Synopsis of the ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 from China (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae), with description of eleven new species

Synopsis of the ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 from China (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae), with description of eleven new species Zhuojian Gu1,2, Chen Zhang1,2, Congcong Du1,2, Zhilin Chen1,2 1 Key Laboratory of Ecology of Rare and Endangered Species and Environmental Protection (Guangxi Normal University), Ministry of Education, Guilin 541004, China 2 Guangxi Key Laboratory of Rare and Endangered Animal Ecology, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, China https://zoobank.org/5402C325-8635-40B9-88BB-38E68296253B Corresponding author: Zhilin Chen ([email protected]) Academic editor: D. Zimmermann ♦ Received 19 June 2025 ♦ Accepted 29 October 2025 ♦ Published 20 November 2025 Abstract The ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 is a morphologically diverse group with a distribution spanning the Holarctic, Southeast Asia, and northeastern Australia, and comprising 106 described species worldwide. China represents a biodiversity hotspot for this genus, yet only 17 species were previously recognized. Here, we present a comprehensive morphological analysis of Chinese specimens, recognizing 28 valid species, including 11 new to science: Myrmecina carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. hirsuta Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. jiachengi Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. and M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. In addition, we provide an updated illustrated key to all Chinese Myrmecina species. Key Words China, Crematogastrini, new species, taxonomy Introduction The ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Myrmicinae) represents a morphologically distinctive group characterized by a cylindrical petiole lacking a dorsal node and paired longitudinal carinae on the ventrolateral margins of the head. Ecologically, Myrmecina ants specialized on predation of oribatid mites (Masuko 1994; Bolton 2003). With a distribution spanning the Holarctic, Southeast Asia, and northeastern Australia, the genus currently comprises 106 valid species (Bolton 2025), exhibiting particularly high diversity in subtropical and temperate regions. A landmark revision by Okido et al. (2020) dramatically expanded the known diversity in Southeast Asia, describing 40 new species and highlighting the area as a global hotspot for Myrmecina radiation. China’s unique position at the interface of the Palearctic and Oriental biogeographic realms yielded a remarkably diverse Myrmecina fauna. Early taxonomic records (Forel 1912; Wheeler 1921) documented only scattered occurrences, while subsequent studies by Zhou (2001), Huang et al. (2008), and Zhou et al. (2008) expanded the known diversity to nine species. Previous studies on Myrmecina taxonomy have faced a major limitation — geographically restricted sampling. These constraints have led to persistent taxonomic ambiguities and an underestimation of endemic diversity in this genus. However, recent intensive sampling campaigns across southern China (particularly in Shaanxi, Yunnan, Guangxi, and Hainan) have revealed a significant undocumented diversity, with multiple putative new taxa awaiting description. A notable example is the work of Liu et al. (2022), who not only reported the first Chinese record of M. raviwonghei, but Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448|DOI 10.3897/dez.72.162491 Copyright Zhuojian Gu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 396 also described three new species (M. eowilsoni, M. gaoligongensis, M. pierceae) from Yunnan, bringing the total number of recognized Chinese species from thirteen to seventeen. These discoveries provide compelling evidence that the current taxonomic framework for Chinese Myrmecina requires urgent and comprehensive revision. Prior research on Chinese Myrmecina has revealed notable patterns of regional endemism and distinctive morphological adaptations, including reduced antennal segment counts (Huang et al. 2008), specialized propodeal spine morphology (Zhou et al. 2008), and specific microhabitat preferences (Okido et al. 2020). Critical taxonomic uncertainties persist despite these advances, including questionable synonymies, widespread misidentifications in museum collections, and incomplete species descriptions. For example, M. sinensis Wheeler was justifiably elevated to species status based on diagnostic clypeal and sculptural characters (Zhou et al. 2008), while M. guangxiensis Zhou, 2001 was subsequently placed within a monophyletic group characterized by a unique sharp ridge of the shield wall on the lateral portion of the clypeus in front of the antennal insertions, which is similar as in M. vieti Okido et al., 2020. This study provides a comprehensive review of these taxonomic challenges through a systematic examination of both historical and newly collected Chinese Myrmecina specimens. By employing detailed morphometric analyses, we: (1) revise the taxonomic status of all Chinese congeners, (2) describe eleven new species, and (3) present an illustrated identification key for Chinese fauna. Our results provide a foundation for future phylogenetic and ecological investigations in China. Materials and methods The ant specimens examined in this study, including type specimens, are deposited in the following repositories: (1) GXNU (Insect Collection, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China); and (2) IZCAS (Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China). Morphometric measurements of the 11 newly discovered Myrmecina species were obtained using the KEYENCE VHX-6000 3D digital microscope. Morphological line drawings were produced using Procreate software (version 5.3.15, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd, Tasmania, Australia). Morphology and terminology follow the standards of Bolton (1975). All measurements were recorded in millimeters and rounded to two decimal places. HL Head Length. The maximum distance from the anterior-most point of the clypeal margin to the midpoint of a line drawn across the posterior margin of the head. HW Head Width. The maximum width of head in fullface view, excluding the eyes. CI Cephalic Index. Calculated as: (HW/HL) × 100. SL Scape Length. Excluding the basal radicle. SI Scape Index. Calculated as: (SL/HW) × 100. ED Eye Diameter. The maximum diameter of eye measured in lateral view. MSL Mesosomal length. Weber’s length measured from the anterior-most point of the pronotal collar to the posterior-most point of the propodeal process. PW Pronotal Width. The maximum width of mesosoma measured in dorsal view. PL Petiole Length. The maximum diagonal length of petiole, measured in lateral view, from most anteroventral point of the peduncle, at or below the propodeal lobe, to the most posterodorsal point at the junction with the helical tergite. PH Petiole Height. The maximum height of petiole, measured in lateral view from the highest point of the node to the ventral outline of the node. DPW Petiole Width. The maximum width of the petiole in dorsal view. LPI Petiole length index. Being use to compare the petiolar length-to-width ratio, calculated as: (PH/ PL) × 100. It assesses the length-to-height ratio of the petiole, reflecting its relative height. DPI Dorsal petiole index. Defined as the ratio of petiole length (PL) to dorsal petiole width (DPW), calculated as: (DPW/PL) × 100. It quantifies the length-to-width ratio of the petiole, indicating its relative width. PPL Postpetiole length. The maximum diagonal length of postpetiole, measured in lateral view, from the posterior margin of the petiolar–postpetiolar articulation to the anterior margin of the postpetiole– gaster articulation. GL Gastral length. The maximum length of the gastral in lateral view. TL Total Length. The maximum length of specimen measured from the tip of the mandibles to the tip of the abdominal segment VII, excluding the sting. Due to the position of the specimen, total length was measured as the sum of head length + mesosomal length, petiole and postpetiole length + gaster length. Results Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 Myrmecina Curtis, 1829: 265. Type-species: Myrmecina latreillii (junior synonym of Formica graminicola), by monotypy. Archaeomyrmex Mann, 1921: 448. Synonymized by Brown 1971: 1. Worker morphology. (1) Monomorphic; small body size; (2) head rectangular, posterior cephalic carina distinct, extending to the lower part of the posterior cephalic margin and gradually expanding to the anterior lateral sides of the ventral head; (3) mandibles subtriangular, apical and subapical teeth well developed, remaining teeth usually reduce or indistinct; (4) palpal Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 397 formula typically 4, 3 or 3, 2; (5) clypeus with posterior portion inserted between frontal lobes; anterior margin emarginate, with two lateral corners, usually bearing a small median denticle; (6) frontal lobes covering the antennal fossae; (7) antennae 11–12 segments, with a distinct 3-segmented club; (8) eyes small to medium-sized, ocelli absent; (9) promesonotal suture and metanotal groove absent, promesonotal dorsum weakly convex; (10) propodeum armed with distinct spines or teeth; (11) petiole without anterior peduncle, dorsal surface usually with a median denticular projection. This study documents the following 28 species in China, including 11 new species, as listed below: M. asiatica Okido, Ogata & Hosoishi, 2020 Yunnan; THAILAND, MALAYSIA, INDONESIA. M. asthena Okido, Ogata & Hosoishi, 2020 Yunnan; VIETNAM, MALAYSIA. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Xizang. M. curvispina Zhou, Huang & Ma, 2008 Guangxi. M. eowilsoni Liu, 2022 Yunnan. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Guangxi, Guangdong. M. gaoligongensis Liu, 2022 Yunnan. M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Guangxi. M. graminicola (Latreille, 1802) Guangxi, Guangdong, Zhejiang; UK, DENMARK, GERMANY, RUSSIA. M. guangxiensis Zhou, 2001 Guangxi, Hunan, Yunnan; VIETNAM. M. hamula Zhou, Huang & Ma, 2008 Guangxi, Shaanxi. M. hirsuta Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Zhejiang. M. jiachengi Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Shaanxi. M. kaigong Terayama, 2009 Taiwan. M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Guangxi. M. pauca Huang, Huang & Zhou, 2008 Guangxi, Hunan. M. pierceae Liu, 2022 Yunnan. M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Guangxi. M. raviwonghei Jaitrong, Samung, Waengsothorn & Okido, 2019 Yunnan; THAILAND. M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Chongqing. M. sauteri Forel, 1912 Guangxi, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Taiwan. M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Hainan. M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Yunnan. M. sinensis Wheeler, 1921 Guangxi, Yunan, Zhejiang, Liaoning. M. striata Emery, 1889 Jiangsu (dubious), Sichuan (dubious), Yunnan (dubious); INDIA, MYANMAR, SRI LANKA. M. strigis Lin &Wu, 1998 Taiwan. M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Hainan. M. taiwana Terayama, 1985 Guangxi, Yunnan, Taiwan. Key to Chinese Myrmecina species based on the worker caste 1 Antenna with 11 segments (Fig. 1A) ............................................................................................................... M. pauca – Antenna with 12 segments (Fig. 1B) .......................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1. Antennal segments. A. M. pauca; B. M. sinensis. 2 In full-face view, occipital margin convex (Fig. 2A) ...................................................M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. – In full-face view, occipital margin straight or concave (Fig. 2B) ................................................................................... 3 3 Lateral portion of clypeus raised into sharp ridge, connected with the front ridge of the antennal torulus (Fig. 3A) ..... 4 – Lateral portion of clypeus raised into sharp ridge, but not connected with the front ridge of the antennal torulus (Fig. 3B).................................................................................................................................................................. 13 dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 398 Figure 4. Antennal scapes. A. M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. jiachengi Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 3. Clypeus and antennal torulus. A. M. eowilsoni; B. M. hirsuta Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 2. Head in full-face view. A. M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. 4 Scapes with dense striae, appearing dull (Fig. 4A) ..................................................................................................... 5 – Scapes smooth or with fewer striae, appearing shining (Fig. 4B) ................................................................................ 6 Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 399 5 In full-face view, head with irregular waved longitudinal striae (Fig. 5A); mesosomal dorsum with waved longitudinal rugae and transverse rugae (Fig. 5C) .............................................................................. M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. – In full-face view, head with regular straight longitudinal striae (Fig. 5B); mesosomal dorsum with regular to undulate longitudinal straight striae (Fig. 5D) ................................................................................. M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 6. Postpetiole in dorsal view. A. M. eowilsoni; B. M. sinensis. Figure 5. Head in full-face view and mesosoma in dorsal view. A, C. M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B, D. M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. 6 In dorsal view, postpetiole with anterior portion distinctly wider than posterior portion (Fig. 6A) ..................M. eowilsoni – In dorsal view, postpetiole with anterior portion nearly as wide as posterior portion (Fig. 6B) ..................................... 7 7 Mesosomal dorsum smooth and shining (Fig. 7A) ....................................................... M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. – Mesosomal dorsum with many or dense striae or rugae (Fig. 7B) ............................................................................... 8 dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 400 8 Gastral tergite I with weak reticulations (Fig. 8A)............................................................................................ M. sauteri – Gastral tergite I smooth and shining (Fig. 8B) ............................................................................................................ 9 Figure 7. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. sinensis. Figure 8. Gaster in dorsal view. A. M. sauteri; B. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 9. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. 9 Mesosomal dorsum with irregular waved longitudinal rugae (Fig. 9A) ....................................................................... 10 – Mesosomal dorsum with regular straight longitudinal striae (Fig. 9B) ....................................................................... 11 10 In full-face view, anterior clypeal margin concave, armed with a median denticle (Fig. 10A); anterodorsal postpetiolar surface without sculpture, smooth (Fig. 10C) ........................................................................................ M. guangxiensis – In full-face view, anterior clypeal margin straight, without a median denticle (Fig. 10B); anterodorsal postpetiolar surface with rugae (Fig. 10D) ................................................................................................ M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 401 11 Mesosomal dorsum with even longitudinal striae, the striae rather thick and straight (Fig. 11A) ....................M. kaigong – Mesosomal dorsum with 1–3 primary deeper longitudinal striae markedly deeper and more distinct than other striae (Fig. 11B)................................................................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 10. Anterior clypeal margin in full-face view and postpetiolar dorsum. A, C. M. guangxiensis; B, D. M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 11. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. M. kaigong; B. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. 12 In full-face view, head with regular straight longitudinal striae, anterior margin of clypeus with a median denticle (Fig. 12A); propodeal spiracle large, its diameter approximately equal to the distance between it and the propodeal declivity (Fig. 12C); in lateral view, propodeal spine relatively short, length approximately equal basal width, apex acute and directed posterodorsally (Fig. 12C) ........................................................................M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. – In full-face view, head with irregular waved rugae, anterior margin of clypeus lacking a median denticle (Fig. 12B); propodeal spiracle small, its diameter less than half of the distance between it and the propodeal declivity (Fig. 12D); in lateral view, propodeal spine relatively long, length > 1.5 times basal width, apex upturned (Fig. 12D) ......M. taiwana 13 Mesosomal dorsum with irregular waved rugae (Fig. 13A) ..................................... M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. – Mesosomal dorsum with regular straight longitudinal striae (Fig. 13B) ..................................................................... 14 14 In dorsal view, propodeal spines long, more than 3 times as long as their basal width (Fig. 14A) .............................. 15 – In dorsal view, propodeal spines short, less than 1.5 times as long as their basal width (Fig. 14B) ........................... 20 dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 402 15 In full-face view, head with dense granulate (Fig. 15A) ...................................................................................M. asthena – In full-face view, head with deeply impressed longitudinal striae and sparse rugae (Fig. 15B) ................................... 16 Figure 12. Head in full-face view and mesosoma in lateral view. A, C. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B, D. M. taiwana. Figure 14. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. sinensis. Figure 13. Mesosoma in dorsal view. A. M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. raviwonghei. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 403 16 Propodeal spines point backward and straight in lateral view (Fig. 16A) ................................................................... 17 – Propodeal spines point backward and apex slightly upturned in lateral view (Fig. 16B) ............................................. 18 Figure 17. Head in lateral view and gaster in dorsal view. A, C. M. curvispina; B, D. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. Figure 16. Mesosoma in lateral view. A. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; B. M. raviwonghei. Figure 15. Head in full-face view. A. M. asthena; B. M. raviwonghei. 17 Ventrolateral portion of head smooth and shining (Fig. 16A); gastral tergite I smooth and shining (Fig. 17C) ................ ................................................................................................................................................................ M. curvispina – Ventrolateral portion of head with distinct coarse longitudinal carinae (Fig. 16B); gastral tergite I slightly microreticulate (Fig. 17D) ............................................................................................................ M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 410 Figure 30. Myrmecina carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Propodeal spines in dorsal view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Diagnostic features. (1) Coarse longitudinal carinae on the lateroventral surface of head; (2) gastal tergite I with very fine reticulation (visible at 50 × magnification); (3) propodeal spines needle-like, weakly downcurved, approximately 1.5 times longer than their basal width; (4) eyes medium-sized, composed of 10–12 ommatidia; (5) body uniformly black, with yellowish-brown appendages and gastral apex; Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 411 (6) mesosomal dorsum with abundant longitudinal carinae, more rugose than in related species. Notes. M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is characterized by its coarsely carinate lateroventral surface of head and finely reticulated gaster, key diagnostic features distinguishing it from closely related taxa. It most closely resembles M. curvispina but can be separated by the following combination of characters: (1) M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. possesses coarse longitudinal carinae on the lateroventral portion and rugose dorsal carinae, contrasting with M. curvispina’s completely smooth lateroventral surface and uniformly striate dorsum; (2) the gaster of M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. exhibits very fine reticulations (visible at 50 × magnification), while that of M. curvispina is entirely smooth; (3) Propodeal spines in M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. are needle-like, weakly downcurved, approximately 1.5 times longer than their basal width, whereas in M. curvispina are broadly triangular, strongly outcurved, and approximately equal length and width; (4) eyes in M. carinolateralis Gu & Chen, sp. nov. are medium-sized (10–12 ommatidia), compared to reduced eyes (< 10 ommatidia) of M. curvispina. These consistent morphological differences separate the two species. Worker measurements. (N = 4). HL 0.58–0.63, HW 0.56–0.60, CI 95–97, SL 0.44–0.46, SI 77–79, ED 0.06– 0.07, MSL 0.66–0.70, PW 0.41–0.44, PL 0.16–0.18, PH 0.17–0.19, DPW 0.17–0.19, LPI 105–106, DPI 100–101, GL 0.71–0.79, TL 2.69–2.75. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head subquadrate, with weakly convex lateral margins and medially a shallow concave posterior margin. Mandibles with 7 teeth: apical two robust, teeth 3–6 small and indistinct, basal tooth smaller than apical tooth but more distinct than intermediate teeth; masticatory margin approximately equal in length to inner margin. Clypeus with nearly straight anterior margin, distinct lateral corners, and a prominent median denticle. Frontal lobes broad and laterally expanded. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes extending posteriorly to reach posterolateral corners of head. Eyes medium-sized, composed of 10–12 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline evenly convex; eumetanotal spines (sensu Okido et al. 2020) blunt, not interrupting dorsal profile. Propodeal spines robust and elongate, approximately 1.5 times longer than their basal width, weakly downcurved and directed posteriorly. Propodeal spiracle small, diameter about one-third its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, anterior margin of mesosoma evenly convex, with distinct humeral corners; lateral margins gradually converging posteriorly toward bases of propodeal spines. Propodeal spines needle-like, weakly curved, directed posterolaterally. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole slightly higher than long, with triangular dorsal projection; ventral margin straight. Postpetiole dorsally weakly concave, with distinct anterodorsal corner; gaster ovoid. In dorsal view, petiole with concave anterior margin and straight lateral and posterior margins; postpetiole with distinct anterodorsal and posterodorsal corners; gaster with rounded anterolateral corners. Sculpture. Mandibles with two basal longitudinal grooves on frontal surface, otherwise smooth and shining. Clypeus smooth and shining. Head in full-face and lateral views with coarse longitudinal carinae, some extending across frontal lobes surfaces. Mesosoma with abundant longitudinal carinae laterally and dorsally. Petiole and postpetiole with short longitudinal carinae laterally, dorsal carinae somewhat rugose; gaster with microreticulations. Pilosity and pubescence. Body with moderately dense erect hairs. Pubescence sparse, restricted to antennal club. Coloration. Mandibles, anterior clypeal margin, antennae, legs, and posterior gastral segments yellowish-brown to reddish-brown; remainder of body black. Etymology. The specific epithet “carinolateralis” is a compound Latin adjective, derived from “carina” (meaning “keel” or “ridge”) and “lateralis” (meaning “lateral”), referring to the diagnostic character of coarse longitudinal carinae on the lateroventral portion of the head capsule. The name highlights this distinctive sculptural feature that distinguishes this new species from M. curvispina. Distribution. Xizang. Myrmecina curvispina Zhou, Huang & Ma, 2008 Fig. 31 Myrmecina curvispina Zhou, Huang & Ma, 2008: 286, figs 1–3 (w.) CHINA. Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.9001°N, 110.5001°E, 1550 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 22.VIII.1998, Shanyi Zhou. Diagnostic features. (1) Propodeal spines distinctly outcurved apically in dorsal view; (2) gastral tergite I completely smooth and shining; (3) anteroventral pronotal angle acute and rectangular, projecting forward; (4) eyes small, composed of fewer than 10 ommatidia; (5) head square-shaped (CI 103), with strongly developed occipital carina and concave posterior margin; (6) mandibles massive, masticatory margin with two prominent apical teeth followed by small blunt denticles; (7) mesosomal dorsum less convex than in related species, gradually tapering posteriorly; (8) petiole quadrangular, with distinct cross ridge, subpetiolar process small and triangular; (9) head and mesosoma strongly longitudinally striate. Distribution. Guangxi. Myrmecina eowilsoni Liu, 2022 Fig. 32 Myrmecina eowilsoni Liu, 2022: 156, fig. 3 (w.) CHINA. Material examined. Unexamined. High-resolution images of the holotype from Liu et al. (2022) were reviewed. Diagnostic features. (1) Postpetiole strongly expanded laterally, more than twice as broad as petiole; (2) lateral dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 412 Figure 31. Line drawing of Myrmecina curvispina (redrawn after the original line drawing of Zhou et al. 2008). A. Head in full-face view; B. Body in dorsal view; C. Body in lateral view. Figure 32. Myrmecina eowilsoni, holotype worker (MCZ-ENT00763515, Liu et al. 2022). A. Body in lateral view; B. Head in fullface view; C. Body in dorsal view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 413 portions of clypeus raised into sharp ridges (shield-like) in front of antennal torulus; (3) propodeal spines straight in dorsal view; (4) gastral tergite I smooth and shining; (6) ventrolateral portion of head with puncta or rugae; (7) anterior clypeal margin with a median denticle; (8) eyes small, composed of ≤ 10 ommatidia. Distribution. Yunnan. Myrmecina flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/440F8E4A-034E-4D37-8AA5-00EC5A01D4B3 Fig. 33 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.9153°N, 110.4661°E, 1550 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 12.VII.2020, Chunxuan Luo, GXNU20002732 [GXNU]. Paratypes. • 4 workers and 1 queen, with the same collection date as holotype; • 2 workers, Huangzhushan, Guangdong, China, 24.6990°N, 114.1809°E, 497 m, secondary forest, soil, 25.VII.2022, Benan Zhang, GXNU2201299; • 5 workers, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.9153°N, 110.4472°E, 1700 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 12.VIII.2020, Danni Chen, GXNU20003038; • 3 workers, Tianjingshan, Guangdong, China, 24.6791°N, 112.9868°E, 653 m, secondary forest, soil, 19.VIII.2023, Yanping Wu, GXNU2302412 [13 workers and 1 queen, GXNU; 1 worker, IZCAS]. Diagnostic features. (1) Mesosoma with a pair of blunt-tipped dentiform eumetanotal spines; (2) propodeal spines robust, length subequal to its basal width, interspinal distance approximately twice spine length; (3) propodeal spiracle diameter distinctly greater than its distance to propodeal declivity; (4) petiole in dorsal view slightly longer than height, dorsal outline triangular. Notes. M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is most similar to M. flava but can be readily distinguished by the following characters: (1) eumetanotal spines bluntly denticulate in M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. small right-angled triangular teeth in M. flava); (2) propodeal spines robust, with length subequal to its basal width in M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. triangular spines longer than broad in M. flava); (3) M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. exhibits fine longitudinal striae mixed with puncta on the dorsum of head (vs. 11–13 inconspicuous longitudinal rugae in M. flava); (4) eyes smaller in M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov., composed of 4–6 ommatidia (vs. 10–12 in M. flava); (5) propodeal spiracle large, its diameter greater than its distance to propodeal declivity in M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. spiracle small, its diameter only equal to its distance to propodeal declivity in M. flava); (6) petiole with triangular dorsal outline in M. flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. subtriangular in M. flava). Worker measurements. (N = 5). HL 0.57–0.61, HW 0.55–0.60, CI 96–98, SL 0.46–0.50, SI 84–86, ED 0.05– 0.06, MSL 0.70–0.74, PW 0.38–0.40, PL 0.17–0.19, PH 0.15–0.16, DPW 0.17–0.18, LPI 84–86, DPI 95–100, GL 1.01–1.13, TL 2.69–2.75. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head rectangular, longer than broad; lateral margins nearly straight, posterior margin broadly and shallowly concave. Mandibles with 7–8 teeth: apical two teeth robust, teeth 3–6 reduced to inconspicuous denticles, with a distinct gap between teeth 2 and 3, sub-basal tooth slightly larger than basal tooth. Clypeus with nearly straight anterior margin, lateral teeth and median clypeal denticle indistinct. Antennal fossa bordered anteriorly by a carinate ridge, continuous with lateral clypeal ridge. Frontal lobes broad and flat, not laterally expanded. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes when extending posteriorly, their apices just reaching posterior margin of head. Eyes small, composed of 4–6 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline evenly convex; eumetanotal spines bluntly denticulate. Propodeal spines robust, length subequal to their basal width; propodeal spiracle large, its diameter distinctly greater than its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, pronotum convex anteriorly, with distinct humeral corners; lateral margins gradually converging posteriorly. Two transverse carinae present between eumetanotal spines; propodeal spines approximately half as long as inter-spinal distance. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole slightly longer than its height, dorsal margin triangular, subpetiolar process small tooth, ventral margin concave medially; postpetiole higher than long, with rounded anterodorsal corners; dorsal surface weakly concave; sternite rectangular, anteroventral and posteroventral corners angulate; gaster elongate-ovoid. In dorsal view, petiole and postpetiole rectangular, postpetiole broader than length; gaster ovoid, with straight anterior margin and weakly angular anterolateral corners. Sculpture. Mandibles, clypeus, and median frons smooth and shining; remainder dorsum of head with fine longitudinal striae interspersed with puncta, appearing dull. Lateroventral portion of head with minute puncta (sometimes nearly imperceptible), weakly shining. Pronotal dorsum with short, obliquely ascending striae; sometimes anteroventral area smooth and shining. Mesopleura and lateral propodeum with longitudinal striae. In dorsal view, mesosomal dorsum with 10–15 longitudinal striae. Petiole and postpetiole striate; gaster smooth and shining. Pilosity and pubescence. Subdecumbent hairs present along lateral head margins and antennal scapes. Body densely covered with erect hairs. Pubescence restricted to antennal club. Coloration. Head, mesosomal dorsum, petiole, postpetiole, and gastral tergite I (excluding anterior and posterior margins) reddish-brown to dark brown. Antennal club, legs, lateral mesosoma, lateral gaster, and gastral apex yellow to yellowish-brown. Etymology. The specific epithet “flavipeda” is a Latin compound adjective meaning “yellow-footed” (flavus, yellow + pes/pedis, foot), referring to the species’ distinctive reddish-brown to yellowish legs, which is one of the key diagnostic traits that contrasts with the predominantly dark appendages of other congeners, and the etymology merely defines a category of characters. Distribution. Guangxi, Guangdong. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 414 Figure 33. Myrmecina flavipeda Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Head in full-face view; B. Petiole and postpetiole in dorsal view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 415 Myrmecina gaoligongensis Liu, 2022 Fig. 34 Myrmecina gaoligongensis Liu, 2022: 158, fig. 4 (w.) CHINA. Material examined. Unexamined. High-resolution images of the holotype from Liu et al. (2022) were reviewed. Diagnostic features. (1) Propodeal spines triangular, shorter than their basal width; (2) petiole subrectangular (1.5 × longer than its width); (3) postpetiole quadratic (PPI 100–103); (4) head densely punctate, with weak longitudinal rugae; (5) eyes small (6 ommatidia). Distribution. Yunnan. Myrmecina globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/DA10C220-633D-4584-B055-3523A596752C Fig. 35 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Jiuwanshan, Guangxi, China, 25.2021°N, 108.6817°E, 1206 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 22.VII.2023, Zhuojian Gu, GXNU2300350 [GXNU]. Diagnostic features. (1) Head outline rounded in fullface view (unique among Chinese congeners); (2) ventrolateral portion of head smooth and shining; (3) propodeal dorsum without eumetanotal spines; (4) the lateral and dorsal surfaces of mesosoma with irregular, coarse rugoreticulae. Notes. Comparing to other Myrmecina species, M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. head shape similar to M. breviata and M. dolichothrix from Philippine. Head with broad, shallow longitudinal rugae and sparse piligerous puncta in M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. head without striae in M. breviata); Mesosomal dorsum with waved rugae in M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. with transverse striae in M. dolichothrix). Worker measurements. (N = 1). HL 0.75, HW 0.82, CI 109, SL 0.65, SI 80, ED 0.11, MSL 0.89, PW 0.50, PL 0.21, PH 0.14, DPW 0.20, LPI 66, DPI 97, GL 0.83, TL 3.29. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head subcircular, broader than long, with evenly convex lateral and posterior margins, posterior corners broadly rounded. Mandibles with 7 teeth: apical tooth broad, teeth 2–5 subequal in size, sub-basal tooth stout and blunt, basal tooth inconspicuous. Clypeus projecting anteriorly, anterior margin arcuately emarginate, with stout lateral teeth and a single small median Figure 34. Myrmecina gaoligongensis, holotype worker (MCZ-ENT00759990, Liu et al. 2022). A. Body in lateral view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 416 Figure 35. Myrmecina globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Mesosoma in dorsal view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. denticle. Frontal lobes broad and flat, not expanded laterally, diverging posteriorly. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes long, extending beyond posterior margin of head. Eyes relatively well-developed, composed of 20–22 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline evenly arched; eumetanotal spines absent. Propodeal spines robust and elongate, approximately 1.2 times longer than their basal width, weakly upturned apically. Propodeal spiracle small, slit-shaped, positioned far from propodeal declivity (distance to declivity > 8 times spiracle diameter). In dorsal view, pronotum convex Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 417 anteriorly, with prominent humeral corners; lateral margins gradually converging posteriorly. Propodeal spines stout and straight, directed posteriorly and slightly laterally; propodeal spines length half of the distance between their apices; the distance of inter-spinal slightly wider than petiole. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole higher than long, with a prominent median denticulate projection dorsally; ventral margin flat. Postpetiole dorsally convex, lacking anterodorsal corner; ventral margin shallowly concave anteriorly. In dorsal view, postpetiole approximately 1.2 times wider than long, anterolateral corners broadly rounded (not angular); gaster lacking humeral corners. Sculpture. Head with broad, shallow longitudinal rugae and sparse piligerous puncta, shining; ventrolateral portion of head smooth and shining. Antennal scapes smooth and shining, except for piligerous puncta. Mesosoma with coarse rugoreticulate sculpture dorsally and laterally. Petiole laterally carinate, dorsally with faint rugae; postpetiole dorsally with shallow wrinkles. Gaster smooth and shining. Pilosity and pubescence. Body densely covered with erect hairs; pubescence absents, except on apical three antennal segments. Coloration. Body black, except for reddish-brown anterior head margin and posterior margins of gastral segments; antennae and legs reddish-brown, except for antennal club and tarsi yellowish-brown. Etymology. The specific epithet “globicephala” is a compound Latinized adjective derived from the Greek roots “globo-” (γλοβός, globós, “sphere, ball”) and “-cephala” (κεφαλή, kephalḗ, “head”), meaning “globular-headed” or “spherical-headed.” The name refers to the species’ distinctive rounded head shape, which is a key diagnostic character distinguishing it from related Myrmecina taxa. Distribution. Guangxi. Myrmecina graminicola (Latreille, 1802) Fig. 36 Formica graminicola Latreille, 1802: 255 (w.q.m.) DENMARK. Myrmecina latreillii Curtis, 1829: 265 (m.) GREAT BRITAIN. Curtis 1854: 219 (q.). Junior synonym of graminicola: Mayr 1855: 421. Myrmica striatula Nylander, 1849: 40 (w.) RUSSIA. Subspecies of graminicola: Emery 1898: 131. Junior synonym of graminicola: Mayr 1855: 421. Myrmica bidens Foerster, 1850: 50 (w.q.) GERMANY. Schenck 1852: 95 (m.). Junior synonym of graminicola: Mayr 1855: 421. Myrmecina kutteri Forel, 1914: 1 (w.) ITALY. Subspecies of graminicola: Emery 1916: 171. Junior synonym of graminicola: Brown 1951: 106. Myrmecina graminicola var. grouvellei Bondroit, 1918: 116, fig. 58 (w.) FRANCE. Junior synonym of graminicola: Müller 1923: 81. Myrmecina graminicola subsp. gotlandica Karavaiev, 1930: 146 (w.) SWEDEN. Junior synonym of graminicola: Rigato 1999: 86. Myrmecina graminicola subsp. oelandica Karavaiev, 1930: 146 (w.q.) SWEDEN. Junior synonym of graminicola: Rigato 1999: 86. Myrmecina graminicola var. dentata Santschi, 1939: 77 (w.) TUNISIA. Junior synonym of graminicola: Rigato 1999: 86. Material examined. High-resolution images of the syntype of M. graminicola dentata (https://www.antweb.org, CASENT0913028, photographed by Will Ericson), of the holotype of M. graminicola gotlandica (https://www.antweb.org/, CASENT0917028, photographed by Kate Martynova), of the syntype of M. graminicola oelandica (https:// www.antweb.org/, CASENT0917029, photographed by Kate Martynova) were reviewed. Non-type. • 3 workers, Dadongshan, Guangdong, China, 24.9249°N, 112.7228°E, 653 m, 26.VIII.2023, Xiaoyun Liang, GXNU2302646. Diagnostic features. (1) Antennal scape base dorsoventrally flattened (appearing equally wide at basal bend and apex in dorsal view, unlike the cylindrical, gradually thickening scape of related species); (2) body sculpture coarse, with pronounced rugae on head and mesosoma; (3) body color dark brown to black, typically with reddish-brown highlights on clypeus, mesosoma sides, pedicel, and gastral segments II–IV, and bright ferruginous appendages; (4) anteropropodeal processes developed into a sharp tooth in profile; and (5) longer, more erect pilosity compared to M. melonii (though some Greek specimens exhibit intermediate states). Distribution. Guangxi, Guangdong, Zhejiang; UK, DENMARK, GERMANY, RUSSIA. Notes. Unfortunately, to date, we have not been able to examine the type specimens or high-resolution images of the type of M. graminicola, and have only reviewed photographs of three type subspecies of workers: the specimen of M. graminicola dentata (https://www.antweb. org, CASENT0913028, photographed by Will Ericson), the holotype of M. graminicola gotlandica (https://www. antweb.org/, CASENT0917028, photographed by Kate Martynova), and M. graminicola oelandica (https://www. antweb.org/, CASENT0917029, photographed by Kate Martynova). All three subspecies have been synonymized under M. graminicola by Rigato (1999), and the high-resolution images of these specimens reveal no meaningful morphological differences, confirming they represent the same species. The morphology of specimens from our collection fully matches these specimens in morphological features, and if their original descriptions were scientifically valid—meaning they are indeed synonyms of M. graminicola—then the presence of M. graminicola (Latreille) (Guangxi, Hubei, Hunan, Sichuan, Zhejiang), and subspecies M. graminicola sinensis Wheeler (Guangxi, Liaoning, Zhejiang) in China is also confirmed (Guénard and Dunn 2012). We hope future comprehensive revisions of this genus by other myrmecologists will provide a more rigorous taxonomic diagnosis for M. graminicola. Myrmecina guangxiensis Zhou, 2001 Fig. 37 Myrmecina guangxiensis Zhou, 2001: 139, 237, figs 275, 276 (w.) CHINA. Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Huashuichong, Guangxi, China, secondary forest, leaf litter, 01.IX.1998, Shanyi Zhou. Paratypes. • 4 workers, Dapingshan, Guangxi, China, 18.IX.1998, John R Fellowes. Non-type. • 5 workers, dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 418 Figure 36. Myrmecina graminicola dentata, syntype worker (https://www.antweb.org, CASENT0913028, photographed by Alexandra Westrich). A. Head in full-face view; B. Label of syntype; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 419 Figure 37. Myrmecina guangxiensis. A. Head in full-face view; B. Petiole and postpetiole in dorsal view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 426 Figure 41. Myrmecina kaigong, holotype worker (http://www.niaes.affrc.go.jp/inventory/insect/inssys/hymlst.htm, HYM-206, photographed by Hiraku Yoshitake &Takashi Kurihara). A. Head and mesosoma in dorsal view; B. Label of holotype; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 427 Figure 42. Myrmecina laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Head in full-face view; B. Petiole in lateral view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 428 nov. is densely punctate except for smooth medial frons and clypeus, whereas M. breviata exhibits longitudinal rugae across the entire dorsum of head; (3) the mesosomal dorsum of M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is smooth and shining, contrasting with M. breviata’s weakly carinate pronotum and mesonotum. (4) the propodeal spiracle of M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is exceptionally large (diameter twice its distance to declivity), compared to M. breviata’s smaller spiracle (diameter ≤ 1/6 × the distance); (5) the postpetiole of M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is rectangular, with distinct anteroventral corners, versus M. breviata’s more globular postpetiole with less-defined corners; (6) the eyes of M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov. extremely reduced (4–6 ommatidia) compared to M. breviata (typically 10–12 ommatidia). Worker measurements. (N = 3). HL 0.44–0.46, HW 0.40–0.42, CI 90–93, SL 0.31–0.35, SI 76–78, ED 0.02– 0.03, MSL 0.52–0.54, PW 0.27–0.29, PL 0.13–0.15, PH 0.14–0.16, DPW 0.12–0.14, LPI 106–108, DPI 92–96, GL 0.64–0.67, TL 2.08–2.12. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head distinctly rectangular, longer than broad, lateral margins nearly parallel, posterior margin medially concave, posterolateral corners rounded. Mandibular masticatory margin bearing 8–9 teeth: apical two teeth 1–2 robust, teeth 3–6 small and uniform in size, aligned on the same line as the major teeth; teeth 7–8 slightly larger than 3–6 but lower in height; basal tooth indistinct or occasionally absent. Clypeal anterior margin nearly straight, lacking a median denticle. Frontal lobes thin, subtranslucent, and slightly laterally expanded. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes barely reaching posterolateral corners of head. Eyes small, composed of 4–6 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline of mesosoma weakly convex; eumetanotal spines inconspicuous. Propodeal spines slightly longer than their basal width, directed posteriorly. Propodeal spiracle large, circular, diameter twice as its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, anterior pronotal margin evenly convex, humeral corners prominent; pronotum slightly broader anteriorly than posteriorly; mesonotum abruptly constricted posteriorly. Propodeum with a transverse carina anteriorly; propodeal spines slender, directed posteriorly, length approximately 1/3 the distance between their apices. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole slightly higher than long, dorsum with a triangular projection; ventral margin almost straight, anteroventral corner rounded. Postpetiole rectangular, anteroventral corner angulate, posteroventral corner angular; gaster ovoid. In dorsal view, petiolar dorsum carinate; postpetiole broader anteriorly, with distinct rounded anterodorsal corners; gaster with prominent anterolateral corners. Sculpture. Mandibles, clypeus, and median frons smooth and shining; remainder of head densely punctate, except lateroventral portions smooth and shining. Mesopleura with shallow puncta and weak rugae; rest of mesosoma dorsally and laterally smooth and shining. Petiole laterally with 2–3 weak carinae. Postpetiole anteriorly smooth and shining, posteriorly with longitudinal rugae; gaster entirely smooth, except for short basal striae near insertion. Pilosity and pubescence. Body densely covered with short erect hairs; pubescence absents, except on antennal club. Coloration. Body predominantly yellowish-brown; posterior head and mid-gaster dark brown. Mandibles and appendages yellow. Etymology. The specific epithet “laevidorsa” is a Latin compound adjective derived from “laevis” (smooth) and “dorsum” (back), referring to the characteristically smooth and unsculptured dorsal surface of the mesosoma, a key diagnostic feature distinguishing this species from its congeners. Distribution. Guangxi. Myrmecina pauca Huang, Huang & Zhou, 2008 Fig. 43 Myrmecina pauca Huang, Huang & Zhou, 2008: 275, figs 1–6 (w.q.) CHINA. Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Bamianshan, Hunan, China, 26.0333°N, 113.7500°E, secondary forest, leaf litter, 1300 m, 14.VI.2004, Jianhua Huang. Paratypes. • 3 workers, from the same collection date as holotype. Non-type. • 4 workers, Dayaoshan, Guangxi, China, 24.1356°N, 110.0864°E, 624 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 26.VI.2021, Yulin Xie, GXNU201857; • 4 workers, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.8983°N, 110.4697°E, 1100 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 16.VII.2020, Chunxuan Luo, GXNU203468; • 5 workers, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.8983°N, 110.4697°E, 1100 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 15.VII.2020, Chunxuan Luo, GXNU203356; • 3 workers, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.8983°N, 110.4697°E, 1100 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 16.VII.2020, Chunxuan Luo, GXNU203399; • 2 workers, Maoershan, Guangxi, China, 25.8983°N, 110.4697°E, 1100 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 16.VII.2020, Chunxuan Luo, GXNU203458. Diagnostic features. Antenna 11-segmented (unique among Myrmecina species). Distribution. Guangxi, Hunan. Myrmecina pierceae Liu, 2022 Fig. 44 Myrmecina pierceae Liu, 2022: 160, fig. 5 (w.) CHINA. Material examined. Unexamined. High-resolution images of the holotype from Liu et al. (2022) were reviewed. Diagnostic features. (1) Propodeal spines triangular, shorter than their basal width, posteriorly directed; (2) petiole node subrectangular in dorsal view (1.5 × longer than width); (3) head with thin longitudinal rugae, curving toward occipital corners; ventrolateral portion smooth and shining (1–2 rugae visible laterally); (4) clypeus smooth, anterior margin concave, with median process; (5) gaster entirely smooth and shining; (6) mesosoma Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 429 Figure 43. Myrmecina pauca. A. Head in full-face view; B. Antenna; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 430 Figure 44. Myrmecina pierceae, holotype worker (MCZ-ENT00759962; Liu et al. 2022). A. Body in lateral view; B. Head in fullface view; C. Body in dorsal view. and metasoma with coarse longitudinal rugae dorsally, oblique and irregular laterally; (7) body black, with yellowish-brown mandibles, antennae, and legs. Distribution. Yunnan. Myrmecina planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/5427366C-44B7-4855-BD06-C71A20A27F86 Fig. 45 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Guilin, Guangxi, China, 25.0810°N, 110.2908°E, 145 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 10.VI.2018, Zhilin Chen, GXNU180016 [GXNU]. Paratypes. • 4 workers and 1 queen, with the same collection data as the holotype [3 workers and 1 queen, GXNU; 1 worker, IZCAS]. Diagnostic features. (1) Head subquadrate, lateral margins nearly parallel and posterior margin arcuately concave; (2) mandibles with 7 distinct teeth, including 2 robust apical and subapical teeth, and a prominent basal denticle; (3) clypeus with a straight anterior margin, lacking a median denticle; (4) antennal scapes nearly reaching posterolateral corners; (5) eyes medium-sized, 10–12 ommatidia; (6) propodeal spines robust and acute, subequal in length to basal width, apices weakly curved outward; (7) anterolateral pronotal corners strongly convex, with prominent humeral corners; (8) mesosoma with longitudinal rugae and short oblique branches. Notes. M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is most closely resembles M. guangxiensis but can be readily distinguished by the following combination of characters: (1) the lateroventral portion of the head in M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. bears longitudinal rugae that become sparser posteriorly, whereas M. guangxiensis exhibits irregular striations on the sides and reticulate occipital corners; (2) anterior clypeal margin in M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is straight, without a median denticle, contrasting with clypeal margin in M. guangxiensis is concave, with a median denticle; (3) the eyes of M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. are medium-sized (10–12 ommatidia), significantly larger than the very small eyes (4–5 ommatidia) of M. guangxiensis; (4) the propodeal Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 431 spines of M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. are robust, acute, and subequal in length to their basal width, with apices weakly curved outward, while those of M. guangxiensis are triangular, broad at the base, and straight without upward curvature; (5) the dorsal mesosoma of M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. bears longitudinal rugae, with short oblique branches, while M. guangxiensis exhibits two straight longitudinal striations medially and irregular striations laterally; (6) the petiole and postpetiole in M. planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. have longitudinal Figure 45. Myrmecina planiclypea Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Clypeus and mandible in full-face view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 432 rugae dorsally and laterally, whereas those in M. guangxiensis are shagreened or smooth and shining. Worker measurements. (N = 5). HL 0.64–0.69, HW 0.62–0.67, CI 93–96, SL 0.64–0.67, SI 102–105, ED 0.08–0.10, MSL 0.72–0.76, PW 0.43–0.44, PL 0.19–0.22, PH 0.16–0.18, DPW 0.15–0.16, LPI 88–92, DPI 79–83, GL 0.91–0.98, TL 2.64–2.88. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head subquadrate, lateral margins nearly parallel and posterior margin arcuately concave; posterolateral corners rounded. Mandibles with 7 teeth: apical two teeth robust and acutely pointed, teeth 3–6 small but distinct; basal tooth larger than teeth 3–6, with a prominent denticle near inner margin. Clypeus with straight anterior margin, lacking a median denticle. Frontal lobes weakly laterally expanded. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes nearly reaching posterolateral corners. Eyes medium-sized, composed of 10–12 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline evenly convex, eumetanotal spines small, weakly projecting above dorsal outline. Propodeal spines robust and acute, length subequal to their basal width. Propodeal spiracle large, diameter almost equal to its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, anterior pronotum strongly convex, with prominent humeral corners; lateral margins gradually converging posteriorly to propodeal spine bases. Propodeal spines directed posteriorly, their apices weakly curved outward. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole slightly longer than its height, with triangular denticulate projection posterodorsally; ventral margin straight. Postpetiole with nearly straight dorsal margin and distinct anterodorsal corners; anteroventral corner weakly denticulate; gaster ovoid. In dorsal view, petiole rectangular with concave anterior margin and straight lateral margins; postpetiole broader than its length with shallowly concave anterior margin; gaster with distinct anterolateral corners. Sculpture. Mandibles and clypeus smooth and shining, except for one long and one short basal pit on frontal mandibular surface. Head with longitudinal rugae, bearing short branchings (not forming reticulations), except smooth and shining medial frons between frontal carinae. Lateroventral portion of head with longitudinal rugae, becoming sparser posteriorly. Mesosoma with longitudinal rugae bearing short oblique branches (not reticulate). Petiole and postpetiole laterally with longitudinal rugae, dorsally with finer and denser rugae. Gaster smooth and shining. Pilosity and pubescence. Body with moderately dense erect hairs. Pubescence limited to antennal club. Coloration. Anterior head margin, posterior and ventral margins of mesosoma, petiole, pospetiole, and base and posterior of gaster reddish-brown; remainder of body black. Mandibles, clypeus, and antennae reddish-brown, except antennal club and legs yellowish-brown. Etymology. The specific epithet “planiclypea” is a Latin compound adjective derived from “planus” (flat, level) + “clypeus” (referring to the clypeus), meaning “flat-clypeus”. This name highlights the diagnostic straight and non-protruding anterior clypeal margin that distinguishes this species from congeners with medially denticulate or concave clypeal structures. Distribution. Guangxi. Myrmecina raviwonghei Jaitrong, Samung, Waengsothorn & Okido, 2019 Fig. 46 Myrmecina raviwonghei Jaitrong, Samung, Waengsothorn & Okido, 2019: 3, figs 1–5 (w.) THAILAND. Material examined. Unexamined. High-resolution images of the holotype from Jaitrong et al. (2019) were reviewed. Diagnostic features. (1) Clypeus with shallowly concave dorsal face and tridentate median projection on anterior margin; (2) antennal scapes short (SI 71–78), not reaching posterolateral corners of head; (3) eyes extremely reduced (4–6 ommatidia); (3) propodeal spines relatively long; (4) petiole rectangular in dorsal view (PTI 92–100), ventral margin straight, with small anterior denticle; (5) gastral tergite I strongly concave anteriorly and densely punctate, gastral sternite I reticulate; (6) dorsum of head and mesosoma densely punctate-rugose, ventrolateral portion of head with irregular rugae. Distribution. Yunnan; THAILAND. Myrmecina rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/B5B6F116-DE54-43AE-A80B-C09D6A829A0E Fig. 47 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Jinyunshan, Chongqing, China, 29.8073°N, 106.3897°E, 550 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 28.VII.2003, Jianhua Huang, GXNU030551 [GXNU]. Diagnostic features. (1) Posterolateral corners of head rounded and projecting; (2) clypeus with deeply arcuate anterior margin, bearing a tiny median denticle; (3) eumetanotal spines absent or vestigial; (4) petiole with triangular median dorsal projection and flat ventral margin; (5) postpetiole trapezoidal, lacking anterodorsal corner; (6) coarse irregular rugae on mesosomal dorsum (shared with M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.), but latter lacks oblique frons rugae and punctate-rugulose lateroventral area of head. Notes. Comparing to other Myrmecina species, M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is most similar to M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. in possessing a rugose mesosomal dorsum and robust propodeal spines, but M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. can be unequivocally distinguished by the following traits: (1) the clypeal anterior margin in M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is deeply and arcuately concave, with a tiny median denticle (vs. the clypeal anterior margin in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is nearly straight margin, lacking a denticle), though both share projecting anterolateral clypeal corners; (2) posterolateral corners of head of rounded and projecting in Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 433 Figure 46. Myrmecina raviwonghei, holotype worker (THNHM-I-05470, Jaitrong et al. 2019). A. Body in lateral view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Gaster in dorsal view; E. Petiole and postpetiole in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 434 M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. broadly rounded but not projecting in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.); (3) eumetanotal spines of M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. absent or extremely reduced (vs. stout, tooth-like, and projecting above dorsal outline in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.); (4) interspinal space of propodeal spines of M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. U-shaped (vs. broadly V-shaped in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.); (5) petiole with a triangular median dorsal projection and flat ventral margin (vs. posterodorsally directed tooth-like projection and convex ventral margin with subpetiolar process in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.); (6) postpetiole Figure 47. Myrmecina rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Mesosoma in dorsal view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 435 lacking an anterodorsal corner and not compressed anteroposteriorly (vs. strongly compressed with straight dorsal margin in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.); (7) while both species exhibit coarse irregular rugae on the mesosomal dorsum, M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. lacks the oblique posterolateral rugae on the frons and punctate-rugulose lateroventral head sculpture seen in M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is also similar to M. padangensis from Indonesia, both of them possessing a rugose mesosomal dorsum. length of petiole nearly equal with its height in M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. the length of petiole approximately 1.5 times longer than its height in M. padangensis). Worker measurements. (N = 1). HL 0.68, HW 0.63, CI 93, SL 0.57, SI 90, ED 0.09, MSL 0.81, PW 0.45, PL 0.17, PH 0.21, DPW 0.20, LPI 124, DPI 118, GL 0.87, TL 2.89. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head rectangular, lateral margins nearly parallel, posterior margin deeply concave medially, posterolateral corners rounded and projecting. Mandibles with 7 teeth on masticatory margin: apical two teeth broad and prominent, teeth 3–6 minute and indistinct, basal tooth larger than teeth 3–6, but distinctly smaller than apical teeth. Clypeus with projecting anterolateral corners, anterior margin of clypeus deeply and arcuately concave, bearing a tiny median denticle. Frontal lobes well-developed, laterally expanded. 12-segmented, scapes just reaching posterolateral corners. Eyes relatively large, composed of 16–18 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline of mesosoma convex, eumetanotal spines absent or extremely reduced. Propodeal spines robust at base, acutely tapered apically, length slightly greater than their basal width. Propodeal spiracle moderate size, its diameter approximately 1/2 as its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, anterior margin of pronotum rounded and convex, anterolateral corners broadly rounded (not angular). Propodeal spines 1.5 times longer than their basal width; interspinal space U-shaped. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole distinctly higher than long, dorsal margin with a triangular median projection; ventral margin flat. Postpetiole lacking a pronounced anterodorsal angle, not forming a distinct node; sternite trapezoidal. In dorsal view, petiole wider than long; postpetiole lacking anterolateral corners. Gaster oval. Sculpture. Mandibles and clypeus smooth and shining. Head in full-face view with coarse longitudinal rugae; lateroventral portion of head smooth and shining. Mesosomal dorsum with irregular rugae. Petiole and postpetiole with longitudinal striae; gaster smooth and shining. Pilosity and pubescence. Body densely covered with long erect hairs. Appressed pubescence restricted to antennal club. Coloration. Body dark brown to black; mandibles, antennae, and legs yellowish-brown. Etymology. The specific epithet “rugosodorsum” is a Latin neuter compound adjective, combining “rugosus” (wrinkled or rugose) and “dorsum” (the back or dorsum). It refers to the distinctly rugose dorsal surface of the mesosoma, a key diagnostic trait of this species. Distribution. Chongqing. Myrmecina sauteri Forel, 1912 Fig. 48 Myrmecina sauteri Forel, 1912: 54 (w.q.) CHINA. Material examined. High-resolution images of the syntype (https://www.antweb.org, CASENT0908954, Will Ericson) were reviewed. Non-type. • 2 workers, Jiuwanshan, Guangxi, China, 25.2015°N, 108.6817°E, 1188 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 26.VII.2022, Yuqing He, GXNU221993; • 4 workers, Huapincun, Guangxi, China, 25.5539°N, 109.9447°E, 1371 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 01.VIII.2019, Defu Chen, GXNU191773; • 2 workers, Dayaoshan, Guangxi, China, 24.1697°N, 110.2436°E, 1173 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 16.VII.2021, Defu Chen, GXNU212989. Diagnostic features. (1) Antennae 12-segmented; (2) lateral portions of clypeus raised into a sharp ridge, connected to the front ridge of the antennal torulus; (3) scapes smooth, appearing shining; (4) postpetiole with anterior portion, nearly as wide as posterior in dorsal view; (5) mesosomal dorsum with dense striae or rugosity; (6) gastral tergite I sculptured. Distribution. Guangxi, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Taiwan. Myrmecina shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/D8E77859-1F88-4F50-87E5-2C7C355F9B6A Fig. 49 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Jianfengling, Hainan, China, 18.7482°N, 108.8463°E, 895 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 15.VII.2023, Xiaoyun Liang, GXNU230741 [GXNU]. Paratypes. • 6 workers, with the same collection data as the holotype; • 4 workers, Jianfengling, Hainan, China, 18.7423°N, 108.8491°E, 926 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 19.VI.2024, Benan Zhang, GXNU240512 [8 workers, GXNU; 1 worker, IZCAS]. Diagnostic features. (1) Head rectangular (CI 101– 104), lateral margins rounded and posterolateral corners convex; (2) mandibles with 6–7 teeth, including a basal denticle; (3) anterior margin of clypeus nearly straight, lacking median denticle but bearing distinct anterolateral projections; (4) eumetanotal spines projecting above mesosomal outline; (5) propodeal spines with length equal to their basal width and upturned apices; (6) distinctly compressed postpetiole (height > length) with straight dorsal margin; (7) oblique posterolateral rugae on frons combined with punctate-rugulose lateroventral head sculpture. Notes. M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is closely resembles M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. in sharing rugose antennal scapes, M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. differs markedly from M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. through the following diagnostic traits: (1) the head of M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is rectangular (CI 101–104), with convex lateral margins and rounded posterolateral corners (vs. the head of M. shixui Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is subrectangular (CI 95–97), with projecting posterolateral dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 442 Huang and Zhou 2007; Guénard and Dunn 2012); Jiangsu 4 records (Li et al. 2011; Guénard and Dunn 2012); Yunnan 27 records (Xu 1998; Xu et al. 1999; Xu et al. 2001; Li et al. 2009; Chen et al. 2011; Guénard and Dunn 2012; Lu et al. 2016; Fontanilla et al. 2019; Huang et al. 2019); Sichuan 2 records (Luo et al. 2019a, 2019b; He et al. 2020). These citations involve at least 15 different institutions. The combination of diagnostic traits does not match any confirmed specimens from known regional congeners. Whether M. striata truly occurs in China requires further verification by direct examination of type specimens (or high-resolution photographs of type) and critical comparison with Chinese specimens currently identified as this species. At present we have no practical means of verifying every locality or re-examining every voucher. Deleting the species from the Chinese fauna would therefore imply that all of these records are definitively erroneous—a conclusion we cannot yet be justified. Flagging the taxon as “dubious” preserves the existing information while clearly signaling to future workers that confirmation is required. Current Chinese records should be treated with caution until comparative studies confirm their validity. Myrmecina strigis Lin & Wu, 1998 Fig. 52 Myrmecina strigis Lin & Wu, 1998: 91, figs 9, 11, 21–24 (w.) TAIWAN. Material examined. Unexamined. Diagnostic features. (1) 12-segmented antennae; (2) head and mesosoma with striate-rugose sculpture (frons smooth); (3) anterior margin of clypeus convex (lacking a median denticle); (4) propodeal spines short, acute (shorter than their basal width, directed posteriorly); (5) gastral tergite I smooth; and (6) body size large (TL > 3.5 mm). Notes. To date, we have been unable to examine the type specimens or obtain high-resolution images of the type material of M. strigis, except for SEM photographs of its holotype. This species closely resembles M. asiatica in general morphology, but can be reliably distinguished by the following diagnostic characters: (1) significantly larger body size (TL > 3.5) (vs. < 2.6 in M. asiatica), (2) anterior clypeal margin convex (vs. straight in M. asiatica), and (3) propodeal spines proportionally shorter. Additional distinguishing features include its propodeal spine orientation (compared to M. taiwana) and gastral tergite I completely smooth (vs. the reticulate sculpture in M. raviwonghei). Distribution. Taiwan. Myrmecina subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. https://zoobank.org/7739AF90-5B57-49AB-B080-DB939EF974B7 Fig. 53 Material examined. Holotype. • worker, Wuzhishan, Hainan, China, 18.6698°N, 109.4525°E, 737 m, secondary forest, soil, 11.VII.2024, Xiaoyun Liang, GXNU242026 [GXNU]. Paratypes. • 3 workers, with the same collection data as the holotype; • 5 workers and 1 queens, Jianfengling, Hainan, China, 18.7113°N, 108.8766°E, 995 m, secondary forest, soil, 20.VI.2024, Xiaoyun Liang, GXNU240678; • 1 worker, Jianfenglin, Hainan, China, 18.7491°N, 108.9162°E, 672 m, secondary forest, dead wood, 22.VI.2024, Xiaoyun Liang, GXNU240835; • 2 workers, Jianfengling, Hainan, China, 18.7508°N, 108.8666°E, 811 m, secondary forest, soil, 08.VIII.2023, Yanping Wu, GXNU231415 [11 workers, GXNU; 1 worker, IZCAS]. Diagnostic features. (1) Anterior margin of clypeus concave, bearing a distinct transverse rectangular projection medially (non-dentiform); (2) antennal scapes smooth and shining, with sparse piliferous puncta; (3) lateroventral area of head entirely smooth and shining; (4) ventral margin of petiole convex in lateral view; (5) propodeal spines long (approximately 1.5 times basal width), abruptly tapered, and sharply upturned apically into semicircular hooks; (6) gastral tergite I with only faint striae or weak reticulation, remainder smooth and shining. Notes. M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. is most similar to M. raviwonghei but differs consistently in: (1) anterior margin of the clypeus is medially concave and bears a distinct transverse rectangular projection (non-dentiform) in M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. clypeal margin straight or weakly concave, with a median dentiform in M. raviwonghei. (2) antennal scapes smooth except for sparse piliferous puncta in M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. antennal scapes distinctly punctate in M. raviwonghei); (3) lateroventral area of head smooth and shining in M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov.; (vs. ventrolateral portion of head with rugae in M. raviwonghei); (4) petiole of M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. with a ventral margin convex, postpetiole with rounded anterodorsal corner; sternite of postpetiole trapezoidal with straight ventral margin and dentiform postpetiolar process (vs. ventral margin of petiole is straight ventrally, ventral margin of postpetiole stronger concave with a stronger postpetiolar process in M. raviwonghei); (5) M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. exhibits very faint striae or weak reticulation on the gastral tergite I, while the rest is smooth and shining in M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. (vs. gastral tergite I with finely punctate and gastral sternite I with reticulate in M. raviwonghei). Worker measurements. (N = 3). HL 0.70–0.74, HW 0.80–0.83, CI 112–116, SL 0.53–0.54, SI 65–66, ED 0.08–0.09, MSL 0.81–0.85, PW 0.54–0.57, PL 0.24– 0.26, PH 0.25–0.27, DPW 0.24–0.25, LPI 104–113, DPI 96–100, GL 1.21–1.25, TL 3.45–3.51. Worker description. Head. In full-face view, head trapezoidal, broader posteriorly; lateral margins convex, posterior margin medially concave with rounded posterolateral corners. Mandibles with 7 teeth: apical two teeth robust, teeth 3–6 small, low and blunt; basal tooth smaller than apical teeth. Clypeus with prominent anterolateral corners, anterior margin concave, bearing a transverse Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 443 rectangular projection medially (non-dentiform). Frontal lobes strongly laterally expanded. Antennae 12-segmented, scapes not reaching posterolateral corners. Eyes medium-sized, composed of 14–16 ommatidia. Mesosoma. In lateral view, dorsal outline weakly convex, eumetanotal spines slightly projecting above dorsal outline. Propodeal spines relatively long (1.5 times basal width), abruptly tapered apically, tips sharply upturned, forming semicircular hooks. Propodeal spiracle diameter half its distance to propodeal declivity. In dorsal view, pronotum evenly convex with prominent humeral corners; propodeal spines approximately > 2.0 times basal length, apices outwardly curved. Metasoma. In lateral view, petiole higher than long, dorsally with triangular projection posteromedially; subpetiolar process prominent, ventral margin convex. Postpetiole with rounded anterodorsal corner; sternite of postpetiole trapezoidal with straight ventral margin and dentiform postpetiolar process. Gaster ovoid. In dorsal view, petiole slightly narrower anteriorly, broader than long; postpetiole rectangular with rounded anterolateral corners; gaster anterior margin concave with distinct anterolateral corners. Sculpture. Mandibles smooth and shining except for two longitudinal basal pits; clypeus smooth. Antennal scapes smooth, except for piliferous puncta. Head densely longitudinally rugoreticulate, with punctate interrugal spaces; lateroventral areas smooth. Pronotal sides with posteriorly oblique rugae (not continuous with mesopleural and propodeal rugae). Propodeum with coarse longitudinal rugae extending to transverse inter-spinal carina; single short median carina posterior to spines. Petiole and postpetiole with short longitudinal rugae. Gastral tergite I with faint basolateral striae-reticulation, otherwise smooth. Pilosity. Body densely covered with long erect hairs; pubescence restricted to antennal club. Coloration. Mandibles, frontal lobes, antennae, and legs yellowish-brown to reddish-brown. Head, mesosoma, petiole, and postpetiole black. Gaster black with narrow midlateral area yellow-brown bands and segmental posterior margins. Etymology. The specific epithet “subuncinata” is derived from the Latin prefix “sub- “ (meaning “somewhat” or “slightly”) combined with “uncinatus” (“hooked”), referring to the weakly upturned propodeal spines that distinguish this species. The name reflects the characteristic subtly curved propodeal spines, which is intermediate between the strongly hooked spines of some congeners (e.g., M. hamula) and the weakly hooked spines of some congeners (e.g., M. eruga from Australasia). Distribution. Hainan. Myrmecina taiwana Terayama, 1985 Fig. 54 Myrmecina taiwana Terayama, 1985: 38, figs 6–10 (w.q.) TAIWAN. Material examined. High-resolution images of the paratype ((https://www.antweb.org, CASENT0901731, Will Figure 52. Line drawing of Myrmecina strigis (redrawn after the SEM photographs of Lin and Wu 1998). A. Head in full-face view; B. Body in dorsal view; C. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 444 Ericson) were reviewed. Non-type. • 1 worker, Jiuwanshan, Guangxi, China, 25.0580°N, 108.7435°E, secondary forest, leaf litter, 550 m, 30.VIII.2001, Shanyi Zhou, GXNU0014321; • 1 worker, Jingshi, Guangxi, China, 25.7452°N, 110.2936°E, 320 m, secondary forest, leaf litter, 09.VII.1999, Shanyi Zhou, GXNU003721. Figure 53. Myrmecina subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov. A. Propodeal spines in lateral view; B. Head in full-face view; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 445 Diagnostic features. (1) Antennae 12-segmented; (2) median portion of occipital margin straight, without a median denticle; (3) lateral portions of clypeus raised into a sharp ridge, connected to the front ridge of the antennal torulus; (4) postpetiole with anterior portion nearly as wide as posterior in dorsal view; (5) mesosomal dorsum with irregular longitudinal rugae; (6) gastral tergite I smooth and shining; (7) propodeal Figure 54. Myrmecina taiwana, paratype worker (https://www.antweb.org, CASENT0901731, photographed by Will Ericson). A. Head in full-face view; B. Label of paratype; C. Body in dorsal view; D. Body in lateral view. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 446 spines elongate, length > 1.5 times basal width, apex slightly upturned in lateral view. Distribution. Guangxi, Yunnan, Taiwan. Discussion The present study significantly expands our understanding of Myrmecina diversity in China, documenting 28 species (including 11 new species) and providing the first comprehensive taxonomic review of the genus. Our findings highlight persistent taxonomic challenges that require further investigation. Below, we discuss the implications of our results in the context of broader myrmecological research: (1) the genus Myrmecina exhibits remarkable morphological variation in China, particularly in clypeal structure (e.g., presence or absence of median denticles, lateral ridges), propodeal spine morphology (e.g., hooked in M. hamula, upturned in M. subuncinata Gu & Chen, sp. nov.), sculpturing patterns (e.g., reticulate in M. jiachengi Gu & Chen, sp. nov., rugose in M. rugosodorsum Gu & Chen, sp. nov., smooth in M. laevidorsa Gu & Chen, sp. nov.), antennal segmentation (e.g., M. pauca is the only Chinese species with 11-segmented antennae, a rare trait in the genus); (2) our study confirms that China serves as a biodiversity hotspot for Myrmecina, with 28 species recorded to date, more than any other country in the region (by comparison, Vietnam currently records 6 species, Thailand 4, Malaysia 5, and Indonesia 5). The high diversity in southern China (especially Yunnan, Guangxi, and Hainan) likely reflects the region’s complex topography, climatic heterogeneity, and position at the interface of the Palearctic and Oriental biogeographic realms; (3) records of M. striata in China are dubious. The original description by Emery (1889) lacks diagnostic clarity, and no verified specimens match the type material from Myanmar. Chinese records may represent misidentified or undescribed taxa; (4) current delimitations of Myrmecina species rest almost exclusively on morphology, a practice that easily confuses intraspecific variation with interspecific differences. Robust species boundaries can only be established through integrative datasets: UCE phylogenomics has already resolved the deep relationships of the ectaheteromorph ants (Camacho et al. 2022), and a comparable genomic reassessment of the amphitropical New World genus Dorymyrmex has re-defined its species limits (Oberski 2022). A similar combination of phylogenomics and cuticular-hydrocarbon profiling is now required to test the validity of the morphology-based species within Chinese Myrmecina; (5) several newly described species (M. hirsuta Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. globicephala Gu & Chen, sp. nov., M. shanyii Gu & Chen, sp. nov.) are known from single localities, rendering them vulnerable to habitat loss. Given the role of Myrmecina in soil ecosystems (e.g., predation on oribatid mites), their decline could disrupt nutrient cycling. We recommend targeted surveys in understudied regions (e.g., Sichuan, Fujian) and genetic barcoding of type specimens to clarify taxonomic uncertainties. This study establishes a comprehensive taxonomic framework for Myrmecina in China, but much work remains. Future research should prioritize integrative taxonomy and biogeographic modeling to unravel the evolutionary history of this enigmatic genus. Acknowledgements This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 32360127), the National Animal Collection Resource Center of China, the Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi (No. 2025GXNSFBA069504), the Key Laboratory of Ecology of Rare and Endangered Species and Environmental Protection (Guangxi Normal University), Ministry of Education, and the Guangxi Key Laboratory of Rare and Endangered Animal Ecology (Guangxi Normal University). We sincerely extend our gratitude to Professor Zhenghui Xu (Southwest Forestry University, China) and Alice Laciny, PhD (Natural History Museum Vienna, Austria) for their constructive feedback. We are also deeply indebted to the following individuals for their invaluable assistance in specimen collection (listed alphabetically by surname): Defu Chen, Benan Zhang, Chunxuan Luo, Jiacheng Zhang, Shanyi Zhou, Shixu Sun, Xiaoyun Liang, Yanping Wu, and Yuhao Zhao. References Bolton B (1975) A revision of the ant genus Leptogenys Roger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Ethiopian region with a review of the Malagasy species. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History). Entomology 31: 235–305. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.29487 Bolton B (2003) Synopsis and classification of Formicidae. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute 71: 1–370. Bolton B (2025) An online catalog of the ants of the world. http://antcat. org./ [accessed 19 March 2025] Bondroit J (1918) Les fourmis de France et de Belgique. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 87(1–2): 1–174. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/21686351.1918.12279608 Brown WL (1951) New synonymy of a few genera and species of ants. Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 46: 101–106. Brown WL (1971) Characters and synonymies among the genera of ants. Part IV. Some genera of subfamily Myrmicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Breviora 365:1–5. Camacho GP, Franco W, Branstetter MG, Pie MR, Longino JT, Schultz TR, Feitosa RM (2022) UCE phylogenomics resolves major relationships among ectaheteromorph ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Ectatomminae, Heteroponerinae): a new classification for the subfamilies and the description of a new genus. Insect Systematics and Diversity 6(1): 5. https://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixab026 Chen Y, Luo CW, Li HW, Xu ZH, Liu YJ, Zhao SJ (2011) The investigation of soil ant resources on the West slope of Mt Ailao. Hubei Agricultural Sciences 50(7): 1356–1359. Dtsch. Entomol. Z. 72 (2) 2025, 395–448 dez.pensoft.net 447 Curtis J (1829) British entomology; being illustrations and descriptions of the genera of insects found in Great Britain and Ireland. Vol. 6. London: published by the author, plates 242–289. Curtis J (1854) On the genus Myrmica and other indigenous ants. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 21(3): 211–220. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.1852.tb00456.x Emery C (1889) Formiche di Birmania e del Tenasserim raccolte da Leonardo Fea (1885–87). Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale 27[= (2)7]: 485–512. Emery C (1895) Viaggio di Leonardo Fea in Birmania e regioni vicine. LXIII. Formiche di Birmania del Tenasserim e dei Monti Carin raccolte da L. Fea. Parte II. Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale 34[= (2)14]: 450–483. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.16764 Emery C (1898) Beiträge zur Kenntniss der palaearktischen Ameisen. Öfversigt af Finska Vetenskaps-Societetens Förhandlingar 20: 124–151. Emery C (1916) Fauna entomologica italiana. I. Hymenoptera. -Formicidae. Bollettino della Società Entomologica Italiana 47: 79–275. Foerster A (1850) Eine Centurie neuer Hymenopteren. Zweite Dekade. Verhandlungen des Naturhistorischen Vereins der Preussischen Rheinlande und Westfalens 7: 1–500. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl. title.66967 Fontanilla AM, Nakamura A, Xu Z, Cao M, Kitching RL, Tang Y, Burwell CJ (2019) Taxonomic and functional ant diversity along tropical, subtropical, and subalpine elevational transects in southwest China. Insects 10(5): 128. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10050128 Forel AH (1912) Sauter’s Formosa–Ausbeute. Formicidae (Hy: Myrmecina). Entomologische Mitteilungen. Berlin-Dahlem 1: 45–81. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.25894 Forel AH (1914) Deux nouveautés myrmécologiques. Yvorne, Switzerland: published by the author, 1. Guénard B, Dunn RR (2012) A checklist of the ants of China. Zootaxa 3358(1): 1–77. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3558.1.1 He YC, Xu ZH, Zhang XM, Huang Z, Xiong ZP, Liu X, Liu NY (2020) Ant species diversity of Western Daliangshan in Sichuan Province. Journal of Southwest Forestry University 40(3): 104–115. https:// doi.org/10.11929/j.swfu.201904047 Huang JH, Zhou SY (2007) A checklist of family Formicidae of China-Myrmicinae (Part II) (Insecta: Hymenoptera). Journal of Guangxi Normal University: Natural Science Edition 25(1): 91–99. Huang JH, Huang Y, Zhou SY (2008) A new species of the genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) from Hunan Province, China. Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica 33: 275–278. Huang Z, Xu ZH, Liu X, Li LM, Wang YL, Shi SH, Shi Y, Chen ZF (2019) Ant species diversity in northeastern Yunnan. Shengtaixue Zazhi 38(12): 3697–3705. Jaitrong W, Samung Y, Waengsothorn S, Okido H (2019) A new species of the ant genus Myrmecina Curtis, 1829 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae) from Thailand. Far Eastern Entomologist [= Dal’nevostochnyi Entomolog] 383: 1–7. Karavaiev V (1930) Beitrag zur Ameisenfauna der schwedischen Inseln Gotland und Oeland. Zbirnyk Prats’. Zoolohichnoho Muzeyu 8: 5–46. [= Trudy. Vseukrains’ka Akademiya Nauk. Fizichno-Matematichnoho Viddilu 15: 109–150] Latreille PA (1802) Histoire naturelle des fourmis: et recueil de mémoires et, d’observations sur les abeilles, les araignées, les faucheurs, et autres insects. Paris: Impr. Crapelet (chez T. Barrois) [xvi 445 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.11138 Li ZH (2006) List of Chinese Insects. Vol. 4. Sun Yat-sen University Press. Li Q, Chen YQ, Wang SM, Zheng Y, Zhu YH, Wang SY (2009) Diversity of ants in subtropical evergreen broadleaved forest in Pu’er City, Yunnan. Biodiversity Science 17(3): 233–239. https://doi. org/10.3724/SP.J.1003.2009.08035 Li X, Hao D, Huang Y (2011) Ant species diversity at piedmont of Zijin Mountain in Nanjing. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University 35(5): 55–58. [Natural Science Edition] Lin CC, Wu WJ (1998) The ant tribe Myrmecinini (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Taiwan. Chinese Journal of Entomology 18: 83–100. Liu C, Fischer G, Liu Q, Peng YQ, Economo EP, Guenard B (2022) Updating the taxonomy of the ant genus Myrmecina (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) in China with descriptions of three new species. Zootaxa 5182(2): 152–164. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5182.2.2 Lu Z, Hoffmann BD, Chen Y (2016) Can reforested and plantation habitats effectively conserve SW China’s ant biodiversity? Biodiversity and Conservation 25(4): 753–770. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531016-1090-1 Luo CL, Xu ZH, Xiong ZP, Qi B, Yuan DY, Ran MJ (2019a) Distribution patterns of ant species from Wanglang Nature Reserve and adjacent areas of Sichuan Province. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University 36(4): 638–645. Luo CL, Xu ZH, Zhu HQ, Yuan DY, Qi B, Ran MJ (2019b) Altitudinal gradient of ant species diversity of Wanglang Nature reserve and adjacent area in Sichuan Province. Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University 48(4): 485–492. Mann WM (1921) The ants of the Fiji Islands. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 64: 401–499. Masuko K (1994) Specialized predation on oribatid mites by two species of the ant genus Myrmecina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche (Cambridge, Massachusetts) 101(3–4): 159–173. https://doi. org/10.1155/1994/96412 Mayr G (1855) Formicina austriaca. Beschreibung der bisher im österreichischen Kaiserstaate aufgefundenen Ameisen, nebst Hinzufügung jener in Deutschland, in der Schweiz und in Italien vorkommenden Arten. Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Vereins in Wien 5: 273–478. Müller G (1923) Le formiche della Venezia Guilia e della Dalmazia. Bollettino della Società Adriatica di Scienze Naturali in Trieste 28: 11–180. Nylander W (1849) Additamentum alterum adnotationum in monographiam formicarum borealium. Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae 3: 25–48. Oberski JT (2022) First phylogenomic assessment of the amphitropical New World ant genus Dorymyrmex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), a longstanding taxonomic puzzle. Insect Systematics and Diversity 6(1)[8]: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixab022 Okido H, Ogata K, Hosoishi S (2020) Taxonomic revision of the ant genus Myrmecina in Southeast Asia (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Bulletin of the Kyushu University Museum 17: 1–108. https://doi. org/10.15082/bkum.017.01 Rigato F (1999) Myrmecina melonii n. sp., a new ant from Sardinia, with a review of the West Paleartic Myrmecina (Hymenoptera Formicidae). Bollettino della Società Entomologica Italiana 131: 83–92. Santschi F (1939) Fourmis de Rhodesia et du Congo. Bulletin & Annales de la Société Entomologique de Belgique 79: 237–246. dez.pensoft.net Zhuojian Gu et al.: Myrmecina of Formicidae in China: taxonomy & 11 new species 448 Schenck PA (1852) Beschreibung nassauischer Ameisenarten (No. 8). Verein für Naturkunde im Herzogthum Nassau. Wiesbaden 8: 1–149. Terayama M (1985) Two new species of the ant genus Myrmecina (Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from Japan and Taiwan. Edaphologia 32: 1–40. Terayama M (2009) A synopsis of the family Formicidae of Taiwan (Insecta: Hymenoptera). Research Bulletin of Kanto Gakuen University. Liberal Arts 17: 81–266. Wheeler W (1921) Chinese ants collected by Prof. C. W. Howard. Psyche (Cambridge, Massachusetts) 28(4): 110–115. https://doi. org/10.1155/1921/12185 Xu ZH (1998) A report of fourty-one ant species newly recorded in China from Xishuangbanna District of Yunnan Province (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zhongguo Xue Shu Qi Kan Wen Zhai 4: 1119–1121. Xu ZH, Yang BL, Hu G (1999) Formicidae ant communities in fragments of montane rain forest in Xishuangbanna, China. Zoological Research 20(4): 288–293. Xu ZH, Li JG, Fu QZ, Long QZ (2001) A study on the ant communities on west slope at different elevation of the Gaoligongshan Mountain Nature Reserve in Yunnan, China. Zoological Research 22(1): 58–63. Zhou SY (2001) Ants of Guangxi. Guilin, China: Guangxi Normal University Press. Zhou SY, Huang JH, Ma LB (2008) Two new species of the ant genus Myrmecina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with a key to Chinese species. Sociobiology 52: 283–291.