Temnothorax salvini (Forel, 1899)

Prebus, Matthew M., 2021, Taxonomic revision of the Temnothorax salvini clade (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with a key to the clades of New World Temnothorax, PeerJ (e 11514) 9, pp. 1-462 : 34-66

Key to species of the salvini clade based on the worker caste

Two species, both described from Cuba, that are potentially members of the salvini clade were unable to be observed for this study. Therefore, Temnothorax cuyaguateje (Fontenla) and T. imias (Fontenla) are incertae sedis in Temnothorax .

1. Body without standing setae of any kind, except on the clypeus and borders of the gastral sclerites; propodeum strongly depressed; propodeal spines long and down curved; petiolar node subquadrate; southern Texas to Nicaragua........... T. misomoschus sp. nov. ( misomoschus group)

- Body with standing setae: may be sparse, but at least present on the dorsum of the head, dorsum of the pronotum, and posterior margin of the postpetiole; other characters variable; widespread...........................................................................................................................2

2. Dorsal surfaces of legs and nearly all other surfaces of the body covered in long, tapering, suberect to subdecument setae ( Figs. 37A–37C ).........................................................................3

- Dorsal surfaces of legs without long, tapering, suberect setae: long suberect setae, if present, are restricted to the ventral surface of the legs ( Figs. 37D–37F )...........................15

3. In profile view, promesonotum forming a bulging, even convexity; metanotal groove impressed; propodeum strongly depressed below the level of the promesonotum ( Figs. 38A & 38B ); ground- or litter-nesting species; U.S.A. to Nicaragua ( pergandei group).................................................................................................................................................................4

- In profile view, promesonotum grading evenly into propodeum, not bulging; metanotal groove often obscure; propodeum not strongly depressed ( Figs. 38C & 38D ); nesting habitat variable....................................................................................................................................5

4. Propodeal teeth present ( Fig. 38A ); North America, north of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec ............................................................. T. pergandei (Emery) ( pergandei group)

- Propodeal teeth absent ( Fig. 38B ); propodeal angles rounded and marked by a carina; Central America, south of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec ........................... T. bison sp. nov. ( pergandei group)

5. Mesosoma strongly arched in profile view ( Figs. 39A & 39B )............................................6

- Mesosoma not strongly arched in profile view: flat to slightly sinuate ( Figs. 39C & 39D ); arboreally-nesting species in Central America from Southern Mexico to Panama ( salvini group, in part).....................................................................................................................................7

6. Dorsum of head above compound eyes and dorsum of mesosoma smooth and shining ( Figs. 39A & 39E ); integument predominantly dark brown to black; nesting in hollow twigs in the leaf litter, in dead branches, or under bark near the ground on live trees; Sonoran Desert.................................................. T. politus (Smith) ( subditivus group, part)

- Dorsum of head above compound eyes and dorsum of mesosoma areolate, with overlying rugose sculpture ( Figs. 39B & 39F ); integument predominantly yellow to testaceous; nesting habitat unknown, collected from leaf litter extractions; Southern Mexico to Honduras ( salvini group, in part)................ T. terraztecus sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

7. Petiolar node strongly squamiform, broadly expanded apically: PNWI ≥ 160, corners distinctly angulate in posterior view ( Fig. 40A )..........................................................................8

- Petiolar node not as strongly squamiform, not as broadly expanded apically: PNWI ≤

150, corners rounded in posterior view ( Fig. 40B )...................................................................11

8. Light yellow to color orange, subpetiolar tooth acutely spiniform ( Fig. 41A )................9

- Color dark brown, subpetiolar tooth minute and triangular ( Fig. 41B ).... T. longicaulis stat. nov., nom. nov. ( salvini group, part)

9. Dorsum of head with strongly rugose sculpture overlying areolate sculpture; subpetiolar tooth shorter than the setae that arises from the peduncle directly above it ( Fig. 42A ; may be decumbent in some specimens); dorsum of petiolar node and postpetiole lightly sculptured; size larger: WL> 1.25 mm .......... T. aztecoides sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

- Dorsum of head with weaker, costate-rugose sculpture overlying areolate sculpture; subpetiolar tooth longer: equal to or longer than the setae that arise from the peduncle directly above it ( Fig. 42B ; may be decumbent in some specimens); dorsum of petiolar node and postpetiole smooth and shining to very weakly areolate-rugulose; size smaller: WL <1.17 mm .................................................................................................................................10

10. Propodeal spines longer than the propodeal declivity: PSI> 32 ( Fig. 43A ).................... .................................................................................. T. aztecus (Wheeler) ( salvini group, part)

- Propodeal spines shorter than the propodeal declivity: PSI <30 ( Fig. 43B )....................... ................................................................................ T. paraztecus sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

11. Subpetiolar tooth equal to or longer than the setae that arises from the peduncle directly above it ( Fig. 44A ; may be decumbent in some specimens) ................. T. longinoi sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

- Subpetiolar tooth shorter than the setae that arises from the peduncle directly above it ( Fig. 44B ; may be decumbent in some specimens)...................................................................12

12. Propodeal spines long: PSI> 30 ( Fig. 45A )... T. quetzal sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

- Propodeal spines shorter: PSI <30 ( Fig. 45B )........................................................................13

13. Petiolar node not expanded apically: PNWI ≤ 130 ( Fig. 46A )......... T. salvini (Forel) ( salvini group, part)

- Petiolar node expanded apically: PNWI ≥ 160 ( Fig. 46B )...................................................14

14. Dorsum of mesosoma predominantly rugose; integument areolate between propodeal spines ( Fig. 47A ) ........................................ T. parvidentatus sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

- Dorsum of mesosoma predominantly costate; integument smooth and shining between propodeal spines ( Fig. 47B ) ....... T. fortispinosus sp. nov. ( salvini group, part)

15. Antennal scapes with suberect pilosity ( Fig. 48A ); postpetiole moderately broad, 2.1 to 2.2 times the width of the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view (PSI 210-220); anterior quarter of first gastral tergite very weakly areolate; integument light yellow; Baja California .............................. T. pilicornis sp. nov. ( pilicornis group)

- Antennal scapes with subdecumbent to adpressed pilosity ( Fig. 48B ); postpetiole narrow to very broad; if first gastral tergite sculptured and integument yellow, then petiole narrower: less than 2 times the width of the caudal cylinder in dorsal view (PSI <200); widespread16

16. Petiolar node cuneiform to subcuneiform ( Figs. 49A–49C )............................................17

- Petiolar node shaped otherwise ( Figs. 49D–49F )...................................................................18

17. Anterior clypeal margin emarginate; hind femora moderately to strongly incrassate ( Figs. 50A & 50B ); Southern U.S.A. and Northern Mexico ( rugosus group, in part) .......... ................................................................................. T. rugosus (Mackay) ( rugosus group, part)

- Anterior clypeal margin entire; hind femora weakly incrassate ( Figs. 50C & 50D ); Southern Mexico (Chiapas)................ T. acuminatus sp. nov. ( acuminatus group, part)

18. Petiole with a transverse carina anterodorsally ( Figs. 51A & 51B ); postpetiole narrow, <1.5 times as wide as the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view (PWI <150) ( Figs. 51C & 51D ); Mexico.............................................................................................................19

- Petiole with a transverse carina dorsally or not ( Fig. 51E ); postpetiole relatively broad, ≥ 1.5 times as wide as the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view (PWI ≥ 150) ( Figs. 51F–51H ); widespread..........................................................................................................20

19. Anterior margin of clypeus entire ( Fig. 52A ); propodeum without many setae dorsally, except near extreme anterior near the metanotal groove and midway along the length of the propodeal spines ( Fig. 52B ); petiolar node dorsally rounded in profile view; first gastral sternite areolate-rugulose; Mexico (Veracruz) T. tuxtlanus sp. nov. ( acuminatus group, part)

- Anterior margin of clypeus emarginate ( Fig. 52C ); propodeum with at least one pair of setae dorsally ( Fig. 52D ); petiolar node dorsally truncate in profile view; first gastral sternite smooth; Mexico (Chihuahua; rugosus group, in part) ...... T. parralensis sp. nov. ( rugosus group, part)

20. With the following characters in combination: anterior margin of the clypeus strongly emarginate medially; petiolar peduncle short to moderately long, comprising half the length of the petiole or less; petiolar node subquadrate, erect, and relatively short: NI <170 ( Fig. 53 ); arboreally-nesting species from Southwestern U.S.A. to South Central Mexico ( annexus group) .............................................................................................................................. 21

- Not having the above combination of characters; if clypeus is strongly emarginate, then petiolar peduncle is longer and/or petiolar node is not subquadrate; widespread............25

21. Erect setae present on gula ( Fig. 54A )..................................................................................22

- Setae, if present on gula, not erect ( Fig. 54B ).........................................................................24

22. Head elongate: CI 80-84 ( Fig. 55A ) .............. T. balnearius sp. nov. ( annexus group)

- Head less elongate: CI 86-90 ( Figs. 55B & 55C )....................................................................23

23. Petiolar node lower, not as strongly quadrate in profile view; posterior margin of petiolar node indistinct in profile view, much shorter than dorsal margin ( Fig. 56A ); first gastral tergite densely areolate ............................. T. obtusigaster sp. nov. ( annexus group)

- Petiolar node high and strongly quadrate in profile view; posterior margin of petiolar node distinct in profile view, about two thirds as long as dorsal margin ( Fig. 56B ); first gastral tergite smooth and shining ........................... T. arbustus sp. nov. ( annexus group)

24. Propodeal spines longer, broad; petiole pedunculate ( Fig. 57A ); body heavily sculptured: pronotum in profile view areolate with overlying rugose sculpture .................. ............................................................................. T. annexus (Baroni Urbani) ( annexus group)

- Propodeal spines shorter, less broad; peduncle of petiole shorter ( Fig. 57B ); body less heavily sculptured: pronotum in profile view predominantly areolate, without overlying rugose sculpture ........................................................ T. quercicola sp. nov. ( annexus group)

25. Propodeal spines long (PSI ≥ 22), acute, and directed dorsally: forming an angle of 130 ° or greater with the propodeal declivity in profile view ( Fig. 58a–58C )...............................26

- Propodeal spines, if directed dorsally, not long (PSI ≤ 20; Fig. 58D–58F ).................... 28

26. Dorsum of head weakly sculptured: smooth and shining between weak costulate sculpture; petiolar node erect and subquadrate ( Figs. 59A & 59D ); Southern Mexico ....... ........................................................ T. tenuisculptus (Baroni Urbani) ( tenuisculptus group)

- Dorsum of head strongly sculptured: uniformly areolate-rugulose with overlying costulate or rugulose sculpture; petiolar node rounded dorsally ( Figs. 59B, 59C, 59E, 59F ); Southern Mexico to Honduras......................................................................................................27

27. Postpetiole relatively narrow: <1.7 times as wide as the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view (PWI <170; Fig. 60A ); Southern Mexico to Honduras....... T. acutispinosus sp. nov. ( acutispinosus group)

- Postpetiole relatively broad: about 2 times as wide as the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view (PWI ~ 200; Fig. 60B ); Honduras.... T. altinodus sp. nov. ( altinodus group)

28. With the following characters in combination: dorsal surface of head uniformly areolate ( Fig. 61A ); petiolar peduncle moderately long, comprising less than half the petiolar length; petiolar node antero-posteriorly compressed and tall, with posterior face about as long as the anterior face in profile view ( Fig. 61B ); Texas and Northern Mexico ..................................................................... T. terrigena (Wheeler) ( terrigena group)

- Not matching the above description; if dorsal surface of head is uniformly areolate and petiolar peduncle is moderately long, then the petiolar node is not antero-posteriorly compressed and tall; widespread...................................................................................................29

29. Petiolar node tall and leaning posteriorly in profile view, overhanging the caudal cylinder of the petiole ( Figs. 62A–62C ); Mexico to Nicaragua ( augusti group)................30

- Petiolar node, if tall, not leaning posteriorly in profile view ( Figs. 62D–62F ); widespread..........................................................................................................................................33

30. Propodeal spines short: PSI <35 ( Fig. 63A ) T. augusti (Baroni Urbani) ( augusti group)

- Propodeal spines longer: PSI> 35 ( Fig. 63B )........................................................................31

31. Head relatively broad: CI ≥ 84 ( Fig. 64A ). T. leucacanthoides sp. nov. ( augusti group)

- Head relatively narrow: CI ≤ 81 ( Fig. 64B ).............................................................................32

32. Antennal scapes longer: SI> 100........................... T. aureus sp. nov. ( augusti group)

- Antennal scapes shorter: SI ≤ 100. T. leucacanthus (Baroni Urbani) ( augusti group)

33. Antennal scapes long, exceeding the posterior margin of the head by about two times the maximum width of the scape when fully retracted (SI> 110); dorsum of mesosoma not strongly arched dorsally in profile view; propodeal spines shorter than the propodeal declivity (PSI <35); petiolar node subquadrate; Mexico (Puebla)........................ .................................................................................... T. casanovai sp. nov. ( casanovai group)

- Not matching the above description; if antennal scapes are long, mesosoma strongly arched dorsally, propodeal spines longer than the propodeal declivity, and petiolar node is squamiform; widespread.................................................................................................................34

34. With the following character combination: propodeal spines short (PSI <30); in profile view, dorsum of petiolar node subquadrate to rounded, and bearing four to six erect setae ( Figs. 65A–65C ); in dorsal view, postpetiole moderately broad (190 <PWI <235; Figs. 65D–65F); Southern Mexico to Guatemala ( goniops group, in part)................................. 35

- Not matching the above description; widespread ................................................................ 37

35. Dorsum of head and post-petiole predominantly smooth and shining ( Figs. 66A &

66B)............................................................................. T. xincai sp. nov. ( goniops group, part)

- Dorsum of head and post-petiole areolate-rugulose ( Figs. 66C & 66D )..........................36

36. Petiolar node expanded apically: PNWI> 120 ( Fig. 67A )... T. ixili (Baroni Urbani) ( goniops group, part)

- Petiolar node not expanded apically: PNWI <115 ( Fig. 67B ).............. T. achii sp. nov. ( goniops group, part)

37. Petiolar node squamiform ( Figs. 68A–68D ).......................................................................38

- Petiolar node not squamiform ( Figs. 68E–68H )....................................................................42

38. In dorsal view, propodeal spines straight and evenly diverging: negative space between the propodeal spines “V” shaped, or a basally truncate “V” ( Figs. 69A–69C ); dorsum of petiolar node flat, sides evenly converging basally ( Figs. 69A & 69C ); widespread ............. ...................................................................... T. subditivus (Wheeler) ( subditivus group, part)

- In dorsal view, propodeal spines diverging, but curved toward the midline of the body: negative space between the propodeal spines “U” shaped, or a basally truncate “U” ( Figs. 69D–69F ); dorsum of petiolar node rounded to flat, sides bowed ( Figs. 69D–69F ); Bahamas and Cuba ( pastinifer group, in part)..........................................................................39

39. Head predominantly smooth and shining ( Fig. 70A ) T. schwarzi (Mann) ( pastinifer group, part)

- Head sculptured: areolate to areolate-rugulose with overlying rugulose sculpture ( Figs. 70B–70F )................................................................................................................................40

40. Anterior margin of clypeus strongly emarginated ( Fig. 71A ); in profile view, petiole strongly squamiform and overhanging the petiolar peduncle; petiole with only two erect setae dorsally, postpetiole with six or fewer ( Fig. 71B ) .......... T. pastinifer (Emery) ( pastinifer group, part)

- Anterior margin of clypeus entire or, if weakly indented, head and mesosoma with well-defined rugae in addition to areolae ( Fig. 71C ); in profile view, petiole strongly squamiform or not; petiole with four or more erect setae, postpetiole with ten or more ( Fig. 71D )............................................................................................................................................41

41. Antennal scape long, surpassing posterior margin of head by> 2x the maximum width of the scape when fully retracted (SI ~ 106; Fig. 72A ); petiolar node strongly enlarged apically (PNWI> 180; Fig. 72B )............ T. rutabulafer sp. nov. ( pastinifer group, part)

- Antennal scape short, barely surpassing the posterior margin of head when fully retracted ( Fig. 72C ); petiolar node weakly enlarged apically (PNWI <160; Fig. 72D ) ....... ................................................................... T. androsanus (Wheeler) ( pastinifer group, part)

42. With the following character combination: antennal scapes surpassing the posterior margin of the head capsule by about one and a half times their length; dorsum of mesosoma strongly arched; petiole with a moderately long peduncle; petiolar node high, strongly rounded dorsally, and wider than the caudal cylinder of the petiole in dorsal view; postpetiole wide (215 <PWI <240); bicolored species: head capsule dark, remainder of body light yellow; Cuba ( pastinifer group, in part) .... T. nigricans (Baroni Urbani) ( pastinifer group, part)

- Not matching the above description; widespread..................................................................43

43. Postpetiole moderately broad (150 <PWI <220; Figs. 73A–73D ); Mexico to Costa Rica.......................................................................................................................................................58

- Postpetiole very broad (PWI> 220; Figs. 73E–73H ); Southern Florida, Bahamas, Greater Antilles, Northern Lesser Antilles ( pulchellus group)..............................................................44

44. Hind femora strongly incrassate (FI> 370); propodeal spines short (PSI <21) and petiole with> 4 erect setae ( Fig. 74A ); Hispaniola ............... T. laticrus sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- Hind femora not as strongly incrassate (FI <360); propodeal spines longer (PSI ≥ 30) and petiole with ≤ 4 erect setae ( Fig. 74B ); widespread, including Hispaniola..........................45

45. Erect setae on dorsum of mesosoma very sparse, restricted to a pair arising from the promesonotum ( Figs. 75A & 75B ).............................................................................................. 46

- Standing setae on dorsum of mesosoma more abundant, with erect setae on other regions of the mesosoma, in addition to the promesonotum ( Figs. 75C & 75D )............................47

46. Dorsum of head and mesosoma smooth and shining; dorsum of petiole with two erect setae; bicolored: head and gaster dark brown, remainder of body yellow; U.S. and British Virgin Islands........................................... T. pulchellus (Emery) ( pulchellus group)

- Dorsum of head and mesosoma areolate; dorsum of petiole without erect setae; uniformly testaceous yellow; Barbuda.................................... T. wettereri sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

47. Petiole with only 2 erect setae ( Figs. 76A –76C )...............................................................48

- Petiole with 4 erect setae ( Figs. 76D–76F )...............................................................................50

48. Head predominantly smooth and shining, with weak costulate sculpture along the medial edges of the frontal carinae ( Fig. 77A ); Cuba..............................................................49

- Head with stronger sculpture, either with a smooth central strip surrounded by weakly areolate and costulate sculpture, or with the head uniformly areolate ( Figs. 77B & 77C ); southern Florida, Bahamas, and Cuba....................... T. torrei (Aguayo) ( pulchellus group)

49. In full-face view, posterior margin of head passing into the lateral margins through a broad curve, giving the head an ovular shape ( Fig. 78A ); in dorsal view, promesonotal suture deeply impressed and extending to the dorsal face of the mesosoma ( Fig. 78B ); in profile view, petiolar node subquadrate: dorsal face transitioning to posterior face through a rounded ~90 ° angle ( Fig. 76C )....................... T. hippolytus sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- In full-face view, posterior margin of head passing into the lateral margins through a rounded angle, giving the head a boxy shape ( Fig. 78C ); in dorsal view, promesonotal suture not deeply impressed ( Fig. 78D ); in profile view, petiolar node not subquadrate: dorsal face transitioning to posterior face through broad curve ( Fig. 76B ).... T. terricola (Mann) ( pulchellus group)

50. Dorsum of head uniformly areolate ( Figs. 79A–79C ).......................................................51

- Dorsum of head smooth and shining, or sculptured otherwise ( Figs. 79D –79F )........52

51. In full-face view, head with posterior margin weakly concave ( Figs. 79A & 79C )........ ..................................................................................... T. agavicola sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- In full-face view, head with posterior margin flat to convex ( Fig. 79B ).... T. albispinus (Wheeler) ( pulchellus group)

52. Metapleural gland bulla large, extending more than halfway between the metacoxal insertion and the propodeal spiracle ( Fig. 80A ); U.S. Virgin Islands........ T. magnabulla sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- Metapleural gland bulla smaller, extending about halfway between the metacoxal insertion and the propodeal spiracle ( Figs. 80B–80D ); Hispaniola......................................53

53. Mesosoma smooth and shining dorsally ( Figs. 81A & 81D ); dorsum of mesosoma strongly convex in profile view ( Figs. 81B & 81C )................................................................. 54

- Mesosoma areolate-rugulose dorsally ( Figs. 81E & 81H ); dorsum of mesosoma weakly convex in profile view ( Figs. 81F & 81G ) ................................................................................. 56

54. Uniformly yellow ....................... T. flavidulus (Wheeler & Mann) ( pulchellus group)

- Color variable, but never uniformly yellow.............................................................................55

55. On anterior margin of clypeus, medial two pairs of setae about the same width ( Fig. 82A ); strikingly bicolored: head, mesosoma and waist segments dark brown; remainder bright yellow ..................................... T. harlequina sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- On anterior margin of clypeus, pair of setae flanking the medial pair about twice the width of the medial pair ( Fig. 82B ); integument color variable, but if bicolored, gaster never uniformly bright yellow........................ T. ciferrii (Menozzi & Russo) ( pulchellus group)

56. Anterior clypeal margin emarginated medially ( Fig. 83A ) ............ T. wilsoni sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- Anterior clypeal margin flat to evenly convex ( Fig. 83B )....................................................57

57. Petiole long relative to the postpetiole (PLI 148–166; Fig. 84A ).............. T. balaclava sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

- Petiole short relative to the postpetiole (PLI 140–143; Fig. 84B )........... T. bahoruco sp. nov. ( pulchellus group)

58. Petiolar node low, elongate (NI> 170; Figs. 85A & 85B ); Mexico to Costa Rica ( fuscatus group)..................................................................................................................................................59

- Petiolar node high, relatively short (NI <150; Fig. 85C & 85D ); Southern Mexico and Guatemala ( goniops group, in part)..............................................................................................62

59. Propodeal spines long: PSI> 22 ( Figs. 86A & 86B ); body uniformly colored.......... 60

- Propodeal spines short: PSI <19 ( Fig. 86C ); bicolored: either with mesosoma red and rest of body dark brown, or with gaster yellow and body dark brown.......................................61

60. Propodeal spines acute ( Fig. 86A ) ....................... T. fuscatus (Mann) ( fuscatus group)

- Propodeal spines truncate ( Fig. 86B ) .................. T. nebliselva sp. nov. ( fuscatus group)

61. Eye small and round: in profile view, distance between the compound eye and base of mandible greater than the maximum length of the eye, OI ≤ 22 ( Fig. 87A ); body predominantly dark brown, contrasting with a red mesosoma......... T. ocarinae (Baroni Urbani) ( fuscatus group)

- Eye larger and oval: in profile view, distance between the compound eye and base of mandible roughly equal to the maximum length of the eye, OI ≥ 24 ( Fig. 87B ); body predominantly dark brown, with a contrasting bright yellow gaster T. skwarrae (Wheeler) ( fuscatus group)

62. Head sculptured: dorsum uniformly areolate-rugose ( Fig. 88A ).. T. goniops (Baroni Urbani) ( goniops group, part)

- Dorsum of head predominantly smooth and shining ( Fig. 88B )..... T. huehuetenangoi (Baroni Urbani) ( goniops group, part)

Figures

Figure 37 Comparison of setae morphology of salvini clade workers in dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax aztecoides sp. nov. (CASENT0758791). (B) T. pergandei (CASENT0758291). (C) T. politus (CASENT0619368). (D) T. rutabulafer sp. nov. (CASENT0758266). (E) T. leucacanthoides sp. nov. (CASENT0756102). (F) T. wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-37

Figure 38 Comparison of mesosoma morphology of salvini clade workers in profile view. (A) Temnothorax pergandei (CASENT0758291). (B) T. bison sp. nov. (CASENT0636947). (C) T. longinoi sp. nov. (CASENT0758892). (D) T. politus (CASENT0756845). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-38

Figure 39 Comparison of mesosoma morphology and head sculpture of salvini clade workers. (A–D) Profile view. (E–H) Full-face view. (A) Temnothorax politus (CASENT0756845). (B) T. terraztecus sp. nov. (CASENT0868966). (C) T. longinoi sp. nov. (CASENT0758892). (D) T. quetzal sp. nov. (CASENT0614495). (E) T. politus (CASENT0756845). (F) T. terraztecus sp. nov. (CASENT0868966) (G) T. longinoi sp. nov. (CASENT0758892). (H) T. quetzal sp. nov. (CASENT0614495). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-39

Figure 40 Comparison of petiolar node morphology in the salvini species group in posterodorsal view. (A) Temnothorax aztecoides sp. nov. (CASENT0758791). (B) T. quetzal sp. nov. (CASENT0614495). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-40

Figure 41 Comparison of subpetiolar tooth morphology in the salvini species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax aztecus (CASENT0758793). (B) T. longicaulis stat. nov., nom. nov. (CASENT0758334). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-41

Figure 42 Comparison of worker petiole setae in the salvini species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax aztecoides sp. nov. (CASENT0758791). (B) T. aztecus (CASENT0758793). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-42

Figure 43 Comparison of worker propodeal spine morphology in the salvini species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax aztecus (CASENT0758793). (B) T. paraztecus sp. nov. (CASENT0629030). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-43

Figure 44 Comparison of worker subpetiolar tooth morphology in the salvini species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax longinoi sp. nov. (CASENT0758892). (B) T. salvini (CASENT0756074). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-44

Figure 45 Comparison of worker propodeal spine morphology in the salvini species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax quetzal sp. nov. (CASENT0614495). (B) T. salvini (CASENT0756074). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-45

Figure 46 Comparison of worker petiolar node morphology in the salvini species group in posterodorsal view. (A) Temnothorax salvini (CASENT0756074). (B) T. parvidentatus sp. nov. (CASENT0756087). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-46

Figure 47 Comparison of worker propodeal declivity sculpture in the salvini species group in posterodorsal view. (A) Temnothorax parvidentatus sp. nov. (CASENT0756087). (B) T. fortispinosus sp. nov. (JTLC000010282). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-47

Figure 48 Comparison of worker antennal scape pilosity in the salvini clade in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax pilicornis sp. nov. (CASENT0756186). (B) T. goniops (MCZENT00032436). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-48

Figure 49 Comparison of worker petiolar node morphology in the salvini clade in profile view. (A) Temnothorax acuminatus sp. nov. (JTLC000007439). (B) T. rugosus (LACMENT323296). (C) T. rugosus (LACMENT323260). (D)T. obtusigaster sp. nov. (CASENT0758654). (E) T. rutabulafer sp. nov. (CASENT0758266). (F) T. fuscatus (CASENT0625205). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-49

Figure 50 Comparison of clypeus and femur morphology in the salvini clade. (A) Temnothorax rugosus gyne, full-face view (LACMENT323259). (B) T. rugosus worker, dorsal view (LACMENT323260). (C) T. acuminatus sp. nov. worker, full-face view (JTLC000007439). (D) T. acuminatus sp. nov. worker, dorsal view (JTLC000007439). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-50

Figure 51 Comparison of worker waist segment morphology in the salvini clade. (A) Temnothorax parralensis sp. nov., profile view (LACMENT323355). (B) T. tuxtlanus sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0640472). (C) T. parralensis sp. nov., dorsal view (LACMENT323355). (D) T. tuxtlanus sp. nov., dorsal view (CASENT0640472). (E) T. casanovai sp. nov., profile view (LACMENT323462). (F) T. balnearius sp. nov., dorsal view (LACMENT323199). (G) T. subditivus, dorsal view (CASENT0758340). (H) T. androsanus, dorsal view (MCZENT00021003). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-51

Figure 52 Comparison of worker clypeus and petiole morphology in the salvini clade. Temnothorax tuxtlanus sp. nov. (CASENT0640472).(A) Full-face view. (B) Profile view.T. parralensis sp nov. (LACMENT323355). (C) Full-face view. (D) Profile view. Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-52

Figure 53 Worker clypeus and petiole morphology of the annexus species group. (A) Temnothorax quercicola sp. nov., full-face view (LACMENT323216). (B) T. annexus, profile view (MCZENT00561747). (C) T. obtusigaster sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0758654). (D) T. balnearius sp. nov., profile view (LACMENT323199). (E) T. quercicola sp. nov., profile view (LACMENT323216). (F) T. arbustus sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0758357). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-53

Figure 54 Comparison of worker gular setae in the annexus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax obtusigaster sp. nov. (CASENT0758654). (B) T. annexus (MCZENT00561747). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-54

Figure 55 Comparison of worker head morphology in the annexus species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax balnearius sp. nov. (LACMENT323199). (B) T. obtusigaster sp. nov., (CASENT0758654). (C) T. arbustus sp. nov. (CASENT0758357). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-55

Figure 56 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the annexus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax obtusigaster sp. nov. (CASENT0758654). (B) T. arbustus sp. nov. (CASENT0758357). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-56

Figure 57 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the annexus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax annexus (MCZENT00561747). (B) T. quercicola sp. nov. (LACMENT323216). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-57

Figure 58 Comparison of worker propodeal spine morphology in the salvini clade in profile view. (A) Temnothorax acutispinosus sp. nov. (JTLC000007447). (B) T. altinodus sp. nov. (CASENT0617708; propodeal spine broken). (C) T. tenuisculptus (MCZENT00032435). (D) T. ocarinae (USNMENT00531636). (E) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). (F) T. laticrus sp. nov. (CASENT0758263). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-58

Figure 59 Comparison of worker head sculpture and petiole morphology in the salvini clade. (A) Temnothorax tenuisculptus, full-face view (MCZENT00032435). (B) T. altinodus sp. nov., full-face view (CASENT0617708). (C) T. acutispinosus sp. nov., full-face view (JTLC000007447). (D) T. tenuisculptus, profile view (MCZENT00032435). (E) T. altinodus sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0617708). (F) T. acutispinosus sp. nov., profile view (JTLC000007447). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-59

Figure 60 Comparison of worker waist segment morphology in the salvini clade in dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax acutispinosus sp. nov. (JTLC000007447). (B) T. altinodus sp. nov. (CASENT0617708). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-60

Figure 61 Head sculpture and petiole morphology of Temnothorax terrigena worker. (CASENT0104775; photo: April Nobile, from www.antweb.org). (A) Full-face view. (B) Profile view. Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-61

Figure 62 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the salvini clade in profile view. (A) Temnothorax aureus sp. nov. (CASENT0619363). (B) T. leucacanthoides sp. nov. (CASENT0756102). (C) T. leucacanthus (MCZENT00032434). (D) T. casanovai sp. nov. (LACMENT323462). (E) T. subditivus (CASENT0758340). (F) T. pastinifer (CASENT0758861). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-62

Figure 63 Comparison of worker propodeal spine morphology in the augusti species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax augusti (MCZENT00021005). (B) T. leucacanthoides sp. nov. (CASENT0756102). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-63

Figure 64 Comparison of worker head morphology in the augusti species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax leucacanthoides sp. nov. (CASENT0756102). (B) T. leucacanthus (MCZENT00032434). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-64

Figure 65 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the goniops species group. (A–C) Profile view. (D–F) Dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax achii sp. nov. (JTLC000009876). (B) T. ixili (CASENT0611678). (C) T. xincai sp. nov. (CASENT0632983). (D) T. achii sp. nov. (JTLC000009876). (E) T. ixili (CASENT0611678). (F) T. xincai sp. nov.(CASENT0632983). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-65

Figure 66 Comparison of worker head and waist segment morphology in the goniops species group. (A) Temnothorax xincai sp. nov., full-face view (CASENT0632983). (B) T. xincai sp. nov., dorsal view (CASENT0632983). (C) T. ixili, full-face view (CASENT0611678). (D) T. ixili, dorsal view (CASENT0611678). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-66

Figure 67 Comparison of worker waist segment morphology in the goniops species group in dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax ixili (CASENT0611678). (B) T. achii sp. nov. (JTLC000009876). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-67

Figure 68 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the salvini clade in profile view. (A) Temnothorax subditivus (CASENT0758340). (B) T. pastinifer (CASENT0758861). (C) T. rutabulafer sp. nov. (CASENT0758266). (D) T. adrosanus (CASENT0758350). (E) T. fuscatus (CASENT0625205). (F) T. goniops (MCZENT00032436). (G) T. nigricans (MCZENT00577111). (H) T. wilsoni sp. nov., (MCZENT00583608). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-68

Figure 69 Comparison of worker propodeal spine and petiolar node morphology in the salvini clade in dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax subditivus (CASENT0758340). (B) T. subditivus (MCZENT00016371). (C) T. subditivus (CASENT0619368). (D) T. androsanus (CASENT0758350). (E) T. pastinifer (CASENT0758861). (F) T. rutabulafer sp. nov. (CASENT0758266). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-69

Figure 70 Comparison of worker head sculpture in the pastinifer species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax schwarzi (USNMENT00532012). (B) T. androsanus (MCZENT00021003). (C) T. androsanus (CASENT0758350).(D) T. nigricans (MCZENT00577111). (E) T. pastinifer (CASENT0758861). (F) T. rutabulafer sp. nov.(CASENT0758266). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-70

Figure 71 Comparison of worker clypeus and waist segment morphology in the pastinifer species group. (A) Temnothorax pastinifer, full-face view (CASENT0758861). (B) T. pastinifer, profile view (CASENT0758861). (C) T. rutabulafer sp. nov., full-face view (CASENT0758266). (D) T. rutabulafer sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0758266). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-71

Figure 72 Comparison of worker petiolar node morphology and antennal scape length in the pastinifer species group. (A) Temnothorax rutabulafer sp. nov., full-face view (CASENT0758266). (B) T. rutabulafer sp. nov., posterodorsal view (CASENT0758266). (C) T. androsanus, full-face view (CASENT0758350). (D) T. androsanus, posterodoral view (CASENT0758350). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-72

Figure 73 Comparison of worker waist segment morphology in the salvini clade in dorsal view. (A) Temnothorax goniops (MCZENT00032436). (B) T. huehuetenangoi (USNMENT00529517). (C) T. fuscatus (CASENT0916005). (D) T. ocarinae (USNMENT00531636). (E) T. agavicola sp. nov. (MCZENT00510559). (F) T. torrei (MCZENT00583611). (G) T. laticrus sp. nov. (CASENT0758263). (H) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-73

Figure 74 Comparison of worker propodeal spine and petiole morphology in the pulchellus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax laticrus sp. nov. (CASENT0758263). (B) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-74

Figure 75 Comparison of worker mesosoma setae count in the pulchellus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax pulchellus (LACMENT323204). (B) T. wettereri sp. nov. (CASENT0756094). (C) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). (D) T. wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-75

Figure 76 Comparison of worker petiole setae count in the pulchellus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax torrei (MCZENT00583611). (B) T. terricola (CASENT0915980). (C) T. hippolytus sp. nov. (LACMENT323469). (D) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). (E) T. wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). (F) T. magnabulla sp. nov.(CASENT0756093). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-76

Figure 77 Comparison of worker head sculpture in the pulchellus species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax terricola (CASENT0915980). (B) T. torrei (MCZENT00583611). (C) T. torrei (CASENT0758351). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-77

Figure 78 Comparison of worker head and mesosoma morphology in the pulchellus species group. (A) Temnothorax hippolytus sp. nov., full-face view (LACMENT323469). (B) T. hippolytus sp. nov., dorsal view (LACMENT323469). (C) T. terricola, full-face view (CASENT0915980). (D) T. terricola, dorsal view (CASENT0915980). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-78

Figure 79 Comparison of worker head sculpture in the pulchellus species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax agavicola sp. nov. (MCZENT00510559). (B) T. albispinus (CASENT0756097). (C) T. agavicola sp. nov.(CASENT0756096). (D) T. magnabulla sp. nov. (CASENT0756093). (E) T. harlequina sp nov. (CASENT0756091). (F) T. wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-79

Figure 80 Comparison of worker metapleural gland bulla morphology in the pulchellus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax magnabulla sp. nov. (CASENT0756093). (B) T. wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). (C) T. harlequina sp. nov. (CASENT0756091). (D) T. ciferrii (CASENT0758829). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-80

Figure 81 Comparison of worker mesosoma sculpture and morphology in the pulchellus species group. (A) Temnothorax harlequina sp. nov., dorsal view (CASENT0756091). (B) T. harlequina sp. nov., profile view (CASENT0756091). (C) T. ciferrii, profile view (CASENT0758829). (D) T. ciferrii, dorsal view (CASENT0758829). (E) T. wilsoni sp. nov., dorsal view (MCZENT00583608). (F) T. wilsoni sp. nov., profile view (MCZENT00583608). (G) T. balaclava sp nov., profile view (CASENT0758262). (H) T. balaclava sp. nov., dorsal view (CASENT0758262). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-81

Figure 82 Comparison of worker clypeal setae in the pulchellus species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax harlequina sp. nov. (CASENT0756091). (B) T. ciferrii (CASENT0758829). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-82

Figure 83 Comparison of worker clypeus morphology in the pulchellus species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax wilsoni sp. nov. (MCZENT00583608). (B) T. balaclava sp. nov (CASENT0758262). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-83

Figure 84 Comparison of worker petiole morphology in the pulchellus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax balaclava sp. nov. (CASENT0758262). (B) T. bahoruco sp. nov. (CASENT0758817). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-84

Figure 85 Comparison of salvini clade worker petiole morphology in profile view. (A) Temnothorax fuscatus (CASENT0916005). (B) T. ocarinae (USNMENT00531636). (C) T. goniops (MCZENT00032436). (D) T. huehuetenangoi (USNMENT00529517). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-85

Figure 86 Comparison of worker propodeal spine morphology in the fuscatus group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax fuscatus (CASENT0916005) (B) T. nebliselva sp. nov. (INB0003659261) (C) T. ocarinae (USNMENT00531636). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-86

Figure 87 Comparison of worker compound eye morphology in the fuscatus species group in profile view. (A) Temnothorax ocarinae (USNMENT00531636). (B) T. skwarrae (MCZENT00016358). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-87

Figure 88 Comparison of worker head morphology in the goniops species group in full-face view. (A) Temnothorax goniops (MCZENT00032436). (B) T. huehuetenangoi (USNMENT00529517). Scale bars 0.2 mm. Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11514/fig-88