identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
0235157DFFD8FFDAFF50FCBB4D5AFD7C.text	0235157DFFD8FFDAFF50FCBB4D5AFD7C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex bispinatus Wu & Zhong & Wang & Yin & Huang & Huang 2026	<div><p>Probolomyrmex bispinatus sp. nov.</p><p>(Fig. 1)</p><p>Type material. Holotype. CHINA: 1 queen (SYSBM, En-431714), Tibet, Linzhi City, Medog County, 29°14’40’’N, 95°09’55’’E, 700m alt., 01.viii.2024, Jinhong Zheng leg.</p><p>Measurements. Holotype queen. DPW 0.24, EL 0.14, GL 1.02, HL 0.72, HW 0.48, PtH 0.32, PtL 0.41, PW 0.42, SL 0.56, TL 3.21, WL 1.06, CS 0.60, CI 66, DPI 59, EI 29, LPI 128, PI 60, SI 116.</p><p>Queen description.</p><p>Head: in full-face view subrectangular, about 1.5 times longer than broad, lateral sides evenly convex; posterior head margin slightly convex, posterior head corners blunt. Eyes present, comparatively large and oval, maximum diameter slightly shorter than widest part of antennal scape, with 11 ommatidia along the longest axis. Three ocelli present on vertex, forming an equilateral triangle. In full-face view, frontoclypeal region strongly expanded, anterior margin convex, covering mandibles. Two antennal sockets positioned on frontoclypeal region, fully exposed and contiguous, with no intervening space. Antennae 12-segmented, funiculus 2 nd segment about as long as wide, but 3 rd to 10 th segments wider than long. Antennal scape gradually widening apically, reaching over 1/2 of the head, nearly to the lateral ocelli. Mandibles comparatively small, hidden behind the frontoclypeal region in full-face view.</p><p>Mesosoma: Pronotum rectangular in lateral view, in dorsal view with broadly convex anterior margin. Mesoscutum and mesoscutellum shield-shaped in dorsal view. Anepisternum and katepisternum subtriangular in lateral view, anapleural sulcus clear. Propodeal dorsum in lateral view short and slightly convex; in dorsal view evenly narrow, with two straight lateral margins and a strongly concave posterior face. Posterodorsal corner of propodeum with a pair of protrudent denticles directed backward.</p><p>Petiole: Petiolar node in lateral view 1.5 times longer than high, dorsal face convex posteriorly; in dorsal view rectangular, lateral margins almost parallel, slightly convex and elongate, distinctly longer than wide; posterior face concave centrally. Posterodorsal corner of petiole forming two acute teeth. Subpetiolar process forming a short anteroventral tooth.</p><p>Gaster: First two gastral segments equal in length. Sternal prora spinate.</p><p>Sculpture: Whole body mostly shagreened, surface of head, mandibles, antennae, legs, and the last three gastral segments weakly punctate; mesosoma, petiole, and first two gastral segments densely punctate.</p><p>Pilosity: Whole body without erect long hairs, except mandibles. Dorsum of head, gaster, and antennal scape with fine pubescence.</p><p>Color: Whole body reddish brown.</p><p>Worker and Male. Unknown.</p><p>Comparative diagnosis. Probolomyrmex bispinatus sp. nov. is most similar to P. procne but can be distinguished from the latter by the following diagnostic characters: (1) propodeal posterodorsal denticles sharper and spine-like; (2) posterodorsal corner of petiole in lateral view sharper and points posterodorsally (in P. procne points posteroventrally); and (3) in dorsal view, lateral margins of petiole not straight but slightly convex.</p><p>Comments. Varghese (2024) stated that the queen of P. procne is similar in color and morphology to the worker caste. Taylor (1965) noted that, owing to the extreme structural reduction in Probolomyrmex, taxonomic discrimination of the species is almost entirely dependent on characters of dimensions and proportions, especially those of the head, antennae, and node, as well as sculptural details. This indicates morphological uniformity between queen and worker in P. procne . Given the conservative diagnostic characters of the genus, the new species P. bispinatus sp. nov. is described here based on a single queen specimen. The presence of numerous distinct diagnostic features allows its recognition as a distinct species, and due to the morphological consistency between queen and worker, these characters are considered applicable to the worker caste as well.</p><p>Distribution. China: Tibet (type locality).</p><p>Biology. Little is known about the biology of the species. Queen was found hiding under a rock on the rainforest floor.</p><p>Etymology. Latin name " bispinatus " means double-spined, which in the case of this new species refers to two distinct spines on the petiolar node.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFD8FFDAFF50FCBB4D5AFD7C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFDEFFDDFF50FF6E4CBCFD13.text	0235157DFFDEFFDDFF50FF6E4CBCFD13.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex dammermani Wheeler 1928	<div><p>Probolomyrmex dammermani Wheeler, 1928</p><p>(Fig. 2)</p><p>Probolomyrmex dammermani Wheeler 1928: 7, fig. 1. Worker, INDONESIA. Queen and male described: Eguchi et al. 2006: 7.</p><p>Material examined. Indonesia. 2 syntype workers, Java, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=106.78917&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-6.5944448" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 106.78917/lat -6.5944448)">Buitenzorg</a>, 06°35'40''S, 106°47'21''E, 18.xii.1922, K. Dammerman leg. (MCZC, MCZ:Ent:20427 [MCZbase images examined]; NHMUK, CASENT0102220 [AntWeb images examined]) . Thailand. 1 worker, Trang, 07°32'49''N, 99°47'24''E, 20±m ², 106m alt., 26.xii.2018, Leaf litter extraction, R. Wang et al. leg., Old Secondary forest (IBBL, KCW-S07-11) .</p><p>Comments. Probolomyrmex dammermani is similar to P. vieti, but can be distinguished from the latter by the following characters: (1) in lateral view, posterodorsal corner of propodeum dentiform in P. dammermani, whereas lamellate in P. vieti; and (2) petiolar node slightly longer in P. dammermani .</p><p>Distribution. China: Guangxi (Liang &amp; Chen 2022); Indonesia (type locality); Philippines (Taylor 1965); Thailand (Jaitrong &amp; Nabhitabhata 2005); Vietnam (Eguchi et al. 2006).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFDEFFDDFF50FF6E4CBCFD13	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFDFFFDCFF50FF6E4C1EFA3B.text	0235157DFFDFFFDCFF50FF6E4C1EFA3B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex longinodus Terayama & Ogata 1988	<div><p>Probolomyrmex longinodus Terayama &amp; Ogata, 1988</p><p>Probolomyrmex longinodus Terayama &amp; Ogata 1988: 592, figs. 6–8. Worker, JAPAN. Queen and male described: Eguchi et al. 2006: 14.</p><p>Material examined. Japan. holotype worker, Ryukyu, Ishigaki Is., Yonehara, 15.iii.1984, Y. Fukumoto leg. (KUEC) [PhotoCD images examined: PCD2228 84–87] .</p><p>Comments. Probolomyrmex longinodus was originally described from Japan, and a broad consensus in the literature considers it to be morphologically highly similar to the Chinese species P. longiscapus Xu &amp; Zeng, 2000 (Xu &amp; Zeng 2000; Eguchi et al. 2006; Liang &amp; Chen 2022). In their original description, Xu &amp; Zeng (2000) distinguished the two species based on differences in head length, shape of the posterior head margin, scape length, shape of the propodeal spines, and the outline of the petiolar node. However, Eguchi et al. (2006) noted that while the two species can be separated based on their type material, numerous non-type specimens indicate that P. longinodus is morphologically indistinguishable from P. longiscapus among workers, while males are considered potentially key to distinguishing the two species.</p><p>Among these, the most questionable is the material from Taiwan Province, which exhibits considerable intraspecific morphological variation (Eguchi et al. 2006). These specimens were identified as P. longinodus, but no clear diagnostic characters were provided to justify their assignment to P. longinodus rather than P. longiscapus . The first record of P. longinodus from Taiwan Province was provided by Terayama (1990), whose illustrations of this newly recorded specimen depict an unusually long antennal scape, consistent with the variation later noted by Eguchi et al. (2006). Liang &amp; Chen (2022) proposed that P. longinodus and P. longiscapus could be distinguished by the shape of the propodeal denticle and the posterodorsal margin of the petiole. However, their recorded material from Hainan Province also exhibited a long antennal scape, similar to the material from Taiwan Province, both showing considerable morphological divergence from the Japanese type material of P. longinodus . Therefore, based on our current understanding, this species may constitute a species complex. The significant morphological differences between the Chinese and Japanese material strongly suggest that the specimens from China previously identified as P. longinodus are unlikely to represent P. longinodus sensu stricto; a re-examination of the Chinese material is urgently needed to clarify the extent of morphological variation in P. longinodus .</p><p>Therefore, when distinguishing these two species at the type specimen level, apart from the indistinguishable dorsal outline of the petiole, the diagnostic combination proposed by Xu &amp; Zeng (2000) may be applied: compared to P. longiscapus, workers of P. longinodus sensu stricto have (1) a shorter head, (2) a more strongly convex posterior head margin, (3) a shorter antennal scape, and (4) smaller propodeal denticle. Eguchi et al. (2006) proposed distinguishing the workers of P. longinodus sensu lato from P. longiscapus by the laterally semicircular frontal carina and shorter fourth antennal segment.</p><p>Distribution. Japan (type locality); Thailand (Eguchi et al. 2006); Vietnam (Eguchi et al. 2014). The records from Hainan (Liang &amp; Chen 2022) and Taiwan (Terayama 1990) in China are considered doubtful and are not treated as confirmed occurrences of P. longinodus sensu stricto .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFDFFFDCFF50FF6E4C1EFA3B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFDFFFDEFF50F9F14B7BF92C.text	0235157DFFDFFFDEFF50F9F14B7BF92C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex longiscapus Xu & Zeng 2000	<div><p>Probolomyrmex longiscapus Xu &amp; Zeng, 2000</p><p>(Figs 3–4)</p><p>Probolomyrmex longiscapus Xu &amp; Zeng 2000: 216, figs. 9–11. Worker, CHINA. Queen and male described: Eguchi et al. 2006: 18.</p><p>Material examined. China. holotype worker, Yunnan, Mengla County, Nanqian Village, 820 m alt., 11.iii.1998, soil sample, G. Zeng leg. (SFCY, ANTWEB1060526) [AntWeb images examined] ; 3 workers, Yunnan, Dehong, 27.x.2023, G. Nie leg. (SYSBM, En-431724, En-431725, En-431726) ; 2 workers, Guangdong, Guangzhou, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=113.43917&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=23.294722" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 113.43917/lat 23.294722)">Baiyun Distr. Maofeng Mt.</a>, 23°17’41’’N, 113°26’21’’E, 285m alt., 26.v.2025, S. Wang leg. (SYSBM, En-431727, En-431728) ; 1 worker, Hainan, Qiongzhong County, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=109.71&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=19.17" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 109.71/lat 19.17)">Limu Mt.</a>, 19°10’12’’N, 109°42’36’’E, 681 m alt., 03.x.2016, Z. Chen leg. (GXNU, GXNU400071) [images examined] . Laos. 1 worker, Vientiane, Naxaythong Distr., <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=102.45&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=18.25" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 102.45/lat 18.25)">Sivilay Village</a>, 18°15'N, 102°27'E, 220 m alt., 11.vi.2010, S. Yamane leg. (IBUB, LA10-SKY-078) [AntBase images examined] .</p><p>Comments. Xu &amp; Zeng (2000) distinguished P. longiscapus from P. longinodus based on the following characters: a longer head, a nearly straight posterior head margin, a longer antennal scape, a larger propodeal denticle, and a more slender posterior one-third of the petiole. However, the latter character does not provide substantive differentiation. Eguchi et al. (2006) added that although the two species are difficult to separate at the worker level, P. longiscapus can be distinguished from P. longinodus by its triangular frontal carina in profile and its longer fourth antennal segment. However, our examination of the holotype of P. longiscapus reveals that its frontal carina is rounded, not distinctly triangular. In addition, P. longiscapus resembles P. itoi but differs from it by having shorter antennal scapes and a shorter petiole.</p><p>Distribution. China: Guangdong (new record), Guangxi (Liang &amp; Chen 2022), Yunnan (type locality); Indonesia (Asfiya et al. 2015); Laos (Jaitrong et al. 2016); Vietnam (Eguchi et al. 2006).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFDFFFDEFF50F9F14B7BF92C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFDDFFD4FF50F90B4D11F9D7.text	0235157DFFDDFFD4FF50F90B4D11F9D7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex similis Wu & Zhong & Wang & Yin & Huang & Huang 2026	<div><p>Probolomyrmex similis sp. nov.</p><p>(Figs 5–8)</p><p>Type material. Holotype. CHINA: 1 worker (SYSBM, En-431715), Guangxi Province, Laibin City, Jinxiu County, 23°54’51’’N, 110°16’43’’E, 280m alt., 25.x.2023, Changlin Qin leg. Paratypes: 6 workers (SYSBM, En-431716, En-431717, En-431718, En-431719, En-431720, En-431721), 1 queen (SYSBM, En-431722), and 1 male (SYSBM, En-431723), same data as holotype .</p><p>Measurements. Holotype worker. DPW 0.22, GL 1.00, HL 0.74, HW 0.48, PtH 0.30, PtL 0.42, PW 0.39, SL 0.62, TL 3.19, WL 1.04, CS 0.61, CI 66, DPI 55, LPI 142, PI 51, SI 128.</p><p>Paratype workers (n = 6). DPW 0.22–0.26, GL 0.98–1.08, HL 0.74–0.77, HW 0.48–0.51, PtH 0.28–0.31, PtL 0.40–0.44, PW 0.39–0.42, SL 0.61–0.66, TL 3.22–3.38, WL 1.06–1.10, CS 0.62–0.64, CI 63–66, DPI 55–61, LPI 133–152, PI 51–59, SI 127–137.</p><p>Paratype queen (n = 1). DPW 0.25, EL 0.14, GL 1.12, HL 0.77, HW 0.50, PtH 0.30, PtL 0.43, PW 0.44, SL 0.62, TL 3.47, WL 1.15, CS 0.63, CI 66, DPI 57, EI 28, LPI 142, PI 59, SI 124.</p><p>Paratype male (n = 1). DPW 0.19, EL 0.25, GL 0.88, HL 0.52, HW 0.46, PtH 0.21, PtL 0.38, PW 0.49, SL 0.39, TL 2.85, WL 1.07, CS 0.49, CI 87, DPI 39, EI 55, LPI 177, PI 51, SI 85.</p><p>Worker description.</p><p>Head: in full-face view, subrectangular and distinctly longer than broad, lateral sides evenly convex and narrowed in frontoclypeal region, posterior head margin straight, posterior corners blunt. Eyes absent. In full-face view frontoclypeal region strongly expanded, anterior margin convex, covering mandibles. Two antennal sockets positioned on frontoclypeal region, fully exposed and contiguous, with no intervening space. Antennae 12-segmented, 2 nd funicular segment about as long as wide, 3 rd to 10 th segments wider than long. Antennal scape gradually widening apically, almost reaching posterior head margin. Mandibles triangular and small, masticatory margin with eight teeth, in full-face view hidden behind the frontoclypeal region.</p><p>Mesosoma: Outline of mesosoma in lateral view straight. Promesonotal suture and metanotal groove absent. Pronotum convex in lateral view, in dorsal view with broadly convex anterior and lateral margins. Mesonotum and propodeum in dorsal view with straight lateral margins. Mesopleuron fused to mesonotum, without a separating suture. Propodeal dorsum long and straight in lateral view, evenly narrow in dorsal view, with two straight lateral margins and a strongly concave posterior face. Posterodorsal corner of propodeum with a pair of triangular denticles.</p><p>Petiole: Petiole in lateral view about 1.5 times longer than high, dorsal face convex posteriorly, in dorsal view rectangular, distinctly longer than wide, with almost parallel and slightly convex lateral margins, posterior face concave centrally. Posterodorsal corner of petiole forming two blunt horns. Ventral face of petiole convex. Subpetiolar process forming a slender anteroventral spine.</p><p>Gaster: First and second gastral segments equal in length. Prora protruding anteroventrally.</p><p>Sculpture: Whole body shagreened, finely punctate and sparsely foveolate. Mandibles finely punctate.</p><p>Pilosity: Dorsum of head, gaster, and antennal scape with dense recumbent fine pubescence. Mandibles strongly covered with pubescence, which shortens from apex to base.</p><p>Color: Whole body reddish brown, antennae and legs yellowish.</p><p>Queen. Head almost same as the worker’s, but eyes present and circular. Three ocelli present on vertex. Maximum diameter of eyes with 10 ommatidia along the longest axis. In lateral view, propodeal dorsum straight and distinctly lower than mesoscutellum. Anapleural sulcus of mesopleuron clear. Remaining characters as in worker caste.</p><p>Male. Head circular, posterior head margin and lateral sides convex. Three ocelli present on vertex. Eyes large, almost half as long as head. Two antennal sockets positioned on frontoclypeal region, fully exposed and contiguous, with no intervening space. Antennae 13-segmented, antennal scape almost reaching posterior head margin, about as long as head width. Clypeal margin rounded. Mandibles visible in full-face view, nearly triangular. Masticatory margin straight, with a large and sharp apical tooth. In lateral view, mesoscutum located above pronotum.Anapleural sulcus of mesopleuron clear. Dorsum of propodeum oblique in lateral view with a blunt posterodorsal corner. In dorsal view, pronotum almost entirely covered by mesoscutum. Mesoscutellum broadly triangular. Petiole compressed dorsoventrally in lateral view. Subpetiolar process forming a slender anteroventral spine. Head and gaster smooth, mesosoma and petiole shagreened. Whole body covered with dense recumbent short pubescence. Mandibles with some long and erect hairs. Head, mesosoma, petiole, and gaster blackish. Mandibles, antennal scape, and legs pale. Forewing: pterostigma pale; costa present; radius (R) reduced posterior to pterostigma; cross-vein 2r-rs completely fused with radial sector (Rs) to form the stigmal vein, which extends posteriorly but does not reach the wing margin; veins Rs2, Rs3, and cross-vein rs-m entirely absent; veins radius sector + media (Rs+M), cubitus (Cu), and cross-vein cu-a present; cross-vein m-cu absent. Hindwing: radial sector (Rs) absent; jugal lobe absent.</p><p>Comparative diagnosis. Probolomyrmex similis sp. nov. is morphologically similar to P. longiscapus but can be distinguished by the following combination of characters: (1) larger body size; (2) posterior head margin nearly straight in full-face view (in P. longiscapus weakly concave); (3) propodeal declivity with a shallow depression below the propodeal posterodorsal denticles, bordered by straight or slightly curved dark lines laterally (in P. longiscapus deeply depressed with sharply curved dark lines); and (4) petiole in dorsal view with a pair of broad and distinct teeth (in P. longiscapus the teeth are inconspicuous or very weakly developed).</p><p>Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to visualize the morphometric variation between P. longiscapus and P. similis sp. nov., and to explore morphological differentiation between them (Fig. 9). The first two axes accounted for 59.28% and 19.31% of the total variance, respectively. Along PC1, P. longiscapus occupied the positive region of the axis, whereas most individuals of P. similis sp. nov. clustered in the negative region, indicating a separation trend between the two species, despite the limited sample size. In contrast, PC2 exhibited substantial overlap and did not contribute to their differentiation.</p><p>The variables with the highest loadings on PC1 were CS (−0.3954), PtH/CS (−0.4089), PtL/CS (−0.3230), GL/CS (−0.4049), DPW/CS (−0.3937), and PW/CS (−0.3952). Among these, PtH/CS, PtL/CS, and DPW/CS are all petiole-related ratios that collectively reflect the overall volume of the petiole. These loadings indicate that P. similis sp. nov. tends to have a larger body size (CS), a broader pronotum (PW/CS), a longer gaster (GL/CS), and a more developed petiole (PtH/CS, PtL/CS, DPW/CS) compared to P. longiscapus .</p><p>Additionally, P. similis is easily distinguished from P. itoi by: (1) petiole not elongated in lateral view, with convex dorsal margin (in P. itoi elongated and flattened); (2) gaster broad and robust (in P. itoi distinctly narrowed); and (3) shorter antennal scapes.</p><p>Distribution. China: Guangxi (type locality).</p><p>Biology. The species inhabits steep slopes of forests devoid of deciduous cover, and which are overgrown with moss. Nests were located nearly 5 cm below the surface. Colonies are small, comprising fewer than 10 workers, including some males.</p><p>Etymology. Latin name " similis " means similar, which in the case of this new species indicates that it is morphologically related to P. longiscapus .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFDDFFD4FF50F90B4D11F9D7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFD7FFD7FF50F9534DADFE5C.text	0235157DFFD7FFD7FF50F9534DADFE5C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex vieti Eguchi 2006	<div><p>Probolomyrmex vieti Eguchi et al., 2006</p><p>(Figs 10–12)</p><p>Probolomyrmex vieti Eguchi et al. 2006: 29, figs. 7A-F, 9G, 14A-F, 15G, H, 16J-L. Worker, queen, and male, VIETNAM.</p><p>Material examined. China. 2 workers, 1 queen, and 1 male, Guangdong, Zhaoqing, Sihui, 29.vii.2025, W. Yang leg. (SYSBM, En-431729, En-431730, En-431731, En-431732) .</p><p>Comments. Probolomyrmex vieti was considered by Eguchi et al. (2006) to be barely distinguishable from P. greavesi Taylor, 1965 from the Australian Capital Territory and southern Queensland, Australia; however, in P. vieti, the anteroventral portion of the subpetiolar process projects anteroventrally. This species is also highly similar to P. dammermani; diagnostic characters to separate them are provided in the comments section under P. dammermani . Additionally, P. vieti resembles P. longiscapus, P. longinodus, and P. similis sp. nov., but can be distinguished by the following combination of features: (1) in lateral view, posterodorsal corner of propodeum rounded in P. vieti, whereas dentiform in the other three species; (2) petiolar node significantly shorter; and (3) in lateral view, prora of gaster weak and not spine-like.</p><p>Distribution. Cambodia (Hosoishi et al. 2017); China: Guangdong (Chen &amp; Xu 2025), Guangxi (Liang &amp; Chen 2022), Hainan (Hamer et al. 2025); Indonesia (Eguchi et al. 2006); Singapore (Wang et al. 2022); Thailand (Eguchi et al. 2006); Vietnam (Eguchi et al. 2006).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFD7FFD7FF50F9534DADFE5C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
0235157DFFD4FFC3FF50F8F34AE2FEAE.text	0235157DFFD4FFC3FF50F8F34AE2FEAE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Probolomyrmex Mayr 1901	<div><p>Key to Probolomyrmex species in the world</p><p>As noted by Varghese (2024), the queen caste is generally similar to the worker caste in both coloration and morphology. Therefore, although P. bispinatus sp. nov. is described solely from a single queen specimen, we have included it in the identification key. The rationale for distinguishing this species based on queen characters is discussed in the Comments of P. bispinatus sp. nov. Separation between P. guanacastensis and P. boliviensis is difficult due to the similarity of morphological features, so we prefer the diagnosis of Oliveira &amp; Feitosa (2019).</p><p>1 Subpetiolar process consisting of a single spine (Fig. 13A) or a spine with minor posteroventral projection (Fig. 13B).. 2</p><p>- Subpetiolar process rectangular or lamellate (Fig. 13C), always with a distinct angular posteroventral tooth (Fig. 13D).. 16</p><p>2 In dorsal view, posterodorsal corner of petiole conical, strongly blunt and rounded (Fig. 14A)..................... 3</p><p>- In dorsal view, posterodorsal corner of petiole truncated or concave (Figs 14B–D)............................... 4</p><p>3 Propodeal dorsum not distinctly impressed, almost straight (Fig. 15A); in dorsal view, petiole trapezoidal, lateral margins inclined and straight (Fig. 15C)................................................... P. watanabei Tanaka, 1974</p><p>- Propodeum with a distinct depression in the center of dorsal margin (Fig. 15B); in dorsal view, petiole barrel-shaped, lateral margins convex (Fig. 15D)............................................. P. newguinensis Shattuck et al., 2012</p><p>4 In dorsal view, petiolar width more than half its length (Fig. 16A)............................................ 5</p><p>- In dorsal view, petiolar length twice or more than its width (Fig. 16B)....................................... 13</p><p>5 In dorsal view, posterior margin of petiole broadened, not convergent (Fig. 17A)................................ 6</p><p>- In dorsal view, lateral margins of petiole parallel or slightly convex; posterior margin narrowed, maximum width not at posterior margin (Fig. 17B).......................................................................... 7</p><p>6 In lateral view, propodeal posterodorsal denticles short and blunt; posterodorsal corners of petiole blunt (Fig. 18A).................................................................................... P. procne Brown, 1975</p><p>- In lateral view, propodeal posterodorsal denticles long and sharp; posterodorsal corners of petiole sharp (Fig. 18B)...................................................................................... P. bispinatus sp. nov.</p><p>7 In dorsal view, posterior margin of petiole inwardly concave, forming a pair of denticles (Fig. 19A)................. 8</p><p>- In dorsal view, posterior margin of petiole almost straight or convex (Fig. 19B)................................ 10</p><p>8 Subpetiolar process simple, just a single spine (Fig. 20A)................................ P. brujitae Agosti, 1995</p><p>- Ventral face of subpetiolar process with a minor posteroventral projection (Fig. 20B)............................ 9</p><p>9 Body larger, with much longer antennal scapes....................................... P. boliviensis Mann, 1923</p><p>- Body smaller, with much shorter antennal scapes........................ P. guanacastensis O'Keefe &amp; Agosti, 1998</p><p>10 In lateral view, propodeal posterodorsal corner blunt or angular; posterior margin without denticles (Fig. 21A)........................................................................... P. lamellatus Oliveira &amp; Feitosa, 2019</p><p>- In lateral view, propodeal posterior margin with denticles (Fig. 21B)........................................ 11</p><p>11 In lateral view, propleuron covered or only slightly exposed by pronotum, but not extending beyond the ventral margin of pronotum (Fig. 22A)..................................................... P. cegua Oliveira &amp; Feitosa, 2019</p><p>- In lateral view, ventral margin of propleuron strongly exposed and protruding (Fig. 22B)........................ 12</p><p>12 In lateral view, anterodorsal margin of petiole rounded, not angular (Fig. 23A)......... P. dammermani Wheeler, 1928</p><p>- In lateral view, petiole rectangular; anterodorsal margin distinctly angular (Fig. 23B).............................................................................................. P. okinawensis Terayama &amp; Ogata, 1988</p><p>13 In lateral view, petiole distinctly elongated; dorsal margin flattened (Fig. 24A).............. P. itoi Eguchi et al., 2006</p><p>- In lateral view, petiole moderately elongated; dorsal margin convex (Fig. 24B)................................ 14</p><p>14 Antennal scapes short, apparently not reaching posterior head margin........... P. longinodus Terayama &amp; Ogata, 1988</p><p>- Antennal scapes long, approaching or reaching posterior head margin........................................ 15</p><p>15 Propodeal declivity deeply concave, with a sharply curved fine dark line posterolaterally; in dorsal view, petiolar posterodorsal corner only with a slight central depression (Fig. 25C)................ P. longiscapus Xu &amp; Zeng, 2000</p><p>- Propodeal declivity slight concave, with a straight or slightly curved thick dark line posterolaterally; in dorsal view, petiolar posterodorsal corner strongly bidentate (Fig. 25D)........................................... P. similis sp. nov.</p><p>16 In lateral view, posterior margin of petiole straight (Figs 26A–B)........................................... 17</p><p>- In lateral view, posterior margin of petiole concave (Figs 26C–D)........................................... 24</p><p>17 Petiole with a distinct peduncle (Fig. 27A)........................................... P. petiolatus Weber, 1940</p><p>- Petiole without distinct peduncle, anterodorsal margin rounded (Fig. 27B).................................... 18</p><p>18 In lateral view, mesosomal dorsum outline uneven; metanotal groove weak but present and propodeal dorsum strongly concave (Fig. 28A).................................................. P. zahamena Hita Garcia &amp; Fisher, 2014</p><p>- In lateral view, mesosomal dorsum outline almost perfectly straight or curved; metanotal groove absent or indistinct, and propodeal dorsum only slightly concave or straight (Fig. 28B)............................................. 19</p><p>19 In lateral view, gastral prora distinctly spiny or angular, protruding and sharp (Figs 29A–B)...................... 20</p><p>- In lateral view, gastral prora indistinct or very weak (Figs 29C–D).......................................... 23</p><p>20 Anterior portion of subpetiolar process distinctly inclined anteriorly beyond basal portion (Fig. 30A)............................................................................................. P. vieti Eguchi et al., 2006</p><p>- Anterior portion of subpetiolar process not distinctly inclined anteriorly nor distinctly beyond basal portion, and anterior margin almost vertical to basal portion (Fig. 30B)....................................................... 21</p><p>21 In lateral view, first gastral tergite elevated posterodorsally to present a projection, distinctly above anterior margin of second gastral tergite (Fig. 31A)........................................................ P. tani Fisher, 2007</p><p>- In lateral view, first gastral tergite dorsally complete in outline, not elevated posterodorsally to present a projection nor distinctly above anterior margin of second gastral tergite (Fig. 31B)......................................... 22</p><p>22 Subpetiolar process broad, its height less than half of the length of ventral margin (Fig. 32A).............................................................................................. P. aliundus Shattuck et al., 2012</p><p>- Subpetiolar process narrow, its height approximately equal to the length of ventral margin (Fig. 32B).............................................................................. P. curculiformis Hita Garcia &amp; Fisher, 2014</p><p>23 Head broader; propodeal posterior margin with triangular denticles (Fig. 33A)................ P. greavesi Taylor, 1965</p><p>- Head narrowly elongated; propodeal posterior margin without denticles (Fig. 33B).... P. latalongus Shattuck et al., 2012</p><p>24 In lateral view, petiole distinctly taller or square, its length less than or equal to height (Fig. 34A)................. 25</p><p>- In lateral view, petiole elongated, its length greater than height (Fig. 34B).................................... 27</p><p>25 In lateral view, petiole distinctly thick (Fig. 35A)........................................ P. bidens Brown, 1975</p><p>- In lateral view, petiole more slender and roughly triangular (Fig. 35B)....................................... 26</p><p>26 Posteroventral tooth of subpetiolar process distinct (Fig. 36A)................. P. dentinodis Oliveira &amp; Feitosa, 2019</p><p>- Subpetiolar process just a simple rectangle, without a posteroventral tooth (Fig. 36B)....... P. brevirostris (Forel, 1910)</p><p>27 Subpetiolar process narrow, its posteroventral corner not reaching the vertical midline of petiole (Fig. 37A)......... 28</p><p>- Subpetiolar process broad, its posteroventral corner reaching or surpassing the vertical midline of petiole (Fig. 37B).. 30</p><p>28 In lateral view, dorsal margin of mesosoma convex and curved (Fig. 38A)........... P. kelleri Oliveira &amp; Feitosa, 2019</p><p>- In lateral view, dorsal margin of mesosoma almost completely straight or even concave except at the highest point of promesonotal elevation (Fig. 38B).................................................................... 29</p><p>29 Petiole rough, covered with significantly wider punctures; body smaller (Fig. 39A).......... P. guineensis Taylor, 1965</p><p>- Petiole almost smooth or finely sculptured, minute and inconspicuously punctate; body larger (Fig. 39B)........................................................................................... P. filiformis Mayr, 1901</p><p>30 In dorsal view, posterior margin of petiole broadly concave centrally, forming two blunt teeth (Fig. 40A)..................................................................................... P. maryatiae Eguchi et al., 2006</p><p>- In dorsal view, posterior margin of petiole straight, without two blunt teeth (Fig. 40B).......................... 31</p><p>31 Anteroventral corner of subpetiolar process sharply spine-like (Fig. 41A)............. P. simplex Shattuck et al., 2012</p><p>- Anteroventral corner of subpetiolar process bluntly tooth-like (Fig. 41B).................. P. salomonis Taylor, 1965</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0235157DFFD4FFC3FF50F8F34AE2FEAE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Wu, Tianqi;Zhong, Ying;Wang, Shuojie;Yin, Jiadong;Huang, Yi;Huang, Yuyuan	Wu, Tianqi, Zhong, Ying, Wang, Shuojie, Yin, Jiadong, Huang, Yi, Huang, Yuyuan (2026): A revision of Chinese Probolomyrmex Mayr, 1901 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Proceratiinae), with descriptions of two new species and a global key to species. Zootaxa 5845 (3): 493-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5845.3.4
