed at the top of the order
Hymenoptera, a large group of insects that also includes bees, wasps, ichneumon flies,
velvet ants, sawflies, and other smaller groups (Bolton, 1995). Ants can be easily
distinguished from other members of the order by several features, such as the
differentiation of the abdomen into two distinct regions, a slim one- or two-jointed,
highly mobile pedicel, and a larger, more compact terminal portion called the gaster.
Another distinguishing feature is the elbowed antennae, with the first joint greatly
elongated in the female. All ant species are social, and with the exception of a few
parasitic forms, they are always at least trimorphic, meaning that the female is not only
distinct from the male, but also appears in two distinct phases: a fertile queen or female
phase, and a usually sterile worker phase. The queen phase is almost always winged like
the male, but loses its wings after mating, while the worker phase never has wings, except
in rare cases. In some species, the females, and in many cases, the workers may show
differentiation into two sub-phases (Wheeler, William Morton et al., 1910).
6. Ecology
Ants that live in trees, especially those that nest in wood, are characterized by
larger eyes, shorter and thicker legs and antennae (procoxae, scapes, etc.), and a flatter,
broader mesosoma. These features are likely adaptations to living in small cavities within
trees and shrubs, and being more closely in contact with their foraging surfaces.
Melissotarsus is an example of an arboreal ant (a rare African genus of ants in the sub
family Myrmicinae) that is adapted to living in wooden tunnels, and as a result, it has
short and stub by appendages (procoxae, scapes, etc.), larger eyes, and a flatter, broader
mesosoma. Similarly, leaf litter ants also have shorter appendages and compact
mesosomas, but smaller eyes due to their habitat in dark interstitial spaces on the forest
 floor. In contrast, ground-nesting ants that live on the surface tend to be larger in size
with longer legs and larger eyes, likely due to the need for faster movement to acquire
resources and avoid predators. An example of this is Cataglyphis bicolor ant, an epigaeic
forager in the Saharan desert with elongated legs and eyes that are well-suited to its
environment (Wehner, 1983), with their over 14,000 species (Bolton, 2020), are an
incredibly diverse group of insects that can be found across the world, occupying a
variety of ecological niches. This makes them an important subject for ecomorphology
studies, as their ecological range provides a valuable opportunity to examine different
trophic and microhabitat niches in detail. Ants occupy a range of ecological niches, from
obligate leaf harvesters that cultivate fungi, to subterranean predators with no eyes, to
nomadic army ants, and even arboreal omnivores that nest on twigs (Hölldobler &
Wilson, 1990).

B. Review of literature
i. Global synthesis
Family Formicidae comprises of 23 sub families and 307 genera, consisting of
12,500 described species globally (Holldobler and Wilson 1990; Capinera 2008;
Guenard, 2013; Bodlah et al 2016). Myrmicinae is largest of all ant subfamilies, with
more than 6,700 labelled species. Formicinae is also cosmopolitan subfamily, with
around 3,600 defined species (Holldobler and Wilson, 1990).
China is one the biggest country of the world and provides diverse habitat for ant
species. Until now almost 939 valid species and subspecies distributed under 103 genera
are reported from China. Approximately one third of global’s 307 extant documented ant
genera are found in China (Guenard and Dunn, 2012). Almost 520 foreign species had
been reported to enter China during last century. These invasive species had been
deemed as a stress on the economy, ecological safety, communal well-being and
domestic interests of the country (Wan et al., 2009).
Bingham (1903) for the first time comprehensively studied the Indian Ant fauna
and documented all of his finding in a book; The Fauna of British India, Including
Ceylon and Burma. Hymenoptera, Volume 2. Ants and Cuckoo-wasps. He identified a
total of 498 ant species belonging to 79 genera and 5 subfamilies.
Gadagkar et al. (1993) worked on the Ants fauna of the Western Ghats, India.
They provided the first estimates of ant diversity for any Indian forest locality. They
carried out sampling from 12 different localities by using all the sampling methods. They
have identified 140 species of ants belonging to 32 genera and 6 subfamilies.
Compared to its neighboring countries, Turkey has a higher number of ant species
according to the first and only checklist on Turkish ant fauna (Kiran & Karaman 2012).
Greece has the most diverse ant fauna among the neighboring countries, with 315
species (Salata & Borowiec 2018), followed by Iran with over 250 species (Rad et al.
2018; Khalili-Moghadam et al. 2019), Bulgaria with 186 species (Lapeva-Gjonova et al.
2010; Lapeva-Gjonova et al. 2014; Kiran et al. 2017; Borowiec et al. 2019), and Georgia
with 145 species (Gratiashvili et al. 2010; Salata & Borowiec 2018).
In Brazil, there are around 1480 known ant species from 112 genera, nine of
which are endemic (AntWiki.org 2021). Monomorium, a genus of ants with a wide
distribution in arid Australia, serves as an example of poorly documented ant mega
diversity. Although the formal center of diversity for this genus is in Africa, where over
half of its 250 described species occur (Bolton 1995), the Australian fauna has only had
59 of its species recognized in a relatively recent revision (Heterick 2001), which is less
than one-quarter of the world fauna.
Dash (2004) carried out an extensive study on the species diversity of ants in
Louisiana. He examined a total of 130,000 ant specimens and recognized 128 species.
His research increased the known species number 59 (Moser and Blum 1960) to 128
which belongs to 40 genera and 8 subfamilies.
Marko et al. (2006) surveyed the ant fauna of Romania. They recorded 103
species from the Romania, moreover they also reported eleven species of uncertain
occurrence in Romania. They also reported that the ant fauna of Romania is
unsatisfactorily known and there is great number of species still to be discovered.
Eguchi (2008) revised the ant fauna of genus Pheidole in northern Vietnam, and
recognized 31 species including six new species which are: Pheidole capellinii Emery,
P. colpigaleata Eguchi, P. dugasi Forel, P. elongicephala, P. fervens F.Smith, P.fervida
F. Smith, p. fortis Eguchi, P. foveolata Eguchi, P. gatesi (Wheeler), P. hongkongensis
Wheeler, P. indosinensis Wheeler, P. laevicolor Eguchi, P. laevithorax, P. magna
Eguchi, P. megacephala (Fabricius), P. noda F. Smith, P. ochracea, P. parva Mayr, P.
pieli Santschi, P. plagiaria F. smith, P. planifrons Santschi, P. rabo Forel, P.
rugithorax, P. smylhiesii Forel, P. taipoana Wheeler, P. tjibodana Forel, P. tumida, P.
vieti, P. vulgaris Eguchi, P. yeensis Forel, P. zoceana Santschi.
 Over a 50-year period (1955–2005), at least 114 species of ants from 52 genera
and nine subfamilies were intercepted at the New Zealand border. Mc Glynn (1999)
listed 147 species of ants that had been transported to new regions around the globe, but
only 45% of the species in this study were also recorded by Mc Glynn (1999).
Suarez et al. (2005) also documented the ant species entering the USA through
human trade. Their results showed that over a 60-year period, 232 species (58 genera)
were intercepted from 394 samples. Taken together, these studies illustrate the
remarkable diversity of ant species that have been, and are being, transported by global
trade.
Snelling and Hunt, (1975) worked on ants of Chile and provided keys to six
subfamilies and all the reported genera and description to the species. Morisita et al.,
(1989) provided a pictorial guide for the identification of Japanese ants. His keys
describe diagnostic features of Pseudomyrmecinae, Dorylinae, Cerapachyinae
Ponerinae and Leptanillinae. Mohamed et al., (2001) studied the identification and
taxonomic status of twenty seven species distributed under thirteen genera and three
subfamilies of Egyptian formicid ants. Seven species were new records to the Egyptian
fauna. Wild, (2004) worked on taxonomy and distribution of Argentine ant Linepithema
humile of southern South America and provide description for its male, queen and
workers castes. Yoshimura and Fisher, (2007) presented male based pictorial keys to ant
subfamilies and to the genera of Ponerinae in the Malagasy region.
ii. South Asia
Tiwari (1999) carried out a taxonomic survey on the ant fauna of southern
India. They reported a total of 219 species placed in 48 genera and 7 subfamilies.
Among these 2 species were reported for the first time from India and 22 species
were new records from southern India.
Dias, (2008) conducted a preliminary study on ants of Sri Lanka and
present revised key for eleven subfamilies. Dias, (2006) presented a taxonomic
work on ants of Sri Lanka and reported 181 species distributed under 61 genera.
He reported that majority of ant (2008) worked on ants of Rajasthan and
presented a list 51 ant species classified under 22 genera and eight subfamilies.
Varghese, (2003) has presented a study on the ants of Indian Institute of Science
Campus, Bangalore.
 Ghosh et al., (2005) has worked out the ants of Rabindra Sarovar, Kolkata.
They recorded 29 species placed under 20 genera and 5 subfamilies, Formicinae,
Myrmicinae, Ponerinae, Pseudomyrmicinae and Dolichoderinae. They also gave
keys to species, genera, and to the subfamilies. Bolton (1995) worked on
taxonomic and zoogeographical survey of the existing ant species (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Bharti et al., (2016) described 828 valid species of ants belonging
to 100 genera from India only.
Collingwood, (1961) presented a checklist of ants from Afghanistan,
consisting of 44 species belonging to 18 genera and 3 sub families Myrmicinae,
Formicinae and Dolichoderinae. Radchenko and Dubovikoff, (2011) reported
strongylognatus kabakovi, member of parasitic genus strongylognatus from
Afghanistan, which was a new record in Afghanistan.
Delabie et al. (2000) studied the litter ant communities in Atlantic rain
forest region of Brazil. A total of 106 ant species were identified in a 500
Winkler sack samples belonging to 43 genera and 7 subfamilies which are as
follows: Cerapachyinae, Dolichoderinae, Ecitoninae, Formicinae, Myrmicinae,
Ponerinae and Pseudomyrmecinae. The most species rich genus was pheidole,
followed by Gnamptogenys, Strumigenys, Crematogaster, Pachycondyla,
Paratrechina and Apterostigma.
Malsch (2000) investigated the diversity of Ants inhabiting leaf litter in
Pasoh, Malaysia. They found 120 species representing 49 genera and 5
subfamilies which are as follows: Cerapachyinae, Dolichoderinae, Formicinae,
Myrmicinae and Ponerinae. The most speciose genera were Pheidole and
Strumigenys followed by Oligomyrmex and Tetramorium.
Vasconcelos and Delabie (2000) determined the ground ant communities
of central Amazonian forest fragments. They have identified 227 species
belonging to 60 genera and eight subfamilies. Among these the well represented
genera were Pheidole, Gnamptogenys, Pachycondyla, Crematogaster,
Trachymyrmex, Paratrechina and Hypoponera.
Mohamed et al (2001) studied the ant fauna of Sinai and delta region of
Egypt. Their surveys revealed 27 species that belonged to 13 genera and 3
subfamilies. Among these, seven species were reported for the first time from
Egypt; six from Sinai and two from Ebn Salam, which were Aphaenogaster
Phillipsi, Aphaeanogaster syriacum, Cataglyphis minimus, Cardiocondyla
wroughtonii, Monomorium carbonarium, Tetramorium brevicorni, Tetramorium
depressecipes.
Paknia et al. (2008) presented the first checklist of ants in Iran. They have
identified 110 species representing 26 genera of 6 subfamilies from Iran. Among
these seven species were reported for the first time in Iran. The most species rich
genera were Camponotus, Cataglyphis and Messor. Hernandez-Ruiz et al. (2009)
determined the species composition of ants in irrigated agroecosystems and non-
agricultural areas of a dry region in central Mexico. In a total collection of 52,358
ants they have identified 39 species representing 21 genera and 6 subfamilies the
well represented species were: Dorymyrmex spp., Forelius pruinosus,
Monomorium minimum and Pheidole obtusospinosa.
Karaman et al. (2009) examined the ant fauna of Camponotus genus in
Kaz Mountains both horizontally and vertically. They fetched out 13 species
belonging to 3 subgenera which are Colobopsis, Myrmentoma, and
Tanaemyrmex.
Kiran and Karaman, (2012) reported nine subfamilies of ants belonging to
46 genera, 306 proper species (286 species, 20 subspecies) from Turkey. Ant
fauna of Turkey is quite rich just like its adjacent countries with 256 species
reported from Greece (Legakis, 2011), 167 species recorded from Bulgaria
(Lapeva Gjonova et al., 2012), 184 species from Iran (Paknia et al., 2008), 116
species from Armenia (Arakelian, 1994) and 144 species were reported from
Georgia (Gratiashvili et al., 2010). An overall of 1 l l ant species are currently
recorded from Kyrgyzstan (Borowiec et al., 2009) The high number of ant
species reported from Turkey is due to its diverse climatic conditions across the
country (Kiran and Karaman, 2012). Vonashk and Hirsch, (2009) worked on ants
fauna of Israel and present primary checklist of ants which comprise of 203
recognized species, 15 identified subspecies, 10 unidentified species, and 13
undescribed species, together distributed under 46 genera and 1 l subfamilies.
Twenty-seven of these species and subspecies were new record from Israel.
After partition single studies had done on taxonomic status of ants by
Umair (2010) in Pakistan which was limited to only two regions of Punjab. The
only reported work in this part of South Asia has been carried out by Bingham
(1897) (Umair et al., 2012). In pre partition era Bingham (1903) published his
valuable work on the ants in Fauna of British India. He reported 498 species
 under 79 genera from India, including Burma and Ceylon and gave identification
key and detailed account of distribution of the species recorded. Later on Umair
et al., (2012) present the species compositions of Potohar Plateau of Punjab,
Pakistan. They reported about 21 species belonging to 13 genera and 3
subfamilies, Formicinae, Myrmicinae and Ponirenaee All species were new
record from Pakistan. Bharti (2012) reported two new species of genus Myrmica,
Myrmica adrijae species and Myrmica Pseudorugosa species from Himalaya. He
reported Myrmica adrijae species from North western region of India and
Myrmica pseudorugosa species from Northeast Pakistan.
iii. Pakistan
According to a study conducted in the District of Charsada (Rasheed et al.,
2020), only one species of ant, Tapinoma melanocephalum, was found at indoor
collection sites, while seven species were found only at outdoor collection sites.
The remaining 11 species were found at both indoor and outdoor collection sites.
This suggests that different ant species may have different preferences for indoor
versus outdoor habitats.
According to a study conducted in the District of Swabi (Rasheed et al.,
2021), several ant species were recorded for the first time in Pakistan, including
Monomorium abberans, M. dichorum, Messor instabilis, Messor dichorum,
Pheidole fergusoni, P. latinuda, P. sulcaticeps, and Tapinoma indicum. These
species were not previously reported from the District of Charsadda. This
suggests that there is a high degree of ant species diversity in Pakistan, with new
species being discovered and recorded regularly.
After that Bodlah et al, (2016) reported two new species of Tetraponera
from Pakistan. Both these species of genus Tetraponera, Tetraponera allaborans
(Walker, 1859) and Tetraponera nigra (Jerdony 1851) are new records from
Pakistan. They gave their identification characters, distribution and measurement
of different body parts in millimeter.
Umair et al., (2012) carried out a study on the diversity of ants in Potohar
plateau of Punjab, Pakistan. They have collected ants from different localities of
Potohar plateau. Their surveys publicised 21 species placed in 13 genera and 3
subfamilies. All species in their study were reported for the first time from
Pakistan.
 The first comprehensive study on the ants of Pakistan was by Bingham
(1903), since then only one study i.e. Umair et al., (2014) attempted to document
the ant fauna of a specific area in Pakistan, and very little is known about the ant
fauna of Pakistan and there is a lot to discover. Therefore, exploring the ant fauna
of a particular area in Pakistan can prove to be a stepping stone for the advance
studies on the ants such as its role as bio indicator.
Ahmed et al., (2013) reported seven species from Quetta, Balochistan.
Recently, Usman et al., (2017) reported 17 species under 12 genera of subfamilies
Myrmicinae and Camponotinae, from district Karak, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Hina et al., Identified 7 species, 7 genera under three subfamilies, from
Baluchistan, Pakistan. Haji (2008) reported 11 species under seven genera of
house ants of Karachi.
CHAPTER 02

MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study Area

Our study area was District Bannu. The District is located in Bannu division of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa province in Pakistan. It was reported as a District in 1861 during the British rule. It
is one of 26 Districts that make up the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan. It borders
North Waziristan to the North West, Karak to the North East, Lakki Marwat to the Southeast.

Map of District Bannu (Khan et al., 2018).

2.2. HISTORY OF STUDY AREA

 The history of Bannu goes back to prehistoric times, due to its strategic location. Sheri
Khan Tarakai is an ancient settlement site located in the Bannu District with ruins of the oldest
known region, which was occupied from the late fifth until the early third millennium B.C.

2.3. PHYSICAL FEATURES OF STUDY AREA

The Bannu valley proper stretches to the foot of the North West frontier hills, forming an
irregular oval, measuring 60 miles (97 km) from North to South and 40 miles (64 km) from east
to west. The district forms a basin drained by the Kurram River and Gambila River (or Tochi
river) which originate in the hills of Waziristan.

2.4. WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Bannu District is quite a hot district but there are some areas in Bannu district which are
chill. The average temperature in summer is 34 C that is quite hot and sometimes it is quite
unbearable. Tough winters are comfortable for the people. The temperature goes as down to 3-5
C in the months of December and January but sometimes this temperature turns into fog which is
a big problem.

2.5. Materials
Forceps, soft brush, Eppendorftubes, plastic glass and 90% ethanol.

2.6. Collection time period

Collection was done from different areas of tehsil Bannu, Tehsil Miryan and Tehsil Kaki
of district Bannu from April 2021 to August 2022 on monthly basis.

2.7. Methodology

Methodology includes:

1. Collection of ants

Methods of Collection

i. Handpicking
Ants were collected by handpicking method (Agosti and Alonso, 2000). Ants
were collected using hand-picking, where individuals are collected manually with the
 help of the hands. Approximately 10 to 15 ants were collected from each nest and
placed in an Eppendorf tube for storage and transport. This method of collection is
useful for obtaining small samples of ants from specific nests or habitats.

ii. Pit fall Trap

Ants were also collected by pit fall traps (Bruehl et al., 1998). The pitfall method
involves the use of a disposable glass jar filled with a solution of 30 ml ethylene
glycol or 90% alcohol mixed with a few drops of glycerin to prevent evaporation. The
jar was placed in a pit dug into the ground, with the opening of the jar level with the
ground surface. Ants and other insects that fall into the jar become trapped in the
solution and can be collected for study. This method was useful for collecting a
variety of insects, including ants, from the ground.
iii. Sugar Bait or Protein Bait
Ants were collected by sugar bait or protein bait method . The bait collection
method involves using food as an attractant to collect ants. Common baits include
sugar solutions, minced meat, honey, and biscuits. These baits were placed at the
collection site and checked after 30 minutes to see if any ants have been attracted.
Baits can be placed both indoors and outdoors, such as at door locations. Ants that
were attracted to the bait can then be collected manually through hand-picking. This
method were useful for collecting ants that were attracted to specific types of food.
iv. Buccal Aspirator
Ants were also collected by buccal aspirator method (Bodlah et al., 2016; Umair
et al., 2012). A buccal aspirator, also known as a mouth aspirator, is a tool used to
collect small insects, including ants, by sucking them into a tube using the mouth.
This method were useful for collecting ants from areas such as walls and clean
surfaces, where hand-picking may not be practical or possible. To use a buccal
aspirator, the tube were placed near the ants, and the collector exhales through the
tube to create suction that draws the ants into the tube. The ants can then be
transferred to an Eppendorf tube or other container for storage and transport. Both
indoor and outdoor surveys were carried out in the three tehsils of district Bannu .
Information like date, time, area, habitat and collector were recorded for each
specimen.
(a)lndoor collection
For indoor collection houses, hospitals, schools and others buildings were visited.

(b)Outdoor collection

For outdoor collection different habitats like fields, graveyards, hills, streets, gardens were visited.

v. Killing

After collection, handpicked ants were killed by putting them in the cyanide bottles
(Youdeowei, 1977).

vi. Preservation
All the collected samples of ants were preserved in an Eppendorf tube filled with
70% ethanol. The date, time, habitat, and location of the collected specimens were
recorded in a notebook, along with the corresponding tube number. The ethanol was
changed after one or two days to prevent the specimens from deteriorating. This
method of preservation allows the ants to be stored and transported for further study
without losing their morphological features or characteristics.

vii. Mounting (Card point technique)

To prepare specimens for mounting, a small triangular cut card were used to
support the body of the ant. The ant's legs and mandibles were gently stretched, and a
small amount of seccotine glue were applied to the card. The thin side of the
triangular card were placed between the first two pairs of legs on the ventral side of
the ant's body, and the ant were pressed gently onto the card. The mounted ant were
then pinned to the card using a stainless-steel pin, and the card were placed in an
insect collection box for storage. This method allows the ant to be mounted in a
natural position, with its legs and mandibles extended, for further study or display.

5. Identification

(a) Genus level identification.

Identification of the ants up to genus level was performed by using a taxonomic key,
Identification Guide to the Ant genera of the World by Bolton (1994), while subfamily
Dorylinae genera (Aenictus) were identified by using identification keys given in Boroweic,
(2016) and genus Trichomyrmex was identified by key provided by Bolton, (1987).
(b) Species level identification
Identification up to specie level was done by using keys; Fauna of British India including
Ceylon and Burma; by Bingham, (1903), while species of Cardiocondyla were identified by
using identification keys given in Seifert, (2003), species under genus Cataglyphis were
identified by using keys given by Radchenko, (1998), species of genus Aeniclus were
identified keys given by Bharti el al., (2012), under Messor distributed species were
identified by keys given by Abdul Rassoul et al., (2013), species of Leptogenys was
identified by keys by species key provided by Rakotonirina and Fisher, (2014), species of
Brachyponera was identified by keys provided by Yamane, (2014), and species of
Trichomyrmex was identified by key provided by Bolton, (1987).
For identification binocular microscopes were used, OLYMPUS SD30 having 10X, 20X,
30X and 60X magnification power and Nikon SMZ645 having 8X, 10X, 20X, 30X, 40X
and 50X (without 2X lens) and 16X, 20X, 40X, 560X, 80X, and 100X (with 2X lens)
magnification power.

Table 6.1 Keys used for identification of species in current study

Genus Author
Camponotus, Crematogaster, Paratrachena, Lepisiota, Pheidole, Bingham(1903)
Polyrachis, Monomorium, Messor
Cataglyphis Radchenko(1998)
Meranoplus Schodl(1998)

1. Photography

Photograph of morphological characters were acquired using “Bresser Mikro Ockular

Full HD Microscope Camera” and then sketches were drawn for these characters from the
photographs.
CHAPTER 03

RESULT

Present study aimed at describing the diversity and distribution of ant species in district
Bannu as ant fauna of Pakistan has remained least explored. Ants have been selected from
various habitats of nine different localities of the District Bannu using hand collection, buccal
aspirator and pitfall method.

Identification of collected specimens revealed a total of 24 ant species belonging to 10

genera placed in 2 subfamilies viz. Myrmicinae, Formicinae of the family Formicidae.
Myrmicinae was found to be the most dominant subfamily followed by Formicinae. Myrmicinae
was represented by 5 genera i.e Crematogaster, Messor, Meranoplus, Monomorium and
Pheidole, Formicinae was also having 5 genera i.e Camponotus, Cataglyphis, Paratrechina,
Lepisiota and Polyrhachis.

Genus wise distribution shows that Pheidole was the most diverse genus with 6 species
followed by Camponotus and Messor with 5 species each, Monomorium with 2 species while
remaining 6 genera i.e Crematogaster, Cataglyphis, Meranoplus, Paratrechina, Lepisiota and
Polyrhachis was represented by a single species each.

Species of genus Canponotus reported in the current study are C. taylori, C. compressus,
C. invidus, C. oblungus and C. sericeus, Pheidole was having P. himalayana, P. fergusoni, P.
roberti, P. sykesi, P. javana and P. jucunda. Species of the genus Messor was reported by five
species i.e Messor hamalayanus, Messor barbarous Messor orientalis, Messor minor and
Messor senirufus. Monomorium was also having two species i.e Monomorium indicum and
Monomorium minutum, while genera having single species were Cataglyphis setipes,
Crematogaster walshi, Meranoplus bicolor, Paratrechina longicornis, Lepisiota fraunfeldi and
Polyrhachis hauxwelli.

Table 1: Number of recorded ant species from District Bannu.

Genera Subfamilies No of Species

Crematogaster 1

Monomorium 2

Messor Myrmicinae 5

Pheidole 6

Meranoplus 1

Camponotus 5

Cataglyphis 1

Paratrechina Formicinae 1

Lepisiota 1

Polyrhachis 1

10 2 24

Table 2: List of identified species with their genera, and subfamilies of

District Bannu.

Subfamily Genus Species

Myrmicinae Crematogaster Crematogaster walshi

 Monomorium Monomorium indicum

Monomorium minutum

Messor Messor hamalayanus

Messor barbarous

Messor semirufus

Messor orientalis

Messor minor

Meranoplus Meranoplus bicolor

Pheidole Pheidole himalayana

Pheidole fergusoni

Pheidole roberti

Pheidolesykesi

Pheidole javana

Pheidole jucunda

Formicinae Camponotus Camponotus taylori

Camponotus compressus

Camponotus invidus

Camponotus oblungus

Camponotus sericeus
 Cataglyphis Cataglyphis setipes

Paratrechina Paratrechina longicornis

Lepisiota Lepisiota fraunfeldi

Polyrhachis Polyrhachis hauxwelli

Collection was made from six sites in District Bannu (Tehsil Kakki) and three sites from
second Tehsil i.e Tehsil Bannu. All 24 species were reported from Tehsil Kakki area (Table 3)
while only 8 species were reported from Tehsil Bannu area (Table 4). Messor semirufus, Messor
barbarous, Messor orientalis, Messor minor, Monomorium indicum, Cataglyphis setipes,
Lepisiota fraunfeldi, Pheidole sykesi, Pheidole fergusoni,Camponotus compressus, Paratrechina
longicornis and polyrhachis hauxwelli were the most abundant species collected from all
collection sites in both Tehsil of District Bannu. Certain species were collected from only one
collection site like Camponotus invidus was collected from Mama khel, Meranoplus bicolor,
Pheidole javana, Messor himalayanus were collected from Mandan. The most rich diversity site
was Tehsil Kakki with 16 identified species followed by Jhangir Kakki having 10 species while
Toor Kakki was the least species rich site with only 7 species reported from this collection site.

Table 3: Distribution of species of ants in Tehsil Kakki of District Bannu.

Location Toor Myran Kakki Pirkhel Jahangir Navi

Species Kakki Khas Kakki Kala
Crematogaster + + + +
walshi
Monomorium + + +
indicum
Monomorium + + + + +
minutum
Messor + + + +
hamalayanus
Messor barbarous + + +
Messor semirufus + +
Pheidole + + +
himalayana
Pheidole fergusoni + +
Pheidole roberti + + +
Pheidole sykesi + + + +
Pheidole javana + + + + +
Pheidole jucunda + + + +
Meranoplus bicolor + + + + +
Camponotus taylori + + +
Camponotus + + + +
compressus
Camponotus invidus + +
Camponotus + + +
oblungus
Camponotus + + + + +
sericeus
Cataglyphis setipes + +
Paratrechina + +
longicornis
Lepisiota fraunfeldi + + + +
Messor orientalis + + +

Polyrhachis + + + + +
 hauxwelli
Messor minor + + + +

Table 4: Distribution of species of ants in Tehsil Bannu of District Bannu.

Location Mama Khel Mandan Shadew

Species
Messor orientalis + + +
Messor minor + + +
Monomorium indicum + + +
Phiedole sykesi +
Camponotus + + +
compressus
Camponotus invidus + +
Paratrechina + + +
longicornis
Lepisiota fraunfeldi + + +

Table 5: Specimens of ants collected from different habitats of District Bannu.

Species Sampling habitats

Indoor Outdoor

Kitchen Courty Rooms Washroo Cement Fields Trees Streets Road Hilly
 s ards ms Floor sides areas

Crematogaster +
walshi
Monomorium + + + + + + +
indicum
Monomorium + + + + + +
minutum
Messor
hamalayanus
Messor
barbarous
Messor + + + + +
semirufus
Messor + + + + +
orientalis
Messor minor
Phiedole
himalayana
Phiedole +
fergusoni
Phiedole +
roberti
Phiedole + + +
sykesi
Phiedole
javana
Phiedole +
jucunda
Meranoplus +
bicolor
Camponotus
taylori
Camponotus + + + +
compressus
Camponotus
invidus
Camponotus + + + +
oblungus
Camponotus +
sericeus
Cataglyphis +
setipes
Paratrechina
longicornis
Lepisiota + + +
fraunfeldi
Polyrhachis + +
hauxwelli
Figure: 1 Camponotus compressus (dorsal side view).

Genus: Camponotus Mayr , 1861

Species: Camponotus compressus Fabricius, 1787

Major worker:
11 to 16 mm in length; Black, opaque, very finely and densely reticulate, punctate, the
pedicel and base of abdomen sometimes shining, the posterior margins of the abdominal
segments narrowly testaceous, mandibles, flagellum of the antennae and legs casteneous brown
or red, rarely black; pubescence sparse, erect, often wanting on the head and thorax. Head
triangular, very broad posteriorly, lateral occipital angles prominent; mandibles with 7 teeth;
clypeus medially vertically carinate, the middle portion anteriorly rectangularly produced into a
lobe; scape of antennae cylindrical; eyes comparatively small, frontal rather than lateral. Thorax
narrower than the head, anteriorly produced into a collar; legs long, tibia compressed prism-
shaped. Node of pedicel oval, transverse, convex in front, flat posteriorly; abdomen
comparatively broad and massive.

Minor worker:
 6 to 8 mm in length; Similar, smaller and more slender: Head elongate, produced and
narrowed posteriorly, the sides of the head straight not convex; mandibles with 5 teeth.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama khel, 10.03.2021, Numan, 9 workers; Kakki,

26.03.2021, Shahid, 7 workers; Domel, 17.07.2021, Zohaib, 11 workers (7 major and 4 minor).

Comments: Specimens were collected from garaveyard, grass land and residential buildings.

Figure: 2 Camponotus sericeus (dorsal side view).

Genus: Camponotus Mayr, 1861

Species: Camponotus sericeus Fabrcius, 1798

Major worker:
 8 to 10 mm in length; Black, opaque, with a granular appearance on the head and thorax.
antennae and the tibia and tarsi of the legs more less dark castaneous; Head, thorax and node of
pedicel with very sparse erect pubescence: abdomen with a dense recumbent silky golden
pubescence hiding the sculpture. Head very broad and massive, almost as broad across at the
base of the mandibles as at the occiput, the latter more or less emarginate; mandibles with 5 teeth
clypeus broad, somewhat tectiform, the anterior border broadly emarginate in the middle. Thorax
broad in front, strongly compressed posteriorly, emarginate at the meso-metanotal suture, the
basal face of the metanotum horizontal, flat, the sides margined, posterior face excavate; legs
stout, tibia cylindrical. Node of pedicel rounded, knob-like; abdomen very broad, globose.

Minor worker:
5 to 7 mm in length; Similar, smaller; head more elongate proportionately, occiput
rounded, anterior margin of clypeus transverse, antenna and legs lighter in color than in the
worker major.

Material Examined: Bannu: Pirkhel, 4.04.2021, Numan, 8 workers; Jahangir Kakki,

19.04.2021, Naseem, 8 workers (5 major and 3 minor), Navi Kala, 2.05.2021, Israr, 6 workers.

Comments: Specimens collected from grassy vegetation, fields and from different vegetables.
Figure: 3 Camponotus invidus

Genus: Camponotus Mayr, 1861

Species: Camponotus invidus Forel, 1892

Workers:
5 to 6 mm in length; Pale yellow, with very sparse erect yellowish pubescence. Head
from in front more or less elongate oval, the occiput somewhat constricted, sides of the head
straight not convex; mandibles with 6 teeth; clypeus comparatively broad, medial carina
indistinct; median lobe scarcely produced; antennae comparatively long and thick. Thorax very
convex anteriorly, giving a high-shouldered look to the insect, strongly laterally compressed
posteriorly, with the pro-meso and metanotum more strongly curved than in most species; legs
stout, tibia cylindrical. Node of the pedicel low, convex in front, flat posteriorly: abdo- men
comparatively long and massive.

Material Examined: Bannu: Miryan, Numan, 17.05.2021, 5 workers, Shadew, 25.05.2021,

Inam, 7 workers, Mandan, 7.06.2021, Junaid, 8 workers, Mamakhel, 19.06.2021, Abdullah, 6
workers.

Comments: These species were collected from tree hole.

Figure: 4 Camponotus taylori (side viewe).

Genus: Camponotus Mayr, 1861

Species: Camponotus taylori Forel, 1892

Major worker:
 7 to 8 mm in length; Castaneous brown, the mandibles, antennae, thorax and legs of a
lighter redder brown, minutely and closely reticulate- punctate, the head and the thorax above
with scattered larger punctures; pubescence sparse, short, erect, a little more plentiful on the
front of the head, the cheeks and the abdomen. Head subtriangular; mandibles with 7 teeth;
clypeus, antenne eyes as in C. compressus, but the median lobe of the lypeus is very shortly
produced. Thorax very broad and short. the pro- thorax nearly as broad as the head: legs
comparatively short and stout, covered with a short, not very dense recumbent pubescence tibia
cylindrical. Node of the pedicel as in C. compresses, but not so broad; abdomen short and broad.

Minor worker
5 to 5.5 mm in length; Similar, more slender, head comparatively longer. narrower,
almost rectangular, broadly rounded posteriorly. Node of pedicel conical; abdomen narrow.

Material Examined: Bannu: Pir Khel, 23.04.2021, Naveed, 11 workers (7 major and 4
minor), Toor Kakki, 5.05.2021, Majeed, 8 workers, Mama Khel, 17.05.2021, Adnan, 7 workers,
Shadew, 19.05.2021, Javid, 10 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from fields and trees.

Figure: 5. Cataglyphis setipes

Genus: Cataglyphis Forester, 1850

Species: Cataglyphis setipes Forel, 1894

Workers:
The workers are 10 to 12 mm in length. Head, alitrunk, and petiole murky red, legs
almost black. Pilosity sparse, represented by a small number of dispersed hairs, most frequent on
the ventral side of the gaster. Legs densely covered with a bristly hairs. Pubescence very fine
with a silver shine giving a sub opaque look. Head appears quadrangular without mandibles,
posteriorly not emarginated. Mandibles relatively large with a strong dentation and
nextraordinarily large apical tooth. Clypeus slightly convex, and with a little curved anterior
margin. The suture between clypeus and frontal is well marked. The carinae of antennae too
short and parallel not diverging. Eyes positioned vey above the middle line of head. Alitrunk in
lateral view appears saddle shape; pronotum rounded above; mesonotum elongated and round
above; metanotum small and gibbous. Node of the petiole round. Gaster small and ovoid.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 7.06.2021, Numan, 12 workers, Mandan,

11.06.2021, Naveed, 9 workers, Myran, 3.07.2021, Javid, 11 workers, Navi Kala, 9.07.2021,
Jahangir, 7 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from the fields, bare grounds, graveyard, grass fields
and streets.

Figure: 6. Polyrhachis hauxwelli (dorsal view).

Genus: Polyrhachis Smith, 1857

Species: Polyrhachis hauxwelli Bingham, 1903

Workers:
 4 to 5 mm in length; Workers have Black; head and thorax finely punctured, the
punctures rather larger and coarser on the latter; abdomen finely, minutely rugulose, opaque;
pubescence almost wanting, confined to a few short erect hairs on the front of the head and the
apical segments of the abdomen. Head oval, clypeus not very convex, sub lobed, with the
anterior margin rounded, and a faint medial vertical carina: antennal carina far apart; not diver-
gent. Thorax seen from the side moderately arched, very rounded and convex above; pro-
mesonotal suture indicated, meso-metanotal suture completely obsolete; pronotal spines very
short, acute, planted low down on the anterior lateral angles of the pronotum; metanotal spines
much longer, suberect, sloping backwards and with the extreme apex bent laterally outwards:
legs stout, the tibiae with a row of short spines beneath. Node of pedicel low. biconvex, much
more strongly convex posteriorly than in front, armed at the upper lateral angles with two thick,
rather short spines which are directed backwards and curved to the shape of the base of the
abdomen; between the two spines on the upper margin of the node in the middle are two short
acute upright spines: abdomen broadly oval.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, Numan, 10.06.2021, 12 workers, Kakki Khas,
11.04.2021, Shahid, 10 workers, Shadew, 19.04.2021, Inam, 9 workers, Mandan, 25.05.2021,
Naveed, 11 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from the fields and other tree plants.
Figure: 7. Meranoplus bicolor

Genus: Meranoplus Smith, 1853

Species: Meranoplus bicolor (Guerin-Meneville, 1844)

Workers:
4 to 5 mm in length; Worker head, thorax, legs and pedicel of the abdomen bright
ferruginous red, abdomen black; pilosity very long, soft, abundant and of a grey color; head and
thorax above and the 2nd node of the pedicel coarsely sculptured, eribrate; sides of the thorax
punctured opaque; the antennal groove within and the metanotum smooth; scape of antennae and
legs sparsely, flagellum finely and closely punctured, with oblique pubescence; abdomen closely
and finally reticulate, more or less opaque. Head a little longer narrow, obscurely striate and
pubescent: clypeus convex in the middle, inclined downwards, smooth and obscurely bicarinate;
frontal area depressed, well defined. Thorax: the pro-mesonotal shield about as broad as long,
with the anterior angles prominent and acute, the side posteriorly with a small incision, and
beyond that produced backwards into a long, somewhat laminate spine, on each side
overhanging the metanotum; the latter vertical, slightly concave, with a carina on each side
ending above in an acute spine; legs moderately long. Pedicel: the 1st node smooth, viewed from
the side triangular, the apex bevelled; 2nd node globose: abdomen cordate.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 10.08.2021, Numan, 13 workers, Mandan,

28.08.2021, Jalil, 11 workers, Navi Kala, 1.09.2021, Hamid, 11 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from bare ground and grass fields.

Figure: 8. Phiedole sykesi (dorsal view).

Genus: Phiedole Westwood, 1840

Species: Phiedole sykesi Forel, 1902

Workers:
2 to 2.5 mm in length; Worker have Bright light chestnut, the abdomen brown, covered
with abundant erect reddish hairs; head, thorax anteriorly and abdomen smooth, polished and
shining, the sides of the thorax posteriorly delicately, longitudinally striate. Head posteriorly
somewhat transverse and broader than in front: antennae comparatively stout, the scape
extending beyond the top of the head by about one-fourth of its length. Thorax emarginate at the
meso- metanotal suture; metanotum without spines. Anterior node of the pedicel squamiform;
posterior node oval, nearly circular, a little broader posteriorly than in front.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 15.09.2021, Numan, 14 workers, Mandan,

19.09.2021, Jalil, 10 workers, Pir Khel, 26.07.2021, Hamid, 11 workers, Kakki Khas,
28.08.2021, Shahid, 12 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from room, kitchen and grass fields.
Figure :9. Phiedole roberti

Genus: Phiedole Westwood, 1840

Species: Phiedole roberti Forel, 1902

Workers:
2.4 to 2.6 mm in length; Workers head ovato-rectangular, with only a slightly distinct
posterior margin. The scape extends beyond the occiput by two-thirds of its length. The
pronotum forms a strong regular convexity. Mesonotal farrow deep, behind which the
mesonotum is raised and convex, without forming a transverse ridge. Metanotum with two small
teeth. Second node rounded. Smooth and shining; sides of the thorax reticulate and subopaque
Pilosity of the tibia short and a little oblique of a yellowish red. Abdomen yellowish.
Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 10.07.2021, Jamal, 11 workers, Myran,
19.05.2021, Israr, 10 workers, Shadew, 21.06.2021, Fahad, 11 workers.
Comments: These species were collected from grassy fields and kitchen.

Figure :10. Phiedole jucunda

Genus: Phiedole westwod, 1839

Species: Phiedole jucunda Forel, 1885

Workers:
2 to 2.5 mm in length; Workers dark cinnamon-red, the abdomen dark brown. Head and
thorax finely, closely reticulate-punctate, subopaque, abdomen somewhat smooth and shining.
Head oval, the antenna pubescent, stout and long, the scape extending by about one-third of its
length beyond the top of the head. Thorax elongate, the transverse mesonotal furrow and ridge
well-marked, the former deep and wide; metanotal spines comparatively short, but stout and very
acute. Pedicel: the 1st node small, the 2nd node much larger, rhombiform and rounded: abdomen
opaque at base, smooth posteriorly.
Material Examined: Bannu: Toor Kakki, 10.5.2021, Numan, 6 workers, Myran, 19.5.2021,
Adnan, 8 workers, Mama Khel, 25.05 .2021, Numan, 11 workers, Mandan, 3.6.2021, Naveed, 7
workers.
Comments: These species were collected from grassy fields, bare ground and room.

Figure :11. Pheidole himalayana

Genus: Phiedole westwood, 1839

Species: Phiedole himalayana Forel, 1902

Workers:
2 to 2.5 mm in length; Worker head, thorax and pedicel light bright chestnut-red; abdomen
yellowish, somewhat fuscous above. Pilosity, pubescence and sculpture as in P. indica. Scape of the
antennae short, as short as in P. rotschana, not extending beyond the top of the head by more than
one-fifth of its length from insertion; head shorter and less oval than in either of the above species;
thorax comparatively longer, the metanotal spines very short.
Material Examined: Bannu: Navi Kala, 22.6.2021, Numan, 8 workers, Pir Khel, 8.07.2021,
Shahid, 9 workers, Mama Khel, 7.05.2021, Numan, 12 workers, Jahangir Kakki, 12.6.2021,
Israr, 9 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from bare ground, grassy fields and streets.

Figure :12. Phiedole fergusoni

Genus: Phiedole Westwood, 1840

Species: Phiedole fergusoni Forel, 1902

Workers:
 3.5 to 4 mm in length; Workers head, thorax and pedicel closely punctured, opaque;
abdomen smooth and shining, sparsely punctured at base only. Head oval, the occiput rounded,
convex, the antennae stout, pubescent, the scape extending beyond the top of the head by about
one-fourth of its length. Thorax elongate, the transverse mesonotal groove and ridge not well-
marked, the basal portion of the metanotum not horizontal, slightly sloping, the metanotal spines
short, acute and erect. Pedicel elongate, the 1st node almost conical, the 2nd node globose, much
broader and longer; abdomen oval.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mandan, 10.08.2021, Numan, 10 workers, Shadew,

18.08.2021, Jalil, 12 workers, Mama Khel, 25.08.2021, Numan 13 workers, Myran, 3.09.2021,
Shahid, 11 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from bare grounds, grassy fields and rooms.

Figure :13. Monomorium minutum

Genus: Monomorium Mayr, 1855

Species: Monomorium minutum Mayr, 1855

Workers:
1.5 to 2 mm in length; Worker head and thorax dark chestnut-brown, abdomen black,
sometimes entirely black (Smith's type); very smooth, polished and shining: pilosity pale, very
sparse. Head longer than broad, posteriorly transverse; mandibles narrow, with the masticatory
margin oblique, armed with 4 teeth; clypeus very convex, anteriorly rounded; antennae
moderately long, the scape very nearly reaching up to the top of the head; eyes comparatively
large, placed in the middle of the sides of the head. Thorax: the pro-mesonotum convex,
moderately large, the meso-metanotal suture and emargination well-marked; the metanotum
compressed, basal portion rectangular, flat, the apical portion truncate, vertical. Pedicel: the
nodes from above subequal, the 1st node a little more rounded and petiolate anteriorly; the 2nd
node transverse, broader than long, not broader but lower than the 1st node; abdomen oval.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 11.06.2021, Numan, 8 workers, Jahangir Kakki,
18.05.2021, Shahid, 11 workers, Mandan, 11.03.2021, Naveed, 7 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from bare ground, grass fields and vegetation.
Figure :14. Monomorium indicum

Genus: Monomorium Mayr, 1855

Species: Monomorium indicum Forel, 1902

Workers:
2.5 to 3.5 mm in length; Worker head, thorax and pedicel ferruginons red, the legs and in many
specimens the head also verging to brown; abdomen dark brown or black) head, thorax and abdomen
rugulose, opaque, the head and thorax anteriorly in certain lights appearing densely and extremely finely
longitudinally striate; abdomen minutely rétien- late; in some specimens the 2nd and following segments are
smooth, polished and shining: pilosity entirely wanting, Head broad, almost as broad as long, broader
anteriorly than posteriorly, the hinder mergin slightly concave, mandibles narrow, longitudinally striate,
when closed partially concealed under the projecting margin of the clypeus, the latter obtusely bicarniate,
antennae moderately long, the scape not quite attaining the posterior margin of the head; eyes comparatively

large and flat, placed about the middle of the side of the head. Thorax anteriorly rounded, moderately
broad, the meso- and metanotum narrow and strongly compressed, the meso-metanotal suture distinct; the
thorax in profile emarginate at the suture, the basal portion of the metanotum broadening posteriorly.
Pedicel: the nodes, seen from above, nearly equal, the rounded 1st node higher than the 2nd and petiolate
anteriorly; abdomen oval.
Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 13.08.2021, Numan, 15 workers, Shadew, 18.8.2021, Inam,
13 workers, Pir Khel, 21.08.2021, Israr, 15 workers, Mandan, 17.07.2021, Naseem, 12 workers.
Comments: These specimens were collected from bare ground, grass fields, kitchen, rooms and streets.

Figure :15. Messor barbarous

Genus: Messor Forel, 1890

Species: Messor barbarous Linnaeus, 1767

Major workers:
 4 to 9 mm in length; Dark shining red, the abdomen in some specimens black,
the scape of the antennae and the tarsi pale. Head in some specimens finely
longitudinally striate, in the majority smooth, with a few obsolete striae and scattered
punctures: thorax above coarsely transversely, the sides obliquely striate; legs.
pedicel and abdomen highly polished, smooth and shining; the legs with a few
widely scattered punctures, nodes of the pedicel with some half obsolete transverse
striae above. Pilosity almost entirely wanting, reduced to a very few erect soft, not
obtuse hairs on the underside of the head and abdomen and on the thorax above.
Mandibles finely longitudinally striate. Metanotal spines or teeth entirely wanting.
For the rest the characters of the genus.
Minor workers:
Worker minor resembles the worker major; but is of course smaller; the head
invariably smooth, highly polished and shining, with no trace of striae and fewer
punctures than in the major; the sculpture of the thorax much more feeble;
metanotum unarmed as in the major.
Material Examined: Bannu: Jahangir Kakki, 14.05.2021, Numan, 14 workers,
Kakki Khas, 17.05.2021, Shahid, 11 workers, Mama Khel, 23.06.2021, Numan, 15
workers.
Comments: These species were collected from bare ground, vegetation (trees),
grass fields and streets.
Figure :16. Lepisiota frauenfeldi

Genus: Lepisiota Santschi, 1926

Species: Lepisiota frauenfeldi Mayr, 1855

Workers:
2.5 to 3 mm in length; Head, thorax, legs and node of the pedicel brownish yellow;
abdomen very dark brown; the head, except the mandibles and antennae of a darker shade than
the thorax. Pilosity and pubes- cence almost entirely absent; head, thorax and abdomen smoothi
and shining, the last highly polished. Head viewed from the front distinctly longer than broad,
rounded above; mandibles somewhat narrow, curved, with the apical tooth long and acute:
clypeus strongly convex, proportionately rather large, with a faint transverse subapical furrow
parallel to its anterior margin, the suture between its posterior margin and the frontal area
distinct: eves lateral, situated about the middle of the head. Thorax: the pronotum from above
appears almost circular, the mesonotum strongly constricted in front forming a cylindrical neck,
widening posteriorly; the metanotal teeth thick and broad at base, obtuse; the meso-metanotal
suture above deep and distinct. Node of the pedicel seen from the back pentagonal, the upper
border slightly emarginate, with a not very distinct obtuse tooth at its lateral angles; abdomen
oval, somewhat massive.

Material Examined: Bannu: Mama Khel, 9.04.2021, Numan, 16 workers, Mandan,

17.03.2021, Naveed, 13 workers, Shadew, 12.04.2021, Inam, 15 workers, Pir Khel, 26.04.2021,
Hamid, 12 workers.

Comments: These species were collected from clean surfaces such as walls, grassy vegetation
and bare ground.
Chapter 4

DISCUSSION
Present study was conducted to discover the ant diversity in urban and peri urban regions
of District Bannu, the main reason to select District Bannu was that a little bit research work was
done in this field . Ants collected at random were classified in 24 species, identified in 10 genera
and 2 sub families. The most dominant sub family Myrmicinae have 5 genera and 15 species,
followed by sub family formicinae in which 5 genera and 9 species were reported. The result of
the present study shows eight new species which were not gathered before this study from our
country i.e P. javana, P. jucunda, P. himalayana, C. walshi, C. invidus, M. minutum, M.
himalayanus and M. barbarous.

Pakistan ant diversity has been least investigated and is in its initial stages of exploration.
To date limited research work have been arranged in some regions of Pakistan for finding the
diversity of this significant & varied group of insects. First detailed taxonomic work was
conducted by Bingham (1903) to find the diversity of this of insects before the partition of the
subcontinent. A total of 498 species, placed in 79 genera were reported by Bingham (1903).
During his study ants' samples from all types of habitat from areas now comprising of Pakistan,
India and Bangladesh. group not a single study was conducted in Pakistan after its independence
until Umair et al., (2010), his research work on ant diversity was performed in 2 Dist. of Punjab
the finding of his study includes twenty-one spp belongs to thirteen genera & three sub families.
The present study reported 24 species distributed in 10 genera and 2 sub families. Camponotus,
Crematogaster, Lepisiota, Meronoplus, Monomorium, Phiedole and Polyrhachis were common
genera in both the studies while the five genera Holcomyrmex, Solenopsis, Atopomyemex, Lasius
and Lioponera reported by Umair et al., 2010 were not reported in present study. Beside these
genera the remaining 2 genera; Cataglyphis, Messor, Paratrechina of present study were not
shown by Umair et al., 2010. Among 24 reported species in current study only four species viz
C. compressus, C.sericeus, L. fraunfeldi and M. bicolor were common in both studies. While H.
scarbiceps, H. glaber, P. nietneri, P. pronotalis, P. mus, M. longi, M. schurri, S. geminate, A.
celonicus, reported by Umair et al .,2010 were not shown in present research results. In another
study carried out by Shahid (2016) in District Attock, his research finding include twenty-four
species of seventeen genera & five subfamilies. The five sub families were Formicinae,
Myrmicinae, Dolichoderinae, Dorylinae and Ponerinae. The two sub families Formicinae and
Myrmicinae reported by Shahid (2016) have also been collected in present study. The three sub
families Dorylinae, Ponerinae and Dolichoderinae were not reported in the current study.
Camponotus, Cataglyphus, Crematogaster, Lepisiota, Meronoplus, Messor, Monomorium,
Paratrechina, Phiedole and Polyrachis are common genera in both the studies while four genera
Technomyrmex, Leptogenys, Aenictus and Lioponera shown by Shahid (2016) were never shown
or described in current study result. The common species in both studies are C. compressus, C.
sericaeus, C. setipes, L. frauenfeldi, P. longicornis, P. hauxwelli, P. sykesi, M. indicum and M.
bicolor. However C. muritanica, P. indica, P. binghami, T. simillimum, T. simithi, T. elatior, L.
roberti coonoorensis, A. wroughtonii and L. longitarsus reported by Shahid (2016) were not
reported in the present study record from District Bannu. Among 24 spp of present study 14 spp
were not included in the results of Shahid (2016). These results show that District Bannu is
richer in ant diversity then District Attock. It may be due to the differences in habitat and the
zoogeographical regions. Potohar lies in Oriental region while Bannu is an ecotone of Oriental
and Palearctic region, giving an opportunity to more ant species due to its habitat diversity thus
harboring more ant species and having higher diversity then Attock.

Bodlah et al., (2016) conducted research on ants diversity in Rawalpindi and Islamabad.
The results of this study described two new species which were T. allaborans and T. nigra.
These two species were not reported in the current study as both species were reported from
forest area and current study area have no forests.

Rasheed et al., (2019) reported 19 species classified in 11 genera and three subfamilies in
a survey of ants conducted in District Charsada. Current study reported 24 species belonging to
10 genera and 2 subfamilies from District Bannu. The two subfamilies i.e Formicinae and
Myrmicinae reported by Rasheed (2019) were common with the present study. Camponotus,
Crematogaster, Meronoplus, Messor, Monomorium, Pheidole, Polyrhachis, Lepisiota and
Paratrechina, were same in both results. C. compressus, C. sericeus, L. frauenfeldi, P.
longicornis, P. hauxwelli, M. bicolor, M. indicum and M. aberrans these eight genera reported
by Rasheed (2019) were same to the current study result while M. instabilis, M. dichroum, P.
binghami, P. indica, P. latinoda, P. plagiaria, P. sulcaticeps and T. melanocephalum reported by
Rasheed (2019) were not reported in the present study, while remaining 19 species recorded in
current study were absent in work conducted by Rasheed (2019) in Charsada. This shows that
district Bannu is richer in ant fauna then District Charsada of KP. It may be due to the
differences in Habitat or efforts made during collection.
 Ants were gathered from both urban and peri urban regions or areas of District Bannu,
Nine of the 24 species were exclusively collected from urban area while among 19 species
collected from peri urban area only two were exclusively present in Peri urban area. This shows
that the diversity is greater in urban areas. The reason may be this that peri urban area is mostly
open land without or less canopy cover which are used for cultivating crops or they are covered
with fields, in these areas for pest control different insecticides are also used which may reduce
the diversity of insects in an area. While in urban areas the man modified or alteration in habitats
are more such as parks, lawns, grounds, forests, buildings etc with increase plant diversity or
plant species richness which provide suitable habitat to most ant species (Elison, 2012; Mora et
al., 2013; Garden et al., 2006).

According to Schlick-Steiner et al., (2008) ant species richness increases with the
increase in plant species richness and with the increase in human population in area because of
increased supply of food or energy availability, suitable temperature and heterogeneity in habitat.
According to Ellison (2012) majority of the ant species have been collected from
anthropogenically derived and maintained areas, which are sand plain grasslands, sand plain
heathlands, and Scrub Oak shrublands. According to Peck et al., (1998) ant diversity have always
been greater in the field margins or surrounding area of the fields then the cultivated portion of
the fields because the cultivated portion is more disturbed due to crop management, tillage, and
by the use of insecticide. Our study results have also shown that diversity in urban area is more
as compared to peri urban area and it may be due to the less insecticides use in urban area, more
and easy food availability in urban habitats with suitable temperature for ants because most of
them are omnivorous and do not depend on single type of food. Due to urbanization only, those
ant's population suffers which requires a specific nesting place or specific type of food material
(Heterick et al.; 2012; Silverman, 2005; Schlick-Steiner et al., 2008).

According to Uno et al. (2010) variation in plants or vegetation type did not correlate
with ant spp richness but many vegetation factors e.g patch size, trees size and number or their
abundance, leaf litter, and presence of hard surfaces such as concrete and buildings etc. can be
correlated with changes in ant species composition. However, the result of this study shows that
ants' species have been higher in the urban area because man made modifications like grounds,
lawns, parks, roads with the vegetation’s at the side, buildings etc. not only suits human but also
other organisms like ants. In human modified environment the climatic conditions like
temperature, soil moisture, availability of food material, suitable nesting place etc. become more
suitable for this tiny organism (ants) (Schlick-Steiner et al., 2008).
REFRENCES

1. Acernese, F., Agathos, M., Aiello, L., Allocca, A., Amato, A., Ansoldi, S., ... & Gennai,
A. Increasing the astrophysical reach of the advanced virgo detector via the application of
squeezed vacuum states of light. Physical review letters, 2019. 123(23), 231108.
2. Angulo, E., Hoffmann, B. D., Ballesteros-Mejia, L., Taheri, A., Balzani, P., Bang, A., ...
& Courchamp, F. Economic costs of invasive alien ants worldwide. Biological
Invasions, 2022. 24(7), 2041-2060.
3. Arakelian, G. R. "[Fauna of the Republic of Armenia. Hymenoptera. Ants
(Formicidae).]." 1994.
4. Arnan, X., Andersen, A. N., Gibb, H., Parr, C. L., Sanders, N. J., Dunn, R. R., ... &
Retana, J. Dominance–diversity relationships in ant communities differ with
invasion. Global Change Biology, 2018. 24(10), 4614-4625.
5. Barjadze, S., Özdemir, I., & Gratiashvili, N. March. Description of oviparous females
and alate males of Macrosiphum dzhibladzeae Barjadze, 2010 (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
from Georgia. In Annales de la Société entomologique de France (NS) (Vol. 54, No. 2,
pp. 176-181). Taylor & Francis, 2018.
6. Beattie, A. J., & Culver, D. C. The guild of myrmecochores in the herbaceous flora of
West Virginia forests. Ecology, 1981. 62(1), 107-115.
7. Bertelsmeier, C., Avril, A., Blight, O., Jourdan, H., & Courchamp, F. Discovery–
dominance trade‐off among widespread invasive ant species. Ecology and
evolution, 2015. 5(13), 2673-2683.
8. Bertelsmeier, C., Ollier, S., Liebhold, A. M., Brockerhoff, E. G., Ward, D., & Keller, L.
Recurrent bridgehead effects accelerate global alien ant spread. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 2018. 115(21), 5486-5491.
9. Bharti, H., Bharti, M., & Pfeiffer, M. Ants as bioindicators of ecosystem health in
Shivalik Mountains of Himalayas: assessment of species diversity and invasive
species. Asian myrmecology, 2016. 8(1), 65-79.
10. Bharti, H., Guénard, B., Bharti, M., & Economo, E. P. An updated checklist of the ants of
India with their specific distributions in Indian states (Hymenoptera,
Formicidae). ZooKeys, 2016. 551, 1-83.
11. Bingham, C. T. "The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Hymenoptera,
Vol. II. Ants and Cuckoo-wasps." The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and
Burma. Hymenoptera, Vol. II. Ants and Cuckoo-wasps, 1903.
12. Bingham, C. T., & Morley, C. 1897. Hymenoptera (Vol. 1). Taylor & Francis.
13. Bodlah, I., Rasheed, M. T., Fareen, A. G., Ajmal, M. S., & Bodlah, M. A. First record of
two new species of genus Tetraponera (Hymenoptera: Pseudomyrmecinae: Formicidae)
from Pakistan. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 2016. 4(4), 1028-1030.
14. Bolton, B. A taxonomic and zoogeographical census of the extant ant taxa (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Journal of Natural History, 1995. 29(4), 1037-1056.
15. Bolton, B. A taxonomic and zoogeographical census of the extant ant taxa (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Journal of Natural History, 1995. 29(4), 1037-1056.
16. Bolton, Barry. Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Harvard University
Press, 1994.
17. Bond, W. J. Do mutualisms matter? Assessing the impact of pollinator and disperser
disruption on plant extinction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 1994. 344(1307), 83-90.
18. Borowiec, L. E. C. H., & SALATA, S. New records of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)
from Sterea Ellas, Greece. Acta entomologica silesiana, 2017. 25, 1-3.
19. Borowiec, L., Lapeva-Gjonova, A., & Salata, S. Three species of Aphaenogaster Mayr,
1853 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) new to Bulgarian fauna. Acta Zoologica
Bulgarica, 2019. 71(4), 613-616.
20. BOROWIEC, M. L., Borowiec, L. E. C. H., CSŐSZ, S., & RADCHENKO, A. Ants
collected during 2006 Polish expedition to Kyrgyzstan (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Genus, 2009. 20(2), 367-379.
21. Brian, Michael Vaughan, ed. Production ecology of ants and termites. Vol. 13.
Cambridge University Press, 1978.
22. Cammeraat, E. L. H., & Risch, A. C. The impact of ants on mineral soil properties and
processes at different spatial scales. Journal of Applied Entomology, 2008. 132(4), 285-
294.
23. Cammeraat, L. H., Willott, S. J., Compton, S. G., & Incoll, L. D. The effects of ants'
nests on the physical, chemical and hydrological properties of a rangeland soil in semi-
arid Spain. Geoderma, 2002. 105(1-2), 1-20.
24. Cheung, A., Hiby, L., & Narendra, A. (2012). Ant navigation: fractional use of the home
vector. PLoS One, 2012. 7(11), e50451.
25. Dash, Shawn T. Species diversity and biogeography of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)
in Louisiana with notes on their ecology. Louisiana State University and Agricultural &
Mechanical College, 2004.
26. Dean, W. R. J., Milton, S. J., & Klotz, S. The role of ant nest-mounds in maintaining
small-scale patchiness in dry grasslands in Central Germany. Biodiversity &
Conservation, 1997. 6, 1293-1307.
27. Delabie, J. H., Agosti, D., & Nascimento, I. D. Litter ant communities of the Brazilian
Atlantic rain forest region. Sampling Ground-dwelling Ants: case studies from the
world’s rain forests. Curtin University of Technology School of Environmental Biology
Bulletin, 2000. 18.
28. Dias, R. K. S. Amazing ants—present status of research on ants of Sri Lanka. Social
Insects and their Economic Importance and Conservation, 2008. 1-9.
29. Dias, R. S. Current taxonomic status of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Sri
Lanka. The fauna of Sri Lanka-Status of Taxonomy, Research and Conservation,
Karunaratne & Sons Ltd, 2006. 43-52.
30. Eguchi, Katsuyuki. A revision of Northern Vietnamese species of the ant genus Pheidole
(Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae). Magnolia Press, 2008.
31. Esperson, J. R. Do Ants Use Ultrasound for Personal Communication (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae)?. Australian Journal of Entomology, 1994. 33(3), 213-215.
32. Farji‐Brener, A. G., & Werenkraut, V. The effects of ant nests on soil fertility and plant
performance: a meta‐analysis. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2017. 86(4), 866-877.
33. Frouz, J., & Jilková, V. The effect of ants on soil properties and processes (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Myrmecological News, 2008. 11(11), 191-199.
34. Frouz, J., Holec, M., & Kalčík, J. The effect of Lasius niger (Hymenoptera, Formicidae)
ant nest on selected soil chemical properties. Pedobiologia, 2003. 47(3), 205-212.
35. Gadagkar, R., Nair, P., Chandrashekara, K., & Bhat, D. M. Ant species richness and
diversity in some selected localities of Western Ghats. Hexapoda, 1993. 5(2), 79-94.
36. Galindo, V. D. C. (2005). Conditionality in obligate ant-plant mutualisms from a
neotropical dry forest. 2005. University of Arkansas.
37. Ghahari, H., & Collingwood, C. A study on the ants (Hymenoptera: Vespoidea:
Formicidae) from western Iran. Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica
Hungarica, 2013. 48(1), 155-164.
38. Ghosh, S. N., Sheela, S., & Kundu, B. G. Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Rabindra
Sarovar, Kolkata. Rec. zool. Surv. India, Occasional Paper, 2005. (234), 1-40.
39. Gorb, E., & Gorb, S. Seed dispersal by ants in a deciduous forest ecosystem:
mechanisms, strategies, adaptations. 2003. Springer Science & Business Media.
40. Gupta, V. K., Gupta, B., Rastogi, A., Agarwal, S., & Nayak, A. Pesticides removal from
waste water by activated carbon prepared from waste rubber tire. Water research,
2011. 45(13), 4047-4055.
41. Hanzawa, F. M., Beattie, A. J., & Culver, D. C. Directed dispersal: demographic analysis
of an ant-seed mutualism. The American Naturalist, 1988 131(1), 1-13.
42. Hernández-Ruiz, P., Castaño-Meneses, G., & Cano-Santana, Z. Composition and
functional groups of epiedaphic ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in irrigated
agroecosystem and in nonagricultural areas. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira, 2009. 44,
904-910.
43. Heterick, B. E. Revision of the Australian ants of the genus Monomorium
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Invertebrate Systematics, 2001. 15(3), 353-459.
44. Hölldobler, Bert, and Edward O. Wilson. The ants. Harvard University Press, 1990.
45. Hölldobler, Bert, and Edward O. Wilson. The ants. Harvard University Press, 1990.
46. Hu, Y. I., Holway, D. A., Łukasik, P., Chau, L., Kay, A. D., LeBrun, E. G., ... & Russell,
J. A. By their own devices: invasive Argentine ants have shifted diet without clear aid
from symbiotic microbes. Molecular ecology, 2017. 26(6), 1608-1630.
47. Karaman, C., Aktac, N., & Kiran, K. (2011). Ants of the genus Camponotus Mayr,
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Kaz Mountains, Turkey, with descriptions of sexuals
of Camponotus candiotes Emery, 1894 and Camponotus ionius Emery, Turkish Journal
of Zoology, 1861. 35(2), 183-197.
48. Khalili-Moghadam, A., Borowiec, L., & Nemati, A. New records of ants (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae) from the Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province of Iran with taxonomic
comments. Polish Journal of Entomology, 2019. 88(2), 163-182.
49. Kiran, K., & Karaman, C. First annotated checklist of the ant fauna of Turkey
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa, 2012. 3548(1), 1-38.
50. Kiran, K., & Karaman, C. First annotated checklist of the ant fauna of Turkey
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa, 2012. 3548(1), 1-38.
51. Lapeva-Gjonova, A., & Ilieff, O. Ant-associated rove beetles (Coleoptera:
Staphylinidae) in Bulgaria. Acta entomologica slovenica, 2012. 20(1), 73-84.
52. Lawes, M. J., Moore, A. M., Andersen, A. N., Preece, N. D., & Franklin, D. C. Ants as
ecological indicators of rainforest restoration: Community convergence and the
development of an Ant Forest Indicator Index in the Australian wet tropics. Ecology and
Evolution, 2017. 7(20), 8442-8455.
53. Malsch, A. Investigation of the diversity of leaf-litter inhabiting ants in Pasoh,
Malaysia. Sampling ground-dwelling ants: case studies from the worlds’ rain forests.
Á/Curtin Univ., Australia, School of Environmental Biology, Bull, (18), 31Á.
54. Markó, B., Sipos, B., Csősz, S., Kiss, K., Boros, I., & Gallé, L. A comprehensive list of
the ants of Romania (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecologische Nachrichten, 2006.
9, 65-76.
55. McGlynn, T. P. The worldwide transfer of ants: geographical distribution and ecological
invasions. Journal of biogeography, 1999. 26(3), 535-548.
56. Mikheyev, A. S., & Tschinkel, W. R. Nest architecture of the ant Formica pallidefulva:
structure, costs and rules of excavation. Insectes Sociaux, 2004. 51, 30-36.
57. Mohamed, S., Zalat, S., Fadl, H., Gadalla, S., & Sharaf, M. Taxonomy of ant species
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) collected by pitfall traps from Sinai and the delta region,
Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Natural History, 2001. 3(1).
58. Mohamed, S., Zalat, S., Fadl, H., Gadalla, S., & Sharaf, M. Taxonomy of ant species
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) collected by pitfall traps from Sinai and the delta region,
Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Natural History, 2001. 3(1).
59. Morisita, M., M. Kubota, K. Onoyama, K. Ogata, M. Terayama, M. Kondoh, and H. T.
Imai. "A guide for the identification of Japanese ants. I." Ponerinae, Cerapachyinae,
Pseudomyrmecinae, Dorylinae, and Leptanillinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).
Myrmecological Society of Japan, Tokyo (1989).
60. Muhammad, A. A., Abdullah, N. A., Ya, Z., & Mansor, M. S. Diversity and
Composition of Tropical Metropolitan ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): 2022. An
Indicator to Urban Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health.
61. Murdock, T. C., & Tschinkel, W. R. (2015). The life history and seasonal cycle of the
ant, Pheidole morrisi Forel, as revealed by wax casting. Insectes sociaux, 2015. 62, 265-
280.
62. Paknia, O., Radchenko, A., & Pfeiffer, M. New records of ants (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae) from Iran. Di it’d i iti Diversity and species composition of ants in arid and
semi-arid regions of Iran, 2010. 114.
63. Perrichot, V., Nel, A., Néraudeau, D., Lacau, S., & Guyot, T. New fossil ants in French
cretaceous amber (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Naturwissenschaften, 2008. 95, 91-97.
64. Radchenko, Alexander, and Dmitry Dubovikoff. "First record of the ant genus
Strongylognathus Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Afghanistan, with description
of a new species." In Annales Zoologici, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 807-810. Museum and
Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, 2011.
65. Roura-Pascual, N., Suarez, A. V., Gómez, C., Pons, P., Touyama, Y., Wild, A. L., &
Peterson, A. T. Geographical potential of Argentine ants (Linepithema humile Mayr) in
the face of global climate change. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B:
Biological Sciences, 2004. 271(1557), 2527-2535.
66. Salata, S. E. B. A. S. T. I. A. N., & Borowiec, L. E. C. H. (2018). Taxonomic and
faunistic notes on Greek ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Annals of the Upper Silesian
Museum in Bytom Entomology, 2018. 27, 1-51.
67. Salata, S., Karaman, C., Kiran, K., & Borowiec, L. June). Review of the Aphaenogaster
splendida species-group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). In Annales Zoologici (Vol. 71, No.
2, pp. 297-343). 2021. Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences.
68. Snelling, R. R., & Hunt, J. H. The ants of Chile (Hymenoptera: formicidae). Revista
chilena de Entomología, 1975. 9, 63-129.
69. Tiwari, R. N. Taxonomic studies on ants of Southern India:(Insecta: Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Vol. 14. Zoological Survey of India, 1999.
70. Umair, M. "Taxonomic study of ants in Islamabad and Rawalpindi." PhD diss., M. Sc.
thesis, Deptt. of entomol., PMAS, Arid Agric. Univ. Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 2010.
71. Umair, M., Zia, A., Naeem, M., & Chaudhry, M. T. Species composition of ants
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Potohar plateau of Punjab province, Pakistan. Pakistan
Journal of Zoology, 2012. 44(3), 699-705.
72. Varghese, T. (2003). Ants of the Indian Institute of science campus (No. 98). Technical
report.
73. Vasconcelos, H. L., & Delabie, J. H. Ground ant communities from central Amazonia
forest fragments. Sampling Ground-Dwelling Ants: Case Studies from the World’s Rain
Forests, 2000. 18, 59-70.
74. Ward, P. S. Phylogeny, classification, and species-level taxonomy of ants (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Zootaxa, 2007. 1668(1), 549-563.
75. Watanasit, S., Pholphuntin, C., & Permkam, S. Diversity of ants (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae) from Ton Nga Chang Wildlife Sanctuary, Songkhla, Thailand. ScienceAsia,
2000. 26, 187-194.
76. Westoby, M., French, K., Hughes, L., Rice, B., & Rodgerson, L. Why do more plant
species use ants for dispersal on infertile compared with fertile soils?. Australian Journal
of Ecology, 1991. 16(4), 445-455.
77. Wetterer, J. K. Worldwide spread of the African big-headed ant, Pheidole megacephala
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecological News, 17(August), 2012. 51-62.
78. Wheeler, W. M. Ants: their structure, development and behavior (No. 9). 1910.
Columbia University Press.
79. Wojcik, D. P. Behavioral interactions of fire ants and their parasites, predators and
inquilines. In Applied Myrmecology, 2019. (pp. 329-344). CRC Press.
80. Yoshimura, M., & Fisher, B. L. A revision of male ants of the Malagasy region
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Key to subfamilies and treatment of the genera of
Ponerinae. Zootaxa, 2007. 1654(1), 21-40.