106 
Psyche 
[March 
Another Lower Oligocene deposit which has provided beautifully 
preserved fossil ants is Aix-en-Provence, France. Several species 
have been described by Theobald (1937), who recognized four 
subfamilies: Myrmicinae (1 species); Ponerinae (1 species); Doli- 
choderinae (1 genus, 2 species); and Formicinae (3 genera, 9 
species). Also described by Theobald (1937) is an Oligocene collec- 
tion from Haut-Rhin, France, in which he recognizes the same four 
subfamilies (16 genera, 34 species). This fauna is very similar to that 
found in the Baltic Amber; in fact, Theobald has found five species 
which he considers identical to species in the Baltic Amber. In a 
deposit in Gard, France, Theobald (1937) describes two species, one 
a myrmicine, the other a dolichoderine. 
Meunier (1917) has described four ant species from an Upper 
Oligocene deposit in Rott, Germany. These have been assigned to 
three genera: Formica, Ponera, and Myrmica. The specimens are 
well-preserved, as may be seen in Meunier’s photographs, but his 
generic determinations are questionable. 
In 1957, two female reproductives of the same species were 
discovered in an Upper Oligocene deposit in Argentina. The authors 
described the species as Ameghinoia piatnitskyi and placed it in the 
subfamily Ponerinae (Viana and Haedo-Rossi, 1957). E. O. Wilson 
(personal communication) is highly sceptical of the placement of A. 
piatnitskyi in the Ponerinae, and thinks that it is very clearly a 
myrmeciine. This is quite extraordinary because no other fossil ants 
have been recovered from South America, and more importantly, if 
Wilson is correct, this is the first indication that the Myrmiciinae 
were so widespread by the Oligocene. 
Miocene 
The deposits of Miocene age which have provided the greatest 
number of ant specimens have been the Oeningen beds in Germany, 
and the Radoboj formation in Croatia. Approximately 60 species of 
ants from these places were described by the Swiss myrmecologist 
Heer (1849, 1856, 1867), but his generic assignments are necessarily 
questionable in terms of present-day concepts of a formicid genus. 
Regrettably, the type specimens which are essential to a revision of 
this fossil fauna are believed to be lost. 
