1920] Wheeler — Siibfaviilies of Formicidae and Other Taxonomic Notes 51 



as a dichthadiigyne. A similar diversity is seen in the males of 

 the Cerapachyini. The male of Acanthostichus afflictus, recently 

 discovered by Gallardo (1919) in Argentina, is so much like an 

 Eciton or Dorylus male that even an expert myrmecologist would 

 not hesitate to place it among the Dorylinse. The males of other 

 genera (Lioponera, Phyracaces, Cerapachys, Eusphinctus) on the 

 other hand, though lacking the cerci, have a decidedly Ponerine 

 habitus. It would seem, therefore, that the Cerapachyini are 

 intermediate between the Dorylinae and Ponerinae, as Emery has 

 contended, and that we might unite them with either. I should 

 prefer, however, to separate them out as an independent sub- 

 family, which may be ascribed to Forel, who in 1893 first recog- 

 nized the " Cerapachysii " as a natural tribe. Of course, the name 

 Prodorylinse Emery cannot be used for the subfamily, because 

 there is no genus Prodorylus. 



For many years I have deemed it necessary to introduce another 

 nomenclatorial change, namely that of the subfamily name Camp- 

 onotinse to Formicinse. Forel, in his study of the poison apparatus 

 and anal glands of ants, published in 1878, divided the subfamily 

 Formicidae Mayr (1855) into two subfamilies, which he called 

 Camponotidse and Dolichoderidse. This was unjustifiable accord- 

 ing to our present rules of nomenclature, for Mayr's name should 

 have been retained and restricted to the group containing the 

 genus Formica. At that time, which antedated the use of incc as a 

 subfamily suffix, Forel justified his course on the ground that 

 "Formicidae"^ was already in use as a family name. 



Owing to the fact that definite rules and conventions in regard 

 to the suffixes of family and especially of subfamily names in 

 Zoology have been stabilized only within recent decades, there is 

 considerable confusion concerning the authors to whom our modern 

 names in ida' and incr are to be attributed. It seems to be custom- 

 ary to accredit a family or subfamily name to the author who first 

 recognized the group as supergeneric and gave it a Latin or Greek 

 name based on that of one of its genera. If this is done in the case 

 of the Formicidae the authorities cited in the literature require 

 revision. Frederick Smith (1851), Westwood (1840), Shuckard 

 (1840) and Stephens (1829) all attribute Formicidae as a family 

 name to Leach. They appear to refer to his article published in 

 the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia in 1815, where he used the term 



