Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 105–113 | Cite as

Stone dropping by Conomyrma bicolor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): A new technique of interference competition

  • Michael H. J. Möglich
  • Gary D. Alpert


  1. 1.

    The dolichoderine ant Conomyrma bicolor interferes with the activity of other desert ants when their nest entrances are in close proximity. C. bicolor workers surround these nests, pick up small stones and other objects with their mandibles, and drop them down the nest entrances.

  2. 2.

    Interactions of C. bicolor with three species of Myrmecocystus (M. mexicanus, M. mimicus, and M. depilis) were investigated. ‘Stone dropping’ and associated behaviors prevent the Myrmecocystus colonies from foraging. Periodic checks throughout the summer revealed a consistently adverse effect on these Myrmecocystus species.

  3. 3.

    Considerable overlap in food resources, activity times, as well as space among C. bicolor and the Myrmecocystus species suggest that ‘stone dropping’ is a technique of interference competition.

  4. 4.

    We were not able to completely analyze the mechanism which keeps the victimized colonies from foraging. However, we report circumstantial evidence supporting the hypothesis that the stones function as a mechanical signal.



Adverse Effect Activity Time Food Resource Circumstantial Evidence Mechanical Signal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Creighton, W.S.: The ants of North America. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harv. 104, 1–585 (1950)Google Scholar
  2. Hölldobler, B.: Chemische Strategie beim Nahrungserwerb der Diebsameise (Solenopsis fugax Latr.) und der Pharaoameise (Monomorium pharaonis L.). Oecologia Berlin 11, 371–380 (1973)Google Scholar
  3. Lin, N.: The use of sand grains by the pavement ant Tetramorium caespitum while attacking halictime bees. Bull. Brooklyn Entomol. Soc. 59 and 60, 30–34 (1964–65)Google Scholar
  4. Mallis, A.: A list of the ants of California with notes on their habits and distribution. South. Calif. Acad. Sci. Bull. 40, 61–100 (1941)Google Scholar
  5. Miller, R.S.: Competition and species diversity. Brookhaven Symp. Biol. 22, 63–70 (1969)Google Scholar
  6. Snelling, R.R.: A revision of the honey ants, genus Myrmecocystus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Cty. Sci. Bull. 24, 1–163 (1976)Google Scholar
  7. Wheeler, W.M.: Ants: Their structure, development and behavior. New York: Columbia University 1910Google Scholar
  8. Wilson, E.O.: The insect societies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University 1971Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael H. J. Möglich
    • 1
  • Gary D. Alpert
    • 1
  1. 1.Museum of Comparative Zoology LaboratoriesHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations