12.07.2015 Views

in Sri Lanka - Ministry of Environment

in Sri Lanka - Ministry of Environment

in Sri Lanka - Ministry of Environment

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table A. Number <strong>of</strong> genera and species <strong>in</strong> each <strong>of</strong> the twelve ant subfamilies recordedfrom <strong>Sri</strong> <strong>Lanka</strong>.Subfamily Genera Species Morpho-speciesAenict<strong>in</strong>ae 1 5Amblyopon<strong>in</strong>ae 2 1 3Aneuret<strong>in</strong>ae 1 1Cerapachy<strong>in</strong>ae 1 6 1Dolichoder<strong>in</strong>ae 5 8 4Doryl<strong>in</strong>ae 1 3Ectatomm<strong>in</strong>ae 1 1Formic<strong>in</strong>ae 12 54 3Leptanill<strong>in</strong>ae 2 01 3Myrmic<strong>in</strong>ae 23 79 1Poner<strong>in</strong>ae 11 31 6Pseudomyrmec<strong>in</strong>ae 1 461 194 21In addition to the generic and species level classification, a number <strong>of</strong> ant genera have beenclassified to subgenera, subspecies and varieties (Bolton et al. 2006) but the generic nameand species name <strong>of</strong> any ant is presented <strong>in</strong> Appendix Table 1. Also, Carebara is the currentlyvalid generic name <strong>of</strong> Oligomyrmex (Fernandez, 2004; Bolton et al. 2006). Among the antgenera listed <strong>in</strong> Appendix Table 1 the follow<strong>in</strong>g ant genera, Acanthomyrmex, Anillomyrma,Gnamptogenys, Metapone, Paratopula, Rophalomastix, Myopias and Myopopone were neverobserved dur<strong>in</strong>g 2000 to 2011 period. Therefore, they are <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> the ‘Data Deficient (DD)’category. Inadequate research on ant systematics, lack <strong>of</strong> fund<strong>in</strong>g for access<strong>in</strong>g foreign antrepositories and lack <strong>of</strong> morphological descriptions for identification to the species levels arethe major taxonomic issues <strong>in</strong> ant systematics. Also, identification to the species level requiresthe collection <strong>of</strong> major and m<strong>in</strong>or workers (at the same time) <strong>of</strong> certa<strong>in</strong> ant genera such asPheidole but the sampl<strong>in</strong>g methods did not fulfil this need. Sampl<strong>in</strong>g methods that were suitablefor ground ants and ground-forag<strong>in</strong>g ants were employed for our research and therefore, antspecies that occupy other microhabitats (e.g. arboreal – Polyrhachis spp., Tetraponera spp.)and forage elsewhere had a very low representation <strong>in</strong> this collection.DistributionIn order to determ<strong>in</strong>e the distribution pattern <strong>of</strong> ants <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sri</strong> <strong>Lanka</strong> an extensive survey wasconducted <strong>in</strong> Gampaha, Colombo, Galle and Kalutara Districts and <strong>in</strong>tensive surveys conducted<strong>in</strong> other Districts from 2000-2011. Two new records, the presence <strong>of</strong> Aneuretus simoni Emery(<strong>Sri</strong> <strong>Lanka</strong>n Relict Ant) <strong>in</strong> “Kirikanda” forest (Dias, et al., 2011 <strong>in</strong> press) and “Kalugala Kanda”forest <strong>in</strong> Kalutara District (by the first author), were reported <strong>in</strong> 2010 and 2011 respectively.Members <strong>of</strong> Ectatomm<strong>in</strong>ae were never observed <strong>in</strong> our collection.ThreatsDue to the lack <strong>of</strong> adequate research on <strong>in</strong>dividual ant species very little is evident as threats tothe ant fauna. Lack <strong>of</strong> ground vegetation and leaf litter seems to be the reason for the absence<strong>of</strong> leaf litter ants, mostly common poner<strong>in</strong>es, <strong>in</strong> cultivated lands when compared with the ant12

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!