Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative cognition in carpenter ants

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Processing information about quantities allows animals to make optimal decisions during many natural contexts, such as foraging, territorial defense, offspring care, mate choice, and intra-sexual competition. Compared to the wealth of information available in vertebrates, much less is known in invertebrates, even though the processing of quantities is equally relevant for both taxa. Here, we used two separate ecologically relevant tasks (brood pile preference and landmark-guided foraging) to investigate two dimensions of quantitative cognition in carpenter ants: spontaneous quantitative judgments and trained use of sequential landmarks. Individual ants spontaneously discriminated between two piles of dummy cocoons both when the choice involved smaller (1 vs. 2, 3, 4) and larger numerical contrasts (2 vs. 4, 6, 8). Ants used both chemical and visual/tactile cues and their performance was dependent on the numerical ratio. In the second task, ants preferentially searched near the trained landmark (out of five identical ones) despite alterations in its position, suggesting that they used ordinal information about its location when searching for food. In this experiment, ants showed a limit at four since their performance drastically decreased when they were trained to the 5th landmark. We showed that carpenter ants use both relative quantity and relative position to make efficient decisions. Our study contributes to the scant body of knowledge available on quantitative cognition in invertebrate species.

Significance statement

There is ample experimental evidence that non-human animals are able to process quantitative information, in particular mammals, some birds, and fish, and that this ability is useful in a variety of ecologically relevant situations. Yet, information about quantitative cognition in invertebrates is very scarce. We show that individual ants are able to use both relative quantity and relative position of items. Nurse ants spontaneously discriminated between two brood piles of different sizes and foragers were able to learn to identify a landmark associated with food on the basis of its position in a series of identical ones. These results suggest that ants might use quantitative information to make optimal choices in their natural environment although the precise mechanisms underlying this ability should be further investigated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data used in this study are available at the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/m2k3b/?view_only=73691a2fe7114712b40ebedbb6bd1da8).

References

  • Agrillo C, Bisazza A (2018) Understanding the origin of number sense: a review of fish studies. Phil Trans R Soc B 373:20160511

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Agrillo C, Dadda M, Serena G, Bisazza A (2008) Do fish count? Spontaneous discrimination of quantity in female mosquitofish. AnimCogn 11:495–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrillo C, Piffer L, Bisazza A (2011) Number versus continuous quantity in numerosity judgments by fish. Cognition 119:281–287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Agrillo C, Piffer L, Bisazza A, Butterworth B (2012) Evidence for two numerical systems that are similar in humans and guppies. PLoS ONE 7:e31923

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JM, Shivik J, Jordan KE (2011) Tracking of food quantity by coyotes (Canis latrans). Behav Process 88:72–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard AM, Hughes KD, Gerhardt RR, DiVincenti L Jr, Bovee JM, Cantlon JF (2013) Inher-ently analog quantity representations in olive baboons (Papio anubis). Front Psychol 4:253

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Benson-Amram S, Heinen VK, Dryer SL, Holekamp KE (2011) Numerical assessment and individual call discrimination by wild spotted hyaenas, Crocuta crocuta. AnimBehav 82:743–752

    Google Scholar 

  • Beran MJ (2017) Quantitative cognition. In: Call J, Burghardt GM, Pepperberg IM, Snowdon CT, Zentall T (eds) APA handbook of comparative psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, pp 553–577

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisazza A, Piffer L, Serena G, Agrillo C (2010) Ontogeny of numerical abilities in fish. PLoS ONE 5:e15516

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bogale BA, Aoyama M, Sugita S (2014) Spontaneous discrimination of food quantities in the jungle crow, Corvus macrorhynchos. AnimBehav 94:73–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannon EM, Terrace HS (1998) Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys. Science 282:746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cacchione T, Christine Hrubesch C, Call J (2014) Phylogenetic roots of quantity processing: apes do not rely on object indexing to process quantities. Cogn Dev 31:79–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Call J (2000) Estimating and operating on discrete quantities in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). J Comp Psychol 114:136–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cammaerts M-C (2008) Visual discrimination of cues differing as for their number of elements, their shape or their orientation, by the ant Myrmica sabuleti. Biologia 63:1169–1180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cammaerts M-C, Cammaerts R (2019) Ants’ notion of zero through the perception of the absence of an odor. International Journal of Biology 11:2. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijb.v11n2p1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carazo P, Font E, Forteza-Behrendt E, Desfilis E (2009) Quantity discrimination in Tenebrio molitor: evidence of numerosity discrimination in an invertebrate? AnimCogn 12:463–470

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carazo P, Fernández-Perea R, Font E (2012) Quantity estimation based on numerical cues in the mealworm beetle (Tenebrio molitor). Front Psychol 3:502

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chittka L, Geiger K (1995) Can honey bees count landmarks? AnimBehav 49:159–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin AL (2014) Ratio-dependent quantity discrimination in quorum sensing ants. AnimCogn 17:1261–1268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • d’Ettorre P (2013) Learning and recognition of identity in ants. In: Menzel R, Benjamin PR (eds) Invertebrate learning and memory. Elsevier, London, pp 501–513

    Google Scholar 

  • Dacke M, Srinivasan M (2008) Evidence for counting in insects. AnimCogn 11:683–689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis H, Bradford SA (1986) Counting behavior by rats in a simulated natural environment. Ethology 73:265–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehn MM (1990) Vigilance for predators - detection and dilution Effects. BehavEcolSociobiol 26:337–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Feigenson L, Dehaene S, Spelke E (2004) Core systems of number. Trends CognSci 8(307):314

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH, Pierce AA, Sealand RO, delBarco-Trillo J (2005) Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, can distinguish more over-marks from fewer over-marks. AnimCogn 8:182–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatto E, Carlesso D (2019) Spontaneous quantity discrimination in crickets. Ethology 125:613–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giraudoux P (2016) Pgirmess: data analysis in ecology. R package version 1.6.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pgirmess

  • Giurfa M (2019) An insect’s sense of number. Trends CognSci 23:720–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross H, Pahl M, Si A, Zhu H, Tautz J, Zhang S (2009) Number-based visual generalization in the honeybee. PLoS ONE 4:e4263

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser MD, Carey S, Hauser LB (2000) Spontaneous number representation in semi-free-ranging rhesus monkeys. Proc R SocLond B 267:829–833

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Holman L, Dreier S, d’Ettorre P (2010) Selfish strategies and honest signalling: reproductive conflicts in ant queen associations. Proc R SocLond B 277:2007–2015

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howard SR, Avarguès-Weber A, Garcia JE, Greentree AD, Dyer AG (2018) Numerical ordering of zero in honey bees. Science 360:1124–1126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Howard SR, Schramme J, Garcia JE, Ng L, Avarguès-Weber A, Greentree AD, Dyer AG (2020) Spontaneous quantity discrimination of artificial flowers by foraging honeybees. J Exp Biol 223(9):jeb223610

  • Jordan KE, Brannon EM (2006) A common representational system governed by Weber’s law: nonverbal numerical similarity judgments in 6-year-olds and rhesus macaques. J Exp Child Psychol 95:215–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Judge PG, Evans TA, Vyas DK (2005) Ordinal representation of numeric quantities by brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J ExpPsycholAnimBehav Process 31:79–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucon-Xiccato T, MilettoPetrazzini ME, Agrillo C, Bisazza A (2015) Guppies discriminate between two quantities of food items but prioritize item size over total amount. AnimBehav 107:183–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucon-Xiccato T, Gatto E, Bisazza A (2018) Quantity discrimination by treefrogs. AnimBehav 139:61–69

    Google Scholar 

  • MaBouDi H, Dona H, Gatto E, Loukola OJ, Buckley E, Onoufriou PD, Skorupski P, Chittka L (2020) Bumblebees use sequential scanning of countable items in visual patterns to solve numerosity tasks. Integr Comp Biol 60:929–942. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icaa025

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J, Parker GA (1976) The logic of asymmetric contests. AnimBehav 24:159–175

    Google Scholar 

  • McComb K, Packer C, Pusey A (1994) Roaring and numerical assessment in contests between groups of female lions, Panthera leo. AnimBehav 47:379–387

    Google Scholar 

  • MilettoPetrazzini ME, Lucon-Xiccato T, Agrillo C, Bisazza A (2015) Use of ordinal information by fish. Sci Rep 5:15497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moyer RS, Landauer TK (1967) Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature 215:1519–1520

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nieder A (2018) Evolution of cognitive and neural solutions enabling numerosity judgements: lessons from primates and corvids. Phil Trans R Soc B 373:20160514

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl M, Si A, Zhang S (2013) Numerical cognition in bees and other insects. Front Psychol 4:162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00162

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Perez M, Giurfa M, d’Ettorre P (2015) The scent of mixtures: rules of odour processing in ants. Sci Rep 5:8659. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep08659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar DR (2016) Core Team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-127. http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=nlme

  • Piqueret B, Sandoz JC, d’Ettorre P (2019) Ants learn fast and do not forget: associative olfactory learning, memory and extinction in Formica fusca. R Soc Open Sci 6:190778

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnik JM, Brubaker DL, Dale R, Tiller LN, Mumby HS, Clayton NS (2019) Elephants have a nose for quantity. Proc Natl AcadSci USA 116:12566–12571

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2019) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Available online at: www.R-project.org

  • Reznikova Z (2008) Experimental paradigms for studying cognition and communication in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecological News 11:201–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (1996) Transmission of information regarding the quantitative characteristics of an object in ants. NeurosciBehavPhysiol 26:397–405

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (2011) Numerical competence in animals, with an insight from ants. Behaviour 148:405–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugani R (2018) Towards numerical cognition’s origin: insights from day-old domestic chicks. Phil Trans R Soc B 373:20160509

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rugani R, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2007) Rudimental numerical competence in 5-day-old domestic chicks (Gallus gallus): identification of ordinal position. J ExpPsycholAnimBehav Process 33:21–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Skorupski P, MaBouDi HD, Galpayage Dona HS, Chittka L (2018) Counting insects. Phil Trans R Soc B 373:20160513

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki K, Kobayashi T (2000) Numerical competence in rats (Rattus norvegicus): Davis and Bradford (1986) extended. J Comp Psychol 114:73–85

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner CJ (2006) Numerical assessment affects aggression and competitive ability: a team-fighting strategy for the ant Formica xerophila. Proc R SocLond B 273:2737–2742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas ML, Simmons LW (2009) Male-derived cuticular hydrocarbons signal sperm competition intensity and affect ejaculate expenditure in crickets. Proc R SocLond B 276:383–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uller C, Lewis J (2009) Horses (Equus caballus) select the greater of two quantities in small numerical contrasts. AnimCogn 12:733–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward C, Smuts BB (2007) Quantity-based judgments in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris). AnimCogn 10:71–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson ML, Hauser MD, Wrangham RW (2001) Does participation in intergroup conflict depend on numerical assessment, range location, or rank for wild chimpanzees? AnimBehav 61:1203–1216

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittlinger M, Wehner R, Wolf H (2006) The ant odometer: stepping on stilts and stumps. Science 312:1965–1967

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Paul Devienne for technical assistance and for the ant picture in Fig. 3. Thanks to Heiko Rödel and Jean-Luc Durand for advice about the statistics. Many thanks to Angelo Bisazza for the helpful comments.

Funding

P.dE. is funded by “Institut Universitaire de France (IUF).”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Experimental and Comparative Ethology, University of Sorbonne Paris Nord, 99 avenue J.-B. Clément, 93430, Villetaneuse, France

    Patrizia d’Ettorre, Patricia Meunier & Pietro Simonelli

  2. Institut Universitaire de France (IUF), Paris, France

    Patrizia d’Ettorre

  3. School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrew, St Mary’s Quad, South Street, St Andrews, Fife, KY16 9JP, Scotland, UK

    Josep Call

Authors
  1. Patrizia d’Ettorre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia Meunier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pietro Simonelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Josep Call
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

P.dE. and J.C. conceived the experiments. P.dE. and P.M. developed the methodology. Experimental data were taken by P.S. for spontaneous quantity discrimination (cocoon experiment) and by P.M. for use of ordinal information (landmark experiment). Data analysis was performed by P.dE. The paper was written by P.dE. and J.C., with input from all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrizia d’Ettorre.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Giurfa.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 383 KB)

Supplementary file2 (MOV 5183 KB)

Supplementary file3 (MOV 3647 KB)

Supplementary file4 (XLSX 45 KB)

Supplementary file5 (XLSX 31 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

d’Ettorre, P., Meunier, P., Simonelli, P. et al. Quantitative cognition in carpenter ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 75, 86 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03020-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03020-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation