Talk:List of ant genera

Untitled
For some reason Acanthognathus - described as a bony, extinct fish - has snuck into this list. I've removed it. EthicsGradient (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Fix up
I propose on fixing this list up, as it has been marked for immediate attention. I will be modelling it after List of cetaceans, a featured list. Burklemore1 (talk) 07:53, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

To-do list

 * Moved from the sandbox


 * Write lede
 * Manually check status / species counts of incertae sedis / excluded genera
 * Via script:
 * Check type name / current valid name
 * List extant/fossil species counts


 * Things we have to wait for AntCat to fix in their database:
 * Find and add missing collective group names (I forgot to include at least one, †Myrmicites; not sure what to do with †Formicites)
 * Decide how to handle species counts of collective group names. The problem:
 * †Myrmeciites (a CGN) has 3 species which are all listed as CGNs --> "0 species" per AC
 * †Formicium (a CGN) has 3 species which are all listed as valid --> "3 species" per AC
 * Update genus/species counts in the Armaniinae header + add AntCat reference

New images
I did that site search thing for genera without images, starting from the bottom.

Checked so far: Myrmicinae • Paraponerinae • Ponerinae • Proceratiinae • Pseudomyrmecinae • Sphecomyrminae • Incertae sedis All

Found but not uploaded (holotypes x 3): jonkerz ♠talk 09:33, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Paraphaenogaster (wing only)
 * Solenopsites
 * Taphopone (look more like a stone, heh)
 * Excellent, I'll go ahead and add them in! Thanks for tracking them down. Burklemore1 (talk) 06:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Also excellent, and also thanks for uploading them :) Looking for new new images now. jonkerz ♠talk 23:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Trivial stats: This is the percentage of genera or form groups in each subfamily assigned with an image:


 * Agroecomyrmecinae: 4/4 (100%)
 * Amblyoponinae: 14/14 (100%)
 * Brownimeciinae: 1/1 (100%)
 * Dorylinae: 19/19 (100%)
 * Heteroponerinae: 3/3 (100%)
 * Martialinae: 1/1 (100%)
 * Paraponerinae: 1/1 (100%)
 * Proceratiinae: 4/4 (100%)
 * Pseudomyrmecinae: 3/3 (100%)
 * Ponerinae: 54/59 (91%)
 * Dolichoderinae: 42/48 (87%)
 * Leptanillinae: 7/8 (87%)
 * Ectatomminae: 6/7 (85%)
 * Myrmeciinae 6/7 (85%)
 * Myrmicinae: 152/178 (85%)
 * Sphecomyrminae: 6/8 (75%)
 * Formicinae: 59/81 (72%)
 * Aneuretinae: 6/9 (66%)
 * Formiciinae: 1/2 (50%)
 * Incertae sedis: 5/14 (35%)
 * Armaniinae 1/7 (14%)
 * Total: 395/478 (82%). I note these are estimations, as I may have miscounted. Burklemore1 (talk) 07:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's actually pretty good, wouldn't have expected that just a few months ago. jonkerz ♠talk 23:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Genera without images
In the same order as in the main list. Feel free to edit this list.

* I think Sociobiology articles starting at vol. 59 are CC.
 * Excluded from Formicidae

Image sources (to be uploaded)

 * Brown & Carpenter (1978) (PD)
 * Wilson (1985a) (PD)
 * Wilson (1985b) (PD)

Comments
Table extracted via this regex:. I cannot believe I forgot that most Psyche articles are in the public domain... jonkerz ♠talk 00:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ooh, this is rather interesting. I'll see if we can dig more images up so we can upload them. Burklemore1 (talk) 06:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Another fact: Before August 2014, only 0.04% of all ant articles were either GA, FL or FA. Now it's 1.1%, which is an excellent figure. Burklemore1 (talk) 07:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Dorylinae
New 2016 paper was published that altered the taxonomic placement of many species, some of which are in brand new genera. Will be updating once my Internet is fast. Burklemore1 (talk) 04:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Amblyoponinae
Seems this is also the same case for this subfamily, another paper published in 2016. Burklemore1 (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like both are OK now. I updated Formicinae too, and the stats in the headers (but not individual species counts). Taxonomists need take more chill pills, generally. jonkerz ♠talk 17:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely so! Btw, I had no idea a new ant subfamily was erected. How exciting! Any new genera we might have to add? Burklemore1 (talk) 07:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC)