Advertisement

Insectes Sociaux

, Volume 65, Issue 3, pp 431–438 | Cite as

Limited size-related variation in behavioral performance among workers of the exceptionally polymorphic ant Pheidole rhea

  • D. G. Gordon
  • M. Moreau
  • V. Fourcassie
  • J. F. A. Traniello
Research Article

Abstract

Colony fitness is thought to be enhanced through task specialization by physical castes in social insect species that have evolved polymorphic workers. Using the exceptionally polymorphic ant Pheidole rhea as a model, we explored the relationship of worker size and behavior with respect to division of labor by morphologically variable subcastes, hypothesizing that the behavior of minor workers, soldiers, and supersoldiers would align with their social roles. We assayed the ability of different-size workers to detect trail pheromone, generate nest-search locomotion patterns, and recognize non-nestmates and respond with aggressive defense. Our analyses revealed that the largest size class of workers, supersoldiers, can detect trail pheromone at concentrations lower than those eliciting responses from either minors or soldiers. However, there were no size-related differences in locomotion patterns associated with nest-search behavior in a featureless arena, nor was there worker variation in responses to a non-nestmate conspecific. Although the striking polymorphism and allometry of workers suggest role divergence and division of labor in P. rhea, similarity in responses to stimuli associated with extranidal task performance may reflect the conservation of behavioral programs across strongly polymorphic workers.

Keywords

Division of labor Trail following Nest search Nestmate recognition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for K. Godfrey’s collection efforts and Dr. W. Gronenberg for access to an unpublished manuscript. This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant IOS 1354291 to JFAT.

References

  1. Amador-Vargas S, Gronenberg W, Wcislo WT, Mueller U (2015) Specialization and group size: brain and behavioural correlates of colony size in ants lacking morphological castes. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 282:20142502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amador-Vargas S, Mueller UG (2017) Ability to reorient is weakly correlated with central-place versus non-central-place foraging in acacia ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71:43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson C, McShea DW (2001) Individual versus social complexity, with particular reference to ant colonies. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 76:211–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batschelet E (1981) Circular statistics in biology. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Benhamou S (2004) How to reliably estimate the tortuosity of an animal’s path: straightness, sinuosity, or fractal dimension? J Theor Biol 229:209–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Beshers SN, Fewell JH (2001) Models of division of labor in social insects. Annu Rev Entomol 46:413–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bos N, D’Ettorre P (2012) Recognition of social identity in ants. Front Psychol 3:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bourke AFG, Franks NR (1995) Social evolution in ants. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  10. Branson K, Robie AA, Bender J et al (2009) High-throughput ethomics in large groups of Drosophila. Nat Methods 6:451–457CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Calenge C (2006) The package “adehabitat” for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol Modell 197:516–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Czaczkes TJ, Castorena M, Schürch R, Heinze J (2016) Pheromone trail following in the ant Lasius niger: high accuracy and variability but no effect of task state. Physiol Entomol 42:91–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Detrain C, Pasteels JM (1992) Caste polyethism and collective defense in the ant, Pheidole pallidula: the outcome of quantitative differences in recruitment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29:405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Detrain C, Pasteels JM (1991) Caste differences in behavioral thresholds as a basis for polyethism during food recruitment in the ant, Pheidole pallidula (Nyl.) (Hymenoptera: Myrmicinae). J Insect Behav 4:157–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dürr V, Theunissen LM, Dallmann CJ et al (2018) Motor flexibility in insects: adaptive coordination of limbs in locomotion and near-range exploration. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fjerdingstad EJ, Crozier RH (2006) The evolution of worker caste diversity in social insects. Am Nat 167:390–400CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gautrais J, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg J-L, Anderson C (2002) Emergent polyethism as a consequence of increased colony size in insect societies. J Theor Biol 215:363–373CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Giraldo YM, Kamhi JF, Fourcassié V et al (2016) Lifespan behavioural and neural resilience in a social insect. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 283:20152603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gordon DG, Ilieş I, Traniello JFA (2017) Behavior, brain, and morphology in a complex insect society: trait integration and social evolution in the exceptionally polymorphic ant Pheidole rhea. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71:166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordon DG, Traniello JFA (2018) Synaptic organization and division of labor in the exceptionally polymorphic ant Pheidole rhea. Neurosci Lett.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2018.04.001 Google Scholar
  21. Gronenberg W, Paul J, Just S, Hölldobler B (1997) Mandible muscle fibers in ants: fast or powerful? Cell Tissue Res 289:347–361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hasegawa E (1993) Caste specialization in food storage in the dimorphic ant Colobopsis nipponicus (Wheeler). Insectes Soc 40:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hasegawa E, Ishii Y, Tada K et al (2016) Lazy workers are necessary for long-term sustainability in insect societies. Sci Rep 6:20846CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Huang MH (2010) Multi-phase defense by the big-headed ant, Pheidole obtusospinosa, against raiding army ants. J Insect Sci 10:1PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Huang MH, Wheeler DE (2011) Colony demographics of rare soldier-polymorphic worker caste systems in Pheidole ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insectes Soc 58:539–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kamhi JF, Nunn K, Robson SKA, Traniello JFA (2015) Polymorphism and division of labour in a socially complex ant: neuromodulation of aggression in the Australian weaver ant, Oecophylla smaragdina. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 282:20150704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kleineidam CJ, Rössler W, Hölldobler B, Roces F (2007) Perceptual differences in trail-following leaf-cutting ants relate to body size. J Insect Physiol 53:1233–1241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Knaden M, Wehner R (2006) Ant navigation: resetting the path integrator. J Exp Biol 209:26–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Larsen J, Fouks B, Bos N et al (2014) Variation in nestmate recognition ability among polymorphic leaf-cutting ant workers. J Insect Physiol 70:59–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Merkle T, Knaden M, Wehner R (2006) Uncertainty about nest position influences systematic search strategies in desert ants. J Exp Biol 209:3545–3549CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Merkle T, Wehner R (2010) Desert ants use foraging distance to adapt the nest search to the uncertainty of the path integrator. Behav Ecol 21:349–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mersch DP, Crespi A, Keller L (2013) Tracking individuals shows spatial fidelity is a key regulator of ant social organization. Science 340:1090–1093CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Mertl AL, Traniello JFA (2009) Behavioral evolution in the major worker subcaste of twig-nesting Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): does morphological specialization influence task plasticity? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1411–1426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moreau CS (2008) Unraveling the evolutionary history of the hyperdiverse ant genus Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 48:224–239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Muscedere ML, Willey TA, Traniello JFA (2009) Age and task efficiency in the ant Pheidole dentata: young minor workers are not specialist nurses. Anim Behav 77:911–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oster GF, Wilson EO (1978) Caste and ecology in the social insects. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  37. Peeters C, Lin C-C, Quinet Y et al (2013) Evolution of a soldier caste specialized to lay unfertilized eggs in the ant genus Crematogaster (subgenus Orthocrema). Arthropod Struct Dev 42:257–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Powell S (2009) How ecology shapes caste evolution: linking resource use, morphology, performance and fitness in a superorganism. J Evol Biol 22:1004–1013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Powell S (2016) A comparative perspective on the ecology of morphological diversification in complex societies: nesting ecology and soldier evolution in the turtle ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:1075–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Powell S, Franks NR (2006) Ecology and the evolution of worker morphological diversity: a comparative analysis with Eciton army ants. Funct Ecol 20:1105–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ravary F, Lecoutey E, Kaminski G et al (2007) Individual experience alone can generate lasting division of labor in ants. Curr Biol 17:1308–1312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Schultheiss P, Cheng K (2013) Finding food: outbound searching behavior in the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti. Behav Ecol 24:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schultheiss P, Stannard T, Pereira S et al (2016) Similarities and differences in path integration and search in two species of desert ants inhabiting a visually rich and a visually barren habitat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:1319–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thomas ML, Elgar MA (2003) Colony size affects division of labour in the ponerine ant Rhytidoponera metallica. Naturwissenschaften 90:88–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Vander Meer RK, Alvarez F, Lofgren CS (1988) Isolation of the trail recruitment pheromone of Solenopsis invicta. J Chem Ecol 14:825–838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Wehner R, Srinivasan MV (1981) Searching behaviour of desert ants, genus Cataglyphis (Formicidae, Hymenoptera). J Comp Physiol A 142:315–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilson EO (1974) The soldier of the ant Camponotus (Colobopsis) fraxinicola as a trophic caste. Psyche (Stuttg) 81:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson EO (1980) Caste and division of labor in leaf-cutter ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Atta): I. The overall pattern in A. sexdens. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:143–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson EO (2003) Pheidole in the new world: a dominant, hyperdiverse ant genus. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson EO (1984) The relation between caste ratios and division of labor in the ant genus Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilson EO (1976) The organization of colony defense in the ant Pheidole dentata Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1:63–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Union for the Study of Social Insects (IUSSI) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. G. Gordon
    • 1
  • M. Moreau
    • 3
  • V. Fourcassie
    • 2
  • J. F. A. Traniello
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyBoston UniversityBostonUSA
  2. 2.Graduate Program for NeuroscienceBoston UniversityBostonUSA
  3. 3.Research Centre on Animal Cognition, Center for Integrative BiologyToulouse University, CNRS, UPSToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations