Insectes Sociaux

, Volume 58, Issue 2, pp 163–168 | Cite as

No gene flow between wing forms and clonal reproduction by males in the long-winged form of the ant Vollenhovia emeryi

  • K. KobayashiEmail author
  • E. Hasegawa
  • K. Ohkawara


In Vollenhovia emeryi, males produced by the short-winged queens (S males) have the same genotype of genomic opsin gene as the long-winged queens (L queens) rather than the cohabiting S queens. This fact suggests that either one of the following two events might have occurred, (1) a recent gene flow between the S males and the L queens or (2) a past hybridization event between them. In order to test these hypotheses, we analyzed the nuclear genome and the mitochondrial DNA of L males, L queens, and sperm from the L queens’ spermathecae. Results showed that genotype frequencies differed significantly between L males and L queens and between the sperm and L queens. Mitochondrial haplotypes of the sperm were consistent with their queen. These indicate that (1) queens of the L form mated only with the males that have been produced by L queens, and thus there is no gene flow from S males to L queens; (2) males of the L-form clonally produce sons as males of the S-form do; and (3) genotype similarity between S males and L queens indicates a past hybridization event.


Gene flow Clonal reproduction Microsatellites Past hybridization event Vollenhovia emeryi 



We thank Kei Tamura, Masato Hitokoto, and Misato Okamoto for helping with field sampling and Keiko Hamaguchi for technical advice on microsatellite isolation. This study was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) to EH, No. 20370030.

Supplementary material

40_2010_131_MOESM1_ESM.docx (27 kb)
Table S1 (DOCX 27.4 kb)


  1. Cahan S.H., Julian G.E., Rissing S.W., Schwander T., Parker J.D. and Keller L. 2004. Loss of phenotypic plasticity generates genotype–caste association in harvester ants. Curr. Biol. 14: 2277-2282Google Scholar
  2. Foucaud J., Jourdan H., Breton L.J., Loiseau A., Konghouleux D. and Estoup A. 2006. Rare sexual reproduction events in the clonal reproduction system of introduced populations of the little fire ant. Evolution 60: 1646-1657Google Scholar
  3. Foucaud J., Fournier D., Orivel J., Delabie J.H.C., Loiseau A., Breton L.J., Kergoat G.J. and Estoup A. 2007. Sex and clonality in the little fire ant. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24: 2465-2473Google Scholar
  4. Foucaud J., Orivel J., Fournier D., Delabie J.H.C., Loiseau A., Breton L.J., Cerdan P. and Estoup A. 2009a. Reproductive system, social organization, human disturbance and ecological dominance in native populations of the little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata. Mol. Ecol. 18: 5059-5073Google Scholar
  5. Foucaud J., Jourdan H., Breton L.J., Loiseau A., Konghouleux D. and Estoup A. 2009b. Thelytokous parthenogenesis, male clonality and genetic caste determination in the little fire ant: new evidence and insights from the lab. Heredity 25: 1-8Google Scholar
  6. Fournier D. and Aron S. 2009. Evolution: no-male’s land for an Amazonian Ant. Curr. Biol. 19: 738-740Google Scholar
  7. Fournier D., Estoup A., Orivel J., Foucaud J. and Heinze J. 2005. Clonal reproduction by males and females in the little fire ant. Nature 435: 1230-1234Google Scholar
  8. Hamaguchi K., Matsumoto T., Maruyama M., Hashimoto Y., Yamane S. and Itioka T. 2007. Isolation and characterization of eight microsatellite loci in two morphotypes of the Southeast Asian army ant, Aenictus laeviceps. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7: 986-987Google Scholar
  9. Hölldobler B. and Wilson E.O. 1990. The Ants. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 732 ppGoogle Scholar
  10. Imai H.T., Kihara A., Kondoh M., Kubota M., Kuribayashi S., Ogata K., Onoyama K., Taylor R.W., Terayama M., Tsukii Y., Yoshimura M. and Ugawa Y. 2003. Ants of Japan. Gakken, Tokyo. 129 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. Kobayashi K., Hasegawa E. and Ohkawara K. 2008. Clonal reproduction by males of the ant Vollenhovia emeryi (Wheeler). Entomol. Sci. 11: 167-172Google Scholar
  12. Ohkawara K., Nakayama M., Satoh A., Trindl A. and Heinze J. 2006. Clonal reproduction and genetic caste differences in a queen-polymorphic ant, Vollenhovia emeryi. Biol. Lett. 2: 359-363Google Scholar
  13. Pearcy M., Hardy O. and Aron S. 2006. Thelytokous parthenogenesis and its consequences on inbreeding in an ant. Heredity 96: 377-382Google Scholar
  14. Rabeling C., Lino-Neto J., Cappellari S.C., Dos Santos I.A., Mueller U.G. and Bacci M. Jr. 2009. Thelytokous parthenogenesis in the fungus-gardening ant Mycocepurus smithii (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). PLoS One 4: e6781Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Union for the Study of Social Insects (IUSSI) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Animal Ecology, Department of Ecology and Systematics, Graduate School of AgricultureHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan
  2. 2.Ecological Laboratory, Division of Biological Sciences, Graduate School of Natural Science and TechnologyKanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations