W. M. Wheeler.
Some New Formicid Names.
Psyche 23(2):40-41, 1916.

This article at Hindawi Publishing: https://doi.org/10.1155/1916/29679
CEC's scan of this article: http://psyche.entclub.org/pdf/23/23-040.pdf, 84K
This landing page: http://psyche.entclub.org/23/23-040.html

The following unprocessed text is extracted automatically from the PDF file, and is likely to be both incomplete and full of errors. Please consult the PDF file for the complete article.

40 Psyche [April
between ~e~tember 15 and October 15 from nearby plants, no parasitized aphids were found earlier than the dates mentioned above. The aphids were on the roots of Muhlenbergia and rather near the surface; that is about a half inch below the surface of the ground. The coiled and twisted worm was visible within the body of the aphid but after clearing and mounting in balsam it became much more distinct. The accompanying illustration, kindly drawn for us by Dr. Henry Fox, is a very characteristic likeness of the nematode worm within the body of the aphid. The nematode proved indeterminable and it is not unlikely that the aphid is simply an intermediary host.
We know of but one other record of a nematode infesting an aphid. Dr. G. Del Guercio, on page 205 of Nuove Relazioni of the Royal Station of Agricultural Entomology of Florence (Vol. I, 1899), records a nematode as one of the natural means which limits the diffusion of Trama radicis Kaltenbach, a root aphid, and on the following page gives a simple outline drawing of the nematode worm.
SOME NEW FORMICID NAMES.
BY WILLIAM MORTON WHEELER,
Bussey Institution, Harvard University.
Forel's discovery, in 1913, that the East Indian ant, long known under the name of Aphcenogaster (Ischnomyrmex) longipes F. Smith (1857), is really a Pheidole, and the type of the subgenus Ischnomyrmex, makes it necessary to change the name of Pheidole longipes Pergande (1895) of southern California and Mexico. I would propose for the latter the name Pheidole grallipes nom. nov. Owing to the fact that I was unable to receive any proof, my recent paper on the ants collected by Capt. S. A. White in Central Australia (Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr. 39, 1915) contains two unfortunate errors. The name Polyrhachis (Campomyrma) lon- gipes (p. 821), applied to one of the new species, is preoccupied by that of Polyrhachis longipes described by Frederic Smith in 1858 from the Aru Islands. I would, therefore, change the name of the Australian species to P. (C.) macropus nom. nov. Examination-of several fine series of Camponotus (Myrmophyma)



================================================================================