Oecologia

, Volume 81, Issue 2, pp 201–211 | Cite as

Community structure in north temperate ants: temporal and spatial variation

  • Joan M. Herbers
Original Papers

Summary

Ant communities in Vermont and New York woods were sampled in four time periods to determine species composition, relative abundances, and nest locations in space. The Vermont community was richer, containing more species and higher nest densities than New York. Both communities followed the geometric distribution of species abundances, suggesting that a single resource was mediating competition. The resource most clearly implicated was suitable nest sites, principally pre-formed plant cavities. Nonrandom species associations, underdispersion in every season, and the occurrence of incipient nests overwintering aboveground all implicated shortage of such cavities. Furthermore, microhabitat differences which produce suitable nest sites occur over a very small scale in these communities.

Key words

Ants Community structure Spatial pattern Seasonality Environmental heterogeneity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alloway TM, Buschinger A, Talbot M, Stuart R, Thomas C (1982) Polygyny and polydomy in three North American species of the ant genus Leptothorax Mayr. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 89:249–274Google Scholar
  2. Andersen AN (1986) Diversity, seasonality and community organization of ants at adjacent heath and woodland sites in southeastern Australia Aust J Zool 34:53–64Google Scholar
  3. Briese DT, Macauley BJ (1980) Temporal structure of ant community in semi-arid Australia. Aust J Ecol 5:121–134Google Scholar
  4. Brown JH, Reichman OJ, Davidson DW (1979) Granivory in desert ecosystems. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 10:201–227Google Scholar
  5. Clark PJ, Evans FC (1954) Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35:445–453Google Scholar
  6. Clark PJ, Evans FC (1955) On some aspects of spatial pattern in biological populations. Science 121:397–398Google Scholar
  7. Del Rio Pesado MG, Alloway TM (1983) Polydomy in the slavemaking ant Harpagoxenus americanus (Emery) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 90:151–162Google Scholar
  8. Diamond J, Case TJ (1986) Community ecology. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Herbers JM (1985) Seasonal structuring of a north temperate ant community. Ins Soc 32:224–240Google Scholar
  10. Herbers JM (1986) Nest site limitation, and facultative polygyny in the ant Leptothorax longispinosus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:115–122Google Scholar
  11. Herbers JM, Tucker CW (1986) Population fluidity in Leptothorax longispinosus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 93:217–229Google Scholar
  12. Kikkawa J, Anderson DJ (1986) Community ecology: pattern and process. Blackwell Scientific, BostonGoogle Scholar
  13. Levings SC (1983) Seasonal, annual, and among-site variation in the ground ant community of a deciduous tropical forest: some causes of patchy species distributions. Ecol Monogr 53:435–455Google Scholar
  14. Levings SC, Franks NR (1982) Patterns of nest dispersion in a tropical ground ant community. Ecology 63:338–344Google Scholar
  15. Levings SC, Traniello JFA (1981) Territorality, nest dispersion and community structure in ants. Psyche 88:265–319Google Scholar
  16. May R (1975) Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In: Cody ML, Diamond J (eds) Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, pp 81–120Google Scholar
  17. Meagher TR, Burdick DS (1980) The use of nearest neighbor frequency analyses in studies of association. Ecology 61:1253–1255Google Scholar
  18. Morton SR, Davidson DW (1988) Comparative structure of harvester ant communities in arid Australia and North America. Ecol Monogr 58:19–38Google Scholar
  19. Pielou EC (1977) Mathematical biology. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Preston FW (1948) The commonness and rarity of species. Ecology 29:254–283Google Scholar
  21. Rissing SW (1988) Seed-harvester ant association with shrubs: competition for water in the Mohave desert? Ecology 69:809–813Google Scholar
  22. Savolainen R, Vepsäläinen K (1988) A competition hierarchy among boreal ants: impact on resource partitioning and community structure. Oikos 51:135–155Google Scholar
  23. Smallwood J (1982a) Nest relocations in ants. Ins Soc 29:138–147Google Scholar
  24. Smallwood J (1982b) The effect of shade and competition on emigration rate in the ant Aphaenogaster rudis. Ecology 63:124–134Google Scholar
  25. Smallwood J, Culver DC (1979) Colony movements of some North American ants. J Anim Ecol 48:373–382Google Scholar
  26. Snyder LE (1988) Colony subdivision and sex ratios in the ant Myrmica punctiventris: an analysis of queen-worker conflict. MS Thesis, Univ VermontGoogle Scholar
  27. Strong DR, Simberloff D, Abele LG, Thistle AB (eds) (1984) Ecological communities: conceptual issues and the evidence. Princeton Univ Press, Princeton NJGoogle Scholar
  28. Stuart RJ (1985) Spontaneous polydomy in laboratory colonies of the ant Leptothorax curvispinosus Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 92:71–81Google Scholar
  29. Torres JA (1984a) Niches and coecistence of ant communities in Puerto Rico: repeated patterns. Biotropica 16:284–295Google Scholar
  30. Torres JA (1984b) Diversity and distribution of ant communities in Puerto Rico. Biotropica 16:296–303Google Scholar
  31. Traniello JFA, Levings SC (1986) Intra-and intercolony patterns of nest dispersion in the ant Lasius neoniger: correlations with terrotoriality and foraging ecology. Oecologia 69:413–419Google Scholar
  32. Vandermeer J (1980) Elementary mathematical ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Waloff N, Blackith RE (1962) The growth and distribution of the mounds of Lasius flavus (Fabricius) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Silwood Park, Berkshire. J Anim Ecol 31:421–437Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joan M. Herbers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations