Workers around 5-15mm.
Found mainly in Europe. Workers are around 8-10mm in size. Mainly found in Woodland Areas.
Extant: 6 valid subspecies
Formica rufa Linnaeus, 1761 PDF: 426 (q.m.) SWEDEN. Palearctic. AntCat AntWiki HOLTaxonomic history
[Note: not Linnaeus, 1758 PDF: 580 (w.); discussion in Yarrow, 1954c: 313; Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 5.].Combination in Formicina: Shuckard, 1840e PDF: 172.Latreille, 1798 PDF: 37 (w.q.m.); Latreille, 1802a PDF: 143 (w.q.m.); Wheeler & Wheeler, 1953c PDF: 166 (l.); Richter et al., 2020 10.26049/ASP78-1-2020-06 PDF: 133 (w.).Status as species: Scopoli, 1763 PDF: 313; Linnaeus, 1767 PDF: 962; Fabricius, 1775 PDF: 391; Fabricius, 1782: 489; Retzius, 1783 PDF: 74; Geoffroy, in Fourcroy, 1785: 452; Fabricius, 1787 PDF: 308; Razoumowsky, 1789: 223; Gmelin, 1790 PDF: 2798; Christ, 1791 PDF: 510; Olivier, 1792: 492; Fabricius, 1793 PDF: 351; Latreille, 1798 PDF: 37; Latreille, 1802a PDF: 143; Walckenaer, 1802: 160; Fabricius, 1804 PDF: 398; Jurine, 1807 PDF: 272; Gravenhorst, 1807 PDF: 286; Latreille, 1809 PDF: 126; Latreille, 1817a: 98; Lamarck, 1817 PDF: 95; Stephens, 1829b: 357; Brullé, 1833 PDF: 327; Losana, 1834 PDF: 318; Lepeletier de Saint-Fargeau, 1835 PDF: 201; Zetterstedt, 1838: 448; Schilling, 1839 PDF: 54; Guérin-Méneville, 1844a PDF: 421; Nylander, 1846a PDF: 902; Nylander, 1846b PDF: 1047; Foerster, 1850a: 13; Smith, 1851 PDF: 1; Schenck, 1852 PDF: 23; Mayr, 1855 PDF: 328 (redescription); Smith, 1855a PDF: 100; Nylander, 1856b PDF: 60; Gredler, 1858 PDF: 6; Smith, 1858a PDF: 2, 51; Duméril, 1860: 931; Mayr, 1861 PDF: 46 (in key); Meinert, 1861: 311; Mayr, 1863a PDF: 420; Roger, 1863b PDF: 12; Cresson, 1865b PDF: 426; Smith, 1871c: 1; Dours, 1873 PDF: 165; Forel, 1874 PDF: 52 (in key); André, 1874b: 184 (in key); Emery, 1878a PDF: ix (in list); Emery, 1878: 48; Emery & Forel, 1879 PDF: 450; Saunders, 1880 PDF: 204; Provancher, 1881b PDF: 357; André, 1882c PDF: 184 (in key); Provancher, 1883 PDF: 600; White, 1884 PDF: 249; Mayr, 1886d PDF: 426; Provancher, 1887: 232 (in key); Cresson, 1887 PDF: 256; Nasonov, 1889: 17; Scudder, 1891 PDF: 708; Lameere, 1892: 62; Forel, 1892j PDF: 307; Dalla Torre, 1893 PDF: 206; Ruzsky, 1896 PDF: 68; Saunders, 1896 PDF: 20; Ruzsky, 1902d PDF: 10; Ruzsky, 1903c PDF: 205; Ruzsky, 1904a PDF: 291; Ruzsky, 1905b: 320; Wasmann, 1906 PDF: 112 (in key); Emery, 1909b PDF: 184; Forel, 1909c PDF: 105; Wheeler, 1909g PDF: 172; Bondroit, 1910 PDF: 483; Wasmann, 1910 PDF: 517; Karavaiev, 1912b PDF: 588; Wheeler, 1913i PDF: 425 (redescription); Ruzsky, 1914b PDF: 102; Stitz, 1914 PDF: 91; Ruzsky, 1915b: 6; Donisthorpe, 1915f: 245; Forel, 1915d: 56 (in key); Morice & Durrant, 1915 PDF: 430; Emery, 1916a PDF: 255; Bondroit, 1917a PDF: 174; Wheeler, 1917a PDF: 535; Escherich, 1917: 335 (in key); Nadig, 1918 PDF: 341; Bondroit, 1918 PDF: 55; Santschi, 1919e PDF: 246; Bondroit, 1920a PDF: 145; Ruzsky, 1920 PDF: 78; Soudek, 1922b PDF: 79; Vashkevich, 1924b PDF: 147; Ruzsky, 1925a PDF: 287; Ruzsky, 1925b PDF: 43; Emery, 1925d PDF: 253; Lomnicki, 1925a PDF: 16 (in key); Kiseleva, 1925 PDF: 74; Ruzsky, 1926 PDF: 109; Kuznetsov-Ugamsky, 1926c PDF: 96; Krausse, 1926a: 107; Stärcke, 1926a PDF: 149 (in key); Donisthorpe, 1927c: 286; Karavaiev, 1927d: 282 (in key); Karavaiev, 1927e PDF: 345; Lomnicki, 1928 PDF: 8; Karavaiev, 1929d PDF: 214; Karavaiev, 1930b PDF: 148; Karavaiev, 1931b PDF: 32; Karavaiev, 1931c PDF: 113; Karavaiev, 1931e PDF: 216; Gösswald, 1932 PDF: 28; Santschi, 1932e PDF: 72; Teranishi, 1932 PDF: 53; Arnol'di, 1933a: 604 (in key); Teranishi, 1934b PDF: 38; Grandi, 1935 PDF: 104; Karavaiev, 1936: 239 (redescription); Ruzsky, 1936 PDF: 91; Kôno & Sugihara, 1939 PDF: 8; Gösswald, 1941 PDF: 69 (redescription); Novák & Sadil, 1941 PDF: 105 (in key); Holgersen, 1942b PDF: 12; Stärcke, 1942a PDF: 22; Holgersen, 1943c PDF: 176 (in key); Holgersen, 1944a PDF: 187; Ruzsky, 1946 PDF: 69; Stärcke, 1947 PDF: 144; Röszler, 1950 PDF: 212; Donisthorpe, 1950e PDF: 1064; Betrem, 1953 PDF: 324 (in key); Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 5; Ceballos, 1956: 319; Betrem, 1960b: 76 (in key); Dlussky, 1967a PDF: 93; Bernard, 1967a PDF: 308 (redescription); Kutter, 1968b: 61; Collingwood & Yarrow, 1969 PDF: 91; Baroni Urbani, 1971c PDF: 222; Collingwood, 1971 PDF: 168; Dlussky & Pisarski, 1971 PDF: 184 (redescription); Banert & Pisarski, 1972 PDF: 355; Bolton & Collingwood, 1975: 6 (in key); Pisarski, 1975: 48; Van Boven, 1977 PDF: 170; Kutter, 1977c: 273; Collingwood, 1978 PDF: 94 (in key); Arnol'di & Dlussky, 1978: 554 (in key); Collingwood, 1979 PDF: 141; Douwes, 1979 PDF: 187; Douwes, 1981b PDF: 217; Pavan, 1981: 1; Agosti & Collingwood, 1987a PDF: 59; Agosti & Collingwood, 1987b PDF: 287 (in key); Nilsson & Douwes, 1987: 86; Gösswald, 1989: 16; Atanassov & Dlussky, 1992: 277; Arakelian, 1994 PDF: 98; Radchenko, 1994b: 114 (in key); Douwes, 1995: 97; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Poldi et al., 1995: 8; Tang et al., 1995: 106; Czechowski & Douwes, 1996: 125; Espadaler, 1997g PDF: 28; Gallé et al., 1998: 218; Tinaut & Martínez-Ibañez, 1998d PDF: 37 (in key); Czechowski et al., 2002 PDF: 71; Karaman & Karaman, 2003 PDF: 51; Csosz & Markó, 2005 PDF: 231; Karaman & Karaman, 2005 PDF: 61; Bračko, 2006 PDF: 147; Markó et al., 2006 PDF: 68; Petrov, 2006 PDF: 113 (in key); Bračko, 2007 PDF: 20; Seifert, 2007: 309; Werner & Wiezik, 2007 PDF: 144; Zryanin & Zryanina, 2007 PDF: 233; Gratiashvili & Barjadze, 2008 PDF: 134; Casevitz-Weulersse & Galkowski, 2009 PDF: 482; Lapeva-Gjonova et al., 2010 PDF: 53; Boer, 2010: 27; Csosz et al., 2011 PDF: 59; Karaman, 2011a PDF: 83; Legakis, 2011 PDF: 36; Borowiec & Salata, 2012 PDF: 496; Czechowski et al., 2012: 190; Guénard & Dunn, 2012 PDF: 32; Kiran & Karaman, 2012 PDF: 11; Borowiec, 2014 PDF: 78 (see note in bibliography); Bračko et al., 2014 PDF: 19; Lebas et al., 2016: 176; Radchenko, 2016: 284; Salata & Borowiec, 2018c 10.5281/zenodo.2199191 PDF: 45; Seifert, 2018: 318.Senior synonym of Formica dorsata: Latreille, 1802a PDF: 146; Gravenhorst, 1807 PDF: 286; Stephens, 1829b: 357; Nylander, 1846a PDF: 902; Foerster, 1850a: 13; Smith, 1851 PDF: 1; Smith, 1855a PDF: 100; Smith, 1858a PDF: 3; Mayr, 1863a PDF: 420; Roger, 1863b PDF: 12; Smith, 1871c: 1; Forel, 1874 PDF: 98 (in list); Emery & Forel, 1879 PDF: 450; Dalla Torre, 1893 PDF: 207; Wheeler, 1913i PDF: 425; Forel, 1915d: 57 (in key); Donisthorpe, 1915f: 245; Emery, 1925d PDF: 253; Donisthorpe, 1927c: 286; Karavaiev, 1936: 240; Gösswald, 1941 PDF: 73; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Senior synonym of Formica ferruginea: Emery, 1892c PDF: 161; Dalla Torre, 1893 PDF: 207; Emery, 1925d PDF: 253; Karavaiev, 1936: 240; Gösswald, 1941 PDF: 73; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Senior synonym of Formica gaullei: Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 4; Bernard, 1967a PDF: 308; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Casevitz-Weulersse & Galkowski, 2009 PDF: 482; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Senior synonym Formica rufa meridionalis: Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 4; Dlussky, 1967a PDF: 93; Dlussky & Pisarski, 1971 PDF: 184; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Senior synonym of Formica rufa obscurata: Casevitz-Weulersse & Galkowski, 2009 PDF: 482.Senior synonym of Formica piniphila: Mayr, 1855 PDF: 328; Nylander, 1856b PDF: 60; Smith, 1858a PDF: 3; Roger, 1863b PDF: 12; Mayr, 1863a PDF: 420; Smith, 1871c: 1; Dours, 1873 PDF: 165; André, 1874c: 202 (in list); Forel, 1874 PDF: 98 (in list); Emery & Forel, 1879 PDF: 450; Dalla Torre, 1893 PDF: 208; Wheeler, 1913i PDF: 425; Donisthorpe, 1915f: 245; Donisthorpe, 1927c: 286; Karavaiev, 1936: 240; Gösswald, 1941 PDF: 73; Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 4; Betrem, 1960a PDF: 131 (in text); Betrem, 1960b: 76 (in key); Dlussky, 1967a PDF: 93; Bernard, 1967a PDF: 308; Baroni Urbani, 1971c PDF: 222; Dlussky & Pisarski, 1971 PDF: 184; Pisarski, 1975: 48; Van Boven, 1977 PDF: 170; Kutter, 1977c: 273; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Czechowski et al., 2002 PDF: 71; Casevitz-Weulersse & Galkowski, 2009 PDF: 482; Czechowski et al., 2012: 190; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Senior synonym of Formica rufa rufopratensis: Karavaiev, 1936: 240; Bernard, 1967a PDF: 308; Dlussky, 1967a PDF: 93; Baroni Urbani, 1971c PDF: 222; Dlussky & Pisarski, 1971 PDF: 184; Pisarski, 1975: 48; Bolton, 1995b: 202; Czechowski et al., 2002 PDF: 71; Czechowski et al., 2012: 190; Radchenko, 2016: 284.Material of the nomen nudum Formica apicalis: referred here by Roger, 1862c PDF: 287; Roger, 1863b PDF: 12; Donisthorpe, 1915f: 245; Bolton, 1995b: 202.Material of the unavailable names Formica rufa polyctena bondroiti, Formica rufa emeryi referred here by Yarrow, 1955a PDF: 4.Material of the unavailable name Formica rufa pratensis major referred here by Dlussky, 1967a PDF: 93.[Note: Zetterstedt, 1838: 448, 450, nominates Formica rufa twice. The first mention (p. 448) is to the genuine Formica rufa Linnaeus, 1761, as indicated by his sub-entry “Fabr. [1804] Piez. 398.11”. The second mention of Formica rufa is sub-entered “Fabr. [1804] Piez. 400.17,” but in Fabricius, 1804 PDF, this entry refers to Formica rubra, now Myrmica rubra.].Formica rufa, Linn . Faun. Suec. 1721. Syst. Nat. i. 963, 4. Ny-land, Adno. Mon. Form. Boreal, 902, 5. Foerster, Hym. Stud. Form. 13, 3.
Formica polyctena, Foerster , Hym. Stud. Form. 15, 4, Var.?
Formica congerens, Foerster , Hym. Stud. Form. 17, 5, [[ male ]], [[ queen ]].
The Wood Ant B. M.
Faun. Suec. 1721. Scop. Ins. Carn. 836. Be Geer, Ins. 2, 1053, i. t 41, f. 1, 2. Fab. Syst. Ent. 391, 4. Schrank, Ins. Aust. 834. Eourc. Ent. Paris, ii. 452,4. Rossi, Faun. Etrus. ii. 113,936. Christ. 510, t 60, f. 7,8. Don. Brit. Ins. 14, 76, t 496. Lat. Fourm. 143, t. 5, f. 28. Jurine, Hym. 272. St. Farg. Hist. Nat. Ins. i. 201, 3. Curtis, Brit. Ent. 16, t 752 Zett. Ins. Lapp. 448, 3.
Faun. Germ. 54,1. [[ queen ]].
Formica Herculanea, Sam.
Comp. 69, t. 8, f. 10.
Formica maxima , Ray, Hist Ins.
The Hill-Ant, Gould's Ants, ii. 1.
La Fourmi brune, a corcelet fauve, Geoff. Ins. ii. 428, 4.
Hub. Fourm. 320.
Hab. - Britain.
Linn. Fn. Snec. 1721. [[male]] [[queen]]. Latr. Fourm. 143. pl. V. lig. 28. [[ worker ]] [[queen]] [[male]]. Fabr. Piez. 398, 11. Lep. de St. Farg. Hym. 201. 3. F. obsoleta Zett. Jns. Lapp. 449, 5. g [[queen]]. F. dorsata Panz. Fn. fasc. 54. f. i, [[queen]]. F. lugubris Zett. 1. c. 449, 6. [[male]]. Nyl. Adn. p. 902, 5. [[male]] [[queen]] [[ worker ]].
Operaria t Testaceo vel rufo-ferruginea, nuda, levissime cinereo-micans, fronte cum occipite et abdomine castaneo-fuscis; elypei pronotique mediis, palpis, antennis et pedibus nonnibil fuscescentibus; abdominis basi et ano rufo-maculatis; squama sursum rotundatim latiori vel subtriangulariter rotundata. - (Nyl.) Long. 2 1/2 lin.
Femina: Ferrugineo-rufa, nuda; fronte cum oeeipite, thorace supra (praeter metanotum) et abdomine polito (praeter basin, ventrem et anum) castaneo-nigris; clypei medio, palpis, autennarum flagellis, mesosterno saltcm ad partem tibiis tarsisque fuscescentibus; squama lata suhtriangulariter fere rotundata, margine supero inaequali; alis albescenti-hyalinis, a basi ad medium parum infuscatis, nervis fusco-cinereis, stigmate fusco. Long. 3 3/4-4 lin.
Maat Fusco-niger, parum cinereo-nitens, sparse pubescens, pedibus et genitalibus plus minus rufescentibus; oculis parce tenuiter pilosulis; squama subquadrata bumili crassa, supra vix vel parum coneaviuscula; valvula ventrali pilosula saepe rufescente. - (Xyl.) Long. 3 1/2 -3 3/4 Iin.
Bei dem Arbeiter hat der Kopf vorn eine zarte, eingedrückteLängslinie , die Taster sind braun. Die Mandibeln ungefähr 8- zähnig , der Clypeus etwas gewölbt , in der Mitte schwach gekielt, der Mundrand ganz; die Stirnlappen ohne gebogene Ränder . Die Augen wenig vorstehend, klein, die Nebenaugen ebenso. Der Vorder- und Mittelbrustrückenhochgewölbt , der Hinterbrustrücken niedriger, der erstere bisweilen mit bräunlicher Makel. An dem Hinterbrustruecken ist der Basaltheil doppelt kürzer als der abschüssige Theil. Vorder- und Mittelbrust haben eine zarte Mittelrinne, letztre überdies noch auf beiden Seiten eine flache, verlängerte Grube. Die Schuppe oben breit, der Rand etwas eingebogen. Der Hinterleib schwach grauschimmernd, fast ganz nackt, d. h. ohne längere abstehende Borstenhaare ( bloß in der Mitte der Segmente stehen sehr kleine, aber sehr zerstreut), auf der Bauchseite und an der Spitze des Hinterleibs treten sie aber deutlicher und gedrängter hervor. Der Hinterrand aller Segmente blaßhäutig .
Bei dem Weibchen ist der Kopf fast wie bei dem Arbeiter gebildet, die Taster schmutzig gelbbräun- lich, die Fühlergeißel braun, der Schaft roth, bisweilen bräunlich . Kopf und Mittelleib äußerst fein lederartig-runzlig, dicht punktirt, und mit sehr kurzer, feiner, anliegender Behaarung, daher matt, nicht glänzend (mit Ausnahme des Schildchens), auch ohne Spur von BorstenhaarenDer Clypeus sehr fein längsrunzlig , und mäßig dicht punktirt, mit völlig glatten Seitengruben, in der Mitte der Länge nach bräunlich und etwas glänzend . Das Stirnfeld glatt, glän- zend, die eingedrückte Gesichtslinie beinahe etwas unterbrochen, gleich über der Mitte mit grubenartig erweitertem Eindruck, aber nicht ganz deutlich bis zu dem mittlem Nebenauge hinaufreichend. Die Augen kahl. Die Stirnlamellen wie bei dem Arbeiter. Der Mittelbrustrücken mit 3 vertieften Linien. Die Flügel durchsichtig, von der Basis bis über die Mitte hinaus bräun- lich, mit blaßgelblichen oder blaßbräunlichgelben Adern; die erste Diskoidalzelle nach oben Cd. h. gegen den Vorderrand hin) schmal, kaum halb so breit wie an der Basis. Die Beine roth, Tibien und Tarsen ein wenig bräunlich . Die Schuppe nach oben ziemlich breit, von der Seite etwas schief zugerundet und an der Spitze in der Mitte entweder gar nicht oder nur schwach ausgerandet. Die übrigen Segmente fast kugelig, und wie das Schildchen sehr glänzend , was von der feineren Sculptur der viel mehr zerstreuten Punktirung und Behaarung herrührt . Dieser Glanz sticht gegen den mattglänzenden Kopf und Mittelleib sehr ab. Das 2te Segment an der Basis, die Bauchseite mehr oder weniger und die Spitze des Hinterleibs roth, der Hinterrand der Segmente röthlich , und nur wenig häutig durchscheinend. Auf dein Rücken fehlen die Borstenbaare gänzlich , aber auf der Bauchseite und an der Hinterleibsspitze treten solohe kurze und feine Haare deutlich hervor.
Das Männchen hat nach Nylander zweizähnige Mandibeln, großelängliche , vorstehende, spärlich behaarte Augen und ein glattes Stirnfeld. Die Brustseiten, der Hinterbrustrücken , die Schuppe und der Hinterleib, besonders der Bauch mehr oder weniger glänzend . Die Flügel wie bei dem Weibchen. Die Beine entweder rothgelb mit bräunlichenHüften , oder auch mit bräunlichen Schenkeln, oder die Beine sind ganz bräunlich .
Von dieser Art, die wegen Mangel größerer und zusammenhängender Nadelholz Waldungen hier selten vorkommt, besitze ich nur Weibchen. Sie wird in der Nähe der Stadt durch Beraubung der Nester, aus welchen die Puppen hinweggenommen werden um verschiedene Singvögel damit zu füttern , häufig zur Auswanderung getrieben oder gänzlichzerstört . Obgleich diese Weibchen in allen Stücken mit der Nylanderschen Beschreibung übereinstimmen , so weichen sie doch in 2 Stücken ab, nämlich , die Augen sind an meinen Exemplaren nicht behaart, und das Schildchen ist nicht matt, sondern ebenso glänzend wie der Hinterleib, lieber den Glanz des Schildchens spricht sich Nylander nicht aus, weder in der Diagnose noch in der weiteren Beschreibung, woraus doch wohl zu entnehmen, daß es sich von dem Vorder- und Mittelbrustrücken nicht unterscheidet.
Wenn daher beide Punkte bei der rufa Nyl. nicht doch mit unserer Beobachtung übereinstimmen , dann dürfte unsre Art wohl als neu zu betrachten seyn. Ich erhielt meine Exemplare aus einem Neste, welches die bei Nylander angeführten Eigenschaften hatte, nämlichgroßekegelförmige Haufen bildete. Die Schwärmzeit , welche in Finnland zwischen dem 10.-20. Juni fallt, habe ich hier noch nicht beobachtet.
Fn. Suec. 1721 [[ male ]] [[ queen ]]. Latr. Fourm. 143, pl. V, fig. 28. [[ worker ]] [[ queen ]] [[ male ]]. Fabr. Piez. 398, 11. Lepelet. S: t Farg. Hym. 201, 3. Dahlb. mscrpt, et Skand. Ins. 277, 185 commixta cum F. cunicularia ?). F. obsoleta Zett . Ins. Lapp. 449, 5. [[ queen ]] [[ worker ]] (teste Dahlb.) F. dorsata Panz . Fn. fasc. 54, f. 1. [[ queen ]]. F. lugubris Zett . 1. c. 449, 6. [[ male ]].
Operaria: testaceo vel rufo-ferruginea nuda, levissime cinereo micans, fronte cum occipite et abdomine castaneo-fuscis; clypei pronotique mediis, palpis, an tennis et pedibus nonnihil fuscescentibus; abdominis basi et ano ruio-maculalis; squama sursum rolundatim latiori vel subiriangulariter rotundata.
Femina: ferrugiueo-rufa nuda; fronte cum occipite, thorace supra (praeter metanotum) el abdomine polito (praeter basin, ventrem et anum) castaneo-nigris; clypei medio, palpis, antennarum flagellis, mesosterno saltern ad partem et tibiis tarsisque fuscescentibus; squama lata subtriangulariter fere rotundata margine supero inaequali; alis albescenti hyalinis a basi ad medium parum infuscatis, nervis fusco cinereis, stigmate fusco.
Mas: fusco-niger, parum cinereo nitens, sparse pubescens, pedibus et gcnitalibus plus minus rufescenlibus; oculis parce tenuiter pilosulis; squama subquadrata humili crassa, supra vix vel parurn concaviuscula; valvula veutrali pilosula saepe rufescente.
In nostris terris usque in Lapponia vulgaris silvarum pinearura incola. Acervos cumulatos magnos supra nidum congerit. Infestata ferocissime se defendit. Examinat in Fennia praesertim inter d. 10 - 20 m. Junii. Fennis audit haec et affines Kusiainen, Wiholainen, Suecis Stackmyra & cet.
[[ worker ]]. Long, circa 2 1 / 2 lin. coloribus ut in diagnosi. Caput infra linea media longitudinali tenui impressa, fundo nigrescente; palpis fere ut in F, herculeana formatis fuscis, mandibulis subocto-denticulatis, clypeo convexiusculo in medio leviter carinato, atrinque ad basin mandibularum foveola impressa, margine infero integro; lamina frontali marginibus minime reflexis. Antenna long. circ. 1 1 / 4 lin., scil, scapus 2 / 3 lin. et flagellum 3 / 4 lin. Oculi parvi parum prominuli, nigri; ocelli minuti. Pro- et metathorax, pulvinar commune anterius thoracis efficientes, immersione dorsali compressioneque laterali a metathorace, humiliorem thoracis partem efficiente, discreti. Pronotum interdum macula fuscescente. Metathoracis longitudo dorsalis duplo brevior est quam longitudo apicis declivis. Pro- et mesosternum linea mediana tenuiter canaliculata; hoc praeterea fossula plana oblonga utrinque. Squama sursum rotundatim dilatata margine vix vel parum inaequali, Abdomen longitudine thoracis cum petiolo, rotundato-ovatum, leviter cinerascenti-micans, omnino fere nudum (pilis tantum parvis parcissimis in discis segmentorum), ventre anoque pilis conspersis distinctioribus; segmentis apice obsoletissime pallescentibus.
[[ queen ]]. Long. 3 3 / 4 - 4 lin. Caput fere sicut in [[ worker ]] constructum, latitudine thoracis, sed oculis parce pilosulis. Palpi et antennarum flagellum fusca, scapo quoque interdum fuscescente, ut in [[ worker ]]. Thorax subovatus, lineis tribus mesonoti fere ut in herculeana [[ male ]]. Alae ut supra; anticae 4 1 / 4 lin. longae. Pedes coxis, trochanteribus femoribusque rufo-ferrogineis, femoribus interdum et coxis antice fuscescentibus; tibiis tarsisque parum fuscescentibus. Abdomen longitudine thoracis subglobosum supra et infra parum deplanatum, valde politum, punctura tantum microscopica subtilissima; basis abdominis versus petiolum truncata, ventre, apicibus segmentornm et ano rufo-ferrugineis atque ut in [[ worker ]] sparsim parce pilosis.
[[ male ]]. Long. 3 1 / 2 - 3 3 / 4 lin. Caput parvum a latere visum oblongo-ovatum, mandibulis bidenliculatis, oculis magnis oblongis (nec ut in F. herculeana [[ male ]] ovali-rotundatis) prominulis, parce pilosulis, area frontali triangulan nitidiuscula. Pleura, metanotum, squama et abdomen praesertimque venter plus minus nitidis. Alae ut in diagnosi feminae. Pedes aut ferrugineo-testacei coxis plus minus fuscis vel femoribus tantum fuscescentibus vel toti fuscescente. Abdomen longitudine thoracis cum capite. Reliqua ut in diagnosi.
Formica rufa, Linn. Faun. Suec. no. 1721; Syst. Nat. i. 962.3.
Scop. Ins. Cam. 313. 836.
Fabr. Syst. Ent. 391. 4; Ent. Syst. ii. 351. 8; Syst. Piez. 398. 11.
Schrank, Ins. Austr. no. 834.
Rossi, Faun. Etrus. ii. 113. 836.
Don. Brit. Ins. xiv. 76. t. 496 [[queen]].
Oliv. Encycl. Meth. vi. 493. 14.
Latr. Hist. Nat. Fourm. 143. pl. 5. f. 28. A. B. [[male]] [[queen]] [[worker]].
Dumer. Consid. gen. 211. t. 32. f. 2 [[queen]].
Jurine, Hym. 272.
St. Farg. Hym. i. 201. 3.
Curtis, Brit. Ent. xvi. t. 752 [[male]] [[queen]] [[worker]].
Zett. Ins. Lapp. 449. 5.
Brulle, Exped. Sc. de Moree, iii. 327. 727.
Nyl. Form. Fr. et d'Alger. 60. 14; Adno. Mon. Form. Bor. 902. 5.
Foerst, Hym. Stud. Form. 13. 3.
Schenck, Beschr. Nass. Ameis. 25.
Smith, Brit. Form, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. iii. n. s. 100.1.
Mayr. Form. Austr. 56. 9; Ungar. Ameis. 9. 9.
Formica dorsata, Panz. Faun. Germ. 54. 1 [[queen]].
Formica obsoleta, Zett. Ins. Lapp. 449. 5 [[queen]] [[worker]].
Formica lugubris, Zett. idem, 6 [[male]].
Formica polyctena, Foerst . Hym. Stud. Form. 15. 4.
Schenck, Beschr. Nass. Ameis. 28.
Formica truncicola, Foerst . Hym. Stud. Form. 21.
Formica piniphila, Schenck , Beschr. Nass. Ameis. 28.
Hab. Europe.
This species is popularly known as the Wood-ant, from the circumstance of its forming the heaped-up nests of leaves, sticks and similar materials, usually in woods, but colonies are frequently met with in other situations; indeed it sometimes takes possession of the decaying trunk of a tree, and has been observed in a wall built of turf; but woods are its common habitat. The nests of this species are the habitat of several Coleoptera, which probably resort to them as suitable situations in which to undergo their metamorphoses; of such, Cetonia aurata and Clythra quadripunctata are examples: besides these, there are also found in the nests a number of species belonging to the family Staphylinidse, and as these are carried into the nests by the ants themselves, there can he little doubt, as they are not only suffered to live, but are carefully tended to and protected by the ants, that they are in some way conducive to the welfare of the communities, probably emitting, like the Aphidae, secretions which are supplied by the working ants to their young brood. In the nest are also occasionally found colonies of the allied genus Myrmica ; M. nitidula and M. muscorum are sometimes met with, and we have twice found a colony of M. laevinodis living in perfect harmony with the rightful owners in the very heart of the nest.
Formica rufa, Linn. Faun. Suec. no. 1721.
Hab. Europe and North America.
Records
(Map 69): Bulgaria ( Agosti and Collingwood 1987a ); Danubian Plain ( Bobev 1972 , Wesselinoff 1973 , 1979 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 , Vesselinov 1981 ); Eastern Danubian Plain: Razgrad, Ruse, Dobrich ( Ronketi and Penev 1966 ); Predbalkan ( Wesselinoff 1973 ); Central Predbalkan: Dermantsi vill. (Lukovit) ( Atanassov 1934 , 1936 ), Aglen vill. (Lukovit) ( Atanassov 1934 ); Eastern Predbalkan: Targovishte ( Ronketi and Penev 1966 ); Stara Planina Mts ( Bobev 1972 , Wesselinoff 1973 , 1979 , Atanassov 1974 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 , Vesselinov 1981 , Atanassov and Dlusskij 1992 ); Western Stara Planina Mt.: Sokolets peak, Milanovo vill., Zgorigrad vill. ( Atanassov 1934 ); Central Stara Planina Mts: Kostinya river valley, Botev peak (Ray hut) ( Atanassov 1936 ), Boatin reserve (under Tetevenska baba peak), Tsarichina reserve (under Vezhen peak), Dermenka hut (Troyan Balkan) ( Atanassov 1983 ); Eastern Stara Planina Mts ( Bobev 1972 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 , Vesselinov 1981 , Wesselinoff 1979 ): Byala vill. (Sliven) ( Atanassov 1936 ); Viskyar Mt. ( Wesselinoff 1973 ); Verila Mt. ( Wesselinoff 1973 ); Zemen Gorge: Zemen marsh ( Atanassov 1936 ); Sofia Basin: Sofia ( Lapeva-Gjonova and Atanasova 2004 , Antonova and Penev 2006 ), near Vladaya village ( Antonova and Penev 2008 ); Lyulin Mt. ( Atanassov 1934 , Wesselinoff 1973 ); Vitosha Mt. ( Atanassov 1934 , 1936 , 1952 , 1974 , 1979 , Wesselinoff 1967 , 1973 ): Knyazhevo ( Atanassov 1934 ), Dragalevtsi ( Atanassov 1936 ); Plana Mt.: Plana vill., Tsiganka peak (Pasarel vill.), Alino vill. ( Wesselinoff 1967 , 1973 , Vagalinski and Lapeva-Gjonova in press ); Sredna Gora Mts ( Bobev 1972 , Wesselinoff 1973 , 1979 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 , Vesselinov 1981 ); Ihtimanska Sredna Gora Mt.: Benkovski peak ( Atanassov 1934 ); Lozenska Planina Mt. ( Wesselinoff 1967 , Vassilev and Evtimov 1973 , Lapeva-Gjonova 2004b ); Sakar-Tundzha district: along Tundzha river ( Wesselinoff 1973 ); Strandzha Mt. ( Bobev 1972 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 , Wesselinoff 1979 , Vesselinov 1981 ); Osogovo-Belasitsa group ( Wesselinoff 1973 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 ); Belasitsa Mt. ( Atanassov 1964 , 1974 , Wesselinoff 1974 , Lapeva-Gjonova 2004b ); Krupnik-Sandanski-Petrich Valley: Luda Mara river valley ( Atanassov 1964 ), Sandanski ( Gateva 1975 ); Rila-Pirin group ( Bobev 1972 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 ); Rila Mt. ( Wesselinoff 1973 , 1979 , Atanassov 1974 , Vesselinov 1981 , Atanassov and Dlusskij 1992 ): Rilska river valley ( Forel 1892 ), Borovets ( Atanassov 1934 ), Parangalitsa reserve ( Wesselinoff 1968 ), Govedartsi vill., Borovets, Raduil, Kostenets ( Otto et al. 1962 ), Ibar reserve ( Atanassov 1983 ), Panichishte ( Lapeva-Gjonova 2004b ); Pirin Mt. ( Vesselinov 1981 , Wesselinoff 1973 , 1979 ):Razlog, Bansko, Dobrinishte, Gotse Delchev ( Otto et al. 1962 ); Slavianka Mt. ( Atanassov 1974 ); Rhodopi Mts ( Wesselinoff 1973 , Gateva 1978 , Atanassov 1983 , Atanassov and Dlusskij 1992 ); Western Rhodopi Mts ( Bobev 1972 , 1973 , Atanassov 1974 ): Selishte, Vishteritsa, Eleshnitsa ( Otto et al. 1962 ), Yundola ( Otto et al. 1962 , Bechev and Stoyanova 2004 ), Chepelare, Golyam Beglik dam, Smolyan ( Gateva 1975 ), Zdravets hut, Byala cherkva resort, Ravnishta hut, Skalni mostove, Varhovrah hut ( Bechev and Stoyanova 2004 ), Rakitovo, Batak, Peshtera ( Lapeva-Gjonova in press (a) ); Eastern Rhodopi Mts ( Bobev 1972 , Vatov and Bobev 1976 ); Northern Black Sea coast: Varna, Balchik ( Ronketi and Penev 1966 ).
Conservation Status:
Lower Risk/near threatened (IUCN); Protected ( Bulgarian Biodiversity Act (2002) , Annex 2 and 3).
Formica rufa, also known as the red wood ant, southern wood ant, or horse ant, is a boreal member of the Formica rufa group of ants, and is the type species for that group, being described already by Linneaus.[2] It is native to Eurasia, with a recorded distribution stretching from the middle of Scandinavia to the northern Iberia and Anatolia, and from Great Britain to Lake Baikal,[3][2] with unconfirmed reportings of it also to the Russian Far East.[3] There are claims that it can be found in North America,[4] but this is not confirmed in specialised literature,[3] and no recent publication where North American wood ants are listed mentions it as present,[5][3] while records from North America are all listed as dubious or unconfirmed in a record compilation.[6] Workers head and thorax are colored red and the abdomen brownish-black, usually with a dorsal dark patches on the head and promensonotum,[7] although some individuals may be more uniform reddish and even have some red on the part of the gastern facing the body.[2] In order to separate them from closely related species, specimens needs to be inspected under magnification, where difference in hairyness are among the telling characteristics, with Formica rufa being more hairy than per example Formica polyctena but less hairy than Formica lugubris.[2] Workers are polymorphic, measuring 4.5–9 mm in length.[7] They have large mandibles, and like many other ant species, they are able to spray formic acid from their abdomens as a defence.[3] Formic acid was first extracted in 1671 by the English naturalist John Ray by distilling a large number of crushed ants of this species.[8] These ants primarily eat honeydew from aphids. Some groups form large networks of connected nests with multiple queen colonies, while others have single-queen colonies.
Nests of these ants are large, conspicuous, dome-shaped mounds of grass, twigs, or conifer needles,[4] often built against a rotting stump, usually situated in woodland clearings where the sun's rays can reach them. Large colonies may have 100,000 to 400,000 workers and 100 queens.[4] F. rufa is highly polygynous and often readopts postnuptial queens from its own mother colony, leading to old, multigallery nests that may contain well over 100 egg-producing females. These colonies often may measure several metres in height and diameter. F. rufa is aggressively territorial, and often attacks and removes other ant species from the area. Nuptial flights take place during the springtime and are often marked by savage battles between neighbouring colonies as territorial boundaries are re-established.[9] New nests are established by budding from existing nests in the spring,[4] or by the mechanism of temporary social parasitism, the hosts being species of the F. fusca group, notably F. fusca and F. lemani, although incipient F. rufa colonies have also been recorded from nests of F. glebaria, F. cunnicularia, and similar species including the genus Lasius. An F. rufa queen ousts the nest's existing queen, lays eggs, and the existing workers care for her offspring until the nest is taken over.
These ants' primary diet is aphid honeydew, but they also prey on invertebrates such as insects and arachnids;[4] they are voracious scavengers. Foraging trails may extend 100 m.[4] Larger workers have been observed to forage farther away from the nest.[10] F. rufa commonly is used in forestry and often is introduced into an area as a form of pest management.
Worker ants in F. rufa have been observed to practice parental care or perform cocoon nursing. A worker ant goes through a sensitive phase, where it becomes accustomed to a chemical stimulus emitted by the cocoon. The sensitive phase occurs at an early and specific period. An experiment was conducted by Moli et al. to test how worker ants react to different types of cocoon: homospecific and heterospecific cocoons. If the worker ant is brought up in the absence of cocoons, it will show neither recognition nor nursing behaviour. Both types of cocoons are opened up by the workers and devoured for nutrients. When accustomed to only the homospecific cocoons, the workers collect both types of cocoons, but only place and protect the homospecific cocoons. The heterospecific cocoons are neglected and abandoned in the nest and eaten. Lastly, if heterospecific cocoons were injected with extract from the homospecific cocoons, the workers tend to both types of cocoons equally. This demonstrates that a chemical stimulus from the cocoons seems to be of paramount importance in prompting adoption behaviour in worker ants. However, the specific chemical / stimulus has not been identified.[11]
The foraging behaviour of wood ants changes according to the environment. Wood ants have been shown to tend and harvest aphids and prey on and compete with, other predators for food resources. They tend to prey on the most plentiful members of the community whether they are in the canopies of trees or in the forest foliage. Wood ants seem to favour prey that lives in local canopies near their nest; however, when food resources dwindle, they seek other trees further from the nests and explore more trees instead of exploring the forest floor more thoroughly.[12] This makes foraging for food significantly less efficient, but the rest of the nest does not help the foraging ants.[13]
Wood ants have shown aggressive behaviour toward their own species in certain situations.[13][14] Intraspecific competition usually occurs early in the spring between workers of competing nests. This aggression may be linked to the protection of maintaining territory and trail. By observing skirmishes and trail formation of wood ants, the territory surrounding each nest differs between seasons. Permanent foraging trails are reinforced each season, and if an ant from an alien species crossed it, hostile activity occurs. Most likely, the territory changes based on foraging patterns are influenced by seasonal changes.[13]
Ants recognize their nestmates through chemical signals. Failure in recognition causes the colony integrity to decay. Heavy metals accumulated through the environment alter the aggression levels.[15] This could be due to a variety of factors such as changes in physiological effect or changes in resource levels. The ants in these territories tend to be less productive and efficient. Increased resource competition would be expected to increase level of aggression, but this is not the case.
Different types of F. rufa group species have demonstrated different types of social interaction. Some groups are highly polygynous, with multiple queen colonies forming large networks of connected nests. Others are monogynous, with single-queen colonies. Different F. rufa ants from different regions have been recorded as having traits of being both polygynous and monogynous. The females in the F. rufa colonies that are monogynous separate by flight and establish new nests. Queens in polygynous nests form new nests in the vicinity of the original nest with the help of workers.[16] Through evolution, polygyny may have arisen through monogyny. One possibility is that monogynous nests due to environmental and physiological conditions may take up new queens.[17][18] Sometimes in monogynous nests, daughters are recruited as new reproductives and the nest becomes polygynous.[19]
Wood ants typically have multiple nests so they may relocate in case of drastic changes in the environment. This splitting of nests causes the creation of multiple daughter nests. Several reasons occur as to why wood ants move. Such as a change in availability of food resources, attack by the population of another colony, or a change in the state of the nest itself. During this time, workers, queens, and the brood are transferred from the original nest to the daughter nest in a bilateral direction. The goal is to move to the daughter nest, but the transporting ants may bring an individual back to the original nest. The splitting process may last from a week to over a month.[20]
Turnover rate of wood ant nests is very quick. Within a period of three years, Klimetzek counted 248 nests within a 1,640 hectare area under study. Furthermore, no evidence of a correlation between nest age and mortality was found. Smaller nests had lower life expectancy compared to larger nests. The size of the nests increased as the nest aged.[21]
In 2008, the chronic bee paralysis virus was reported for the first time in this and another species of ants, Camponotus vagus. CBPV affects bees, ants, and mites.[22]
Formica rufa, also known as the red wood ant, southern wood ant, or horse ant, is a boreal member of the Formica rufa group of ants, and is the type species for that group, being described already by Linneaus. It is native to Eurasia, with a recorded distribution stretching from the middle of Scandinavia to the northern Iberia and Anatolia, and from Great Britain to Lake Baikal, with unconfirmed reportings of it also to the Russian Far East. There are claims that it can be found in North America, but this is not confirmed in specialised literature, and no recent publication where North American wood ants are listed mentions it as present, while records from North America are all listed as dubious or unconfirmed in a record compilation. Workers head and thorax are colored red and the abdomen brownish-black, usually with a dorsal dark patches on the head and promensonotum, although some individuals may be more uniform reddish and even have some red on the part of the gastern facing the body. In order to separate them from closely related species, specimens needs to be inspected under magnification, where difference in hairyness are among the telling characteristics, with Formica rufa being more hairy than per example Formica polyctena but less hairy than Formica lugubris. Workers are polymorphic, measuring 4.5–9 mm in length. They have large mandibles, and like many other ant species, they are able to spray formic acid from their abdomens as a defence. Formic acid was first extracted in 1671 by the English naturalist John Ray by distilling a large number of crushed ants of this species. These ants primarily eat honeydew from aphids. Some groups form large networks of connected nests with multiple queen colonies, while others have single-queen colonies.
