, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 19–24 | Cite as

Alteration of cuticular hydrocarbon composition affects heterospecific nestmate recognition in the carpenter ant Camponotus fellah

  • I. Lalzar
  • T. Simon
  • R. K. Vander Meer
  • Abraham Hefetz
Research Paper


Nestmate recognition is a ubiquitous phenomenon in social insects as a means to prevent entry of undesired individuals aiming at exploiting the rich nest resources. The recognition cues in ants were shown in a few cases to be cuticular hydrocarbons, although there are a quite number of correlated associations. In the present study we modified the cuticular profiles of workers Camponotus fellah hydrocarbons with cuticular washes from a closely related, yet undescribed species, Camponotus sp. Although these sympatric species are morphologically indistinguishable, cuticular washes of C. sp. contain 9,13-dimethylpentacosane and 11,15-dimethylheptacosane that are either absent or occur as traces in C. fellah. In addition, C. sp. contains significantly greater amounts of 3-methylpentacosane than C. fellah workers. The cuticle modification was done solventless in a manner that minimized disruption to the cuticular structure of the ant being modified. Judging from the 3 focal compounds, such treatment added between 20 and 30% of the original amounts present in C. sp. to the treated C. fellah workers. This addition changed consistently the cuticular hydrocarbon profile of the treated ant. Dyadic assays between C. fellah and their nestmates treated with C. sp. cuticular rinses revealed a significantly higher level of aggression compared to non-treated nestmates. There was no aggression between nestmates of C. sp. These results demonstrate that in heterospecific interactions between the two Camponotus species there is a correlation between cuticular hydrocarbons and a nestmate recognition response, albeit not as high as the response of C. fellah to of C. sp. workers. This is consistent with the hypothesis that cuticular hydrocarbons may play a role in nestmate recognition.


Cuticular hydrocarbons Nestmate recognition Camponotus fellah 



This research was supported by The United States-Israel BiNational Science Foundation (Grant n˚ 203367 to Abraham Hefetz & Robert K. Vander Meer). We thank N. Paz for editorial assistance. The experiments comply with the current laws of Israel.


  1. Akino T, Yamamura K, Wakamura S, Yamaoka R (2004) Direct behavioral evidence for hydrocarbons as nestmate recognition cues in Formica japonica (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Appl Entomol Zool 39:381–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonavita-Cougourdan A, Clément JL, Lange C (1987) Nestmate recognition: the role of cuticular hydrocarbons in the ant Camponotus vagus Scop. J Entomol Sci 22:1–10Google Scholar
  3. Boulay R, Lenoir A (2001) Social isolation of mature workers affects nestmate recognition in the ant Camponotus fellah. Behav Processes 55:67–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Boulay R, Hefetz A, Soroker V, Lenoir A (2000) Camponotus fellah colony integration: Worker individuality necessitates frequent hydrocarbon exchanges. Anim Behav 59:1127–1133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boulay R, Katzav-Gozansky T, Vander Meer RK, Hefetz A (2003) Colony insularity through queen control on worker social motivation in ants. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 270:971–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boulay R, Katzav-Gozansky T, Hefetz A, Lenoir A (2004) Odour convergence and tolerance between nestmates through trophallaxis and trooming in the tnt Camponotus fellah (Dalla Torre). Insectes Soc 51:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clément J-L, Bonavita-Cougourdan A, Lange C (1987) Nestmate recognition and cuticular hydrocarbons in Camponotus vagus Scop. In: Eder E, Rembold H (eds) Chemistry and biology of social insects. J. Peperny, Munchen, pp 473–474Google Scholar
  8. Dahbi A, Lenoir A, Tinaut A, Taghizadeh T, Francke W, Hefetz A (1996) Chemistry of the postpharyngeal gland secretion and its implication for the phylogeny of Iberian Cataglyphis species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Chemoecology 7:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dani FR, Jones GR, Destri S, Spencer SH, Turillazzi S (2001) Deciphering the recognition signature within the cuticular chemical profile of paper wasps. Anim Behav 62:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dani FR, Jones GR, Corsi S, Beard R, Pradella D, Turillazzi S (2005) Nestmate recognition cues in the honey bee: differential importance of cuticular alkanes and alkenes. Chem Sens 30:477–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greene MJ, Gordon DM (2007) Structural complexity of chemical recognition cues affects the perception of group membership in the ants Linephithema humile and Aphaenogaster cockerelli. J Exp Biol 210:897–905CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hefetz A (2007) The evolution of hydrocarbon pheromone parsimony in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)–interplay of colony odor uniformity and odor idiosyncrasy. A review. Myrmecol News 10:59–68Google Scholar
  13. Henderson G, Andersen JF, Philips JK, Jeanne RL (1990) Internest aggression and identification of possible nestmate discrimination pheromones in polygynous ant Formica montana. J Chem Ecol 16:2217–2228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Katzav-Gozansky T, Boulay R, Ionescu-Hirsh A, Hefetz A (2008) Nest volatiles as modulators of nestmate recognition in the ant Camponotus fellah. J Insect Physiol 54:378–385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lahav S, Soroker V, Hefetz A, Vander Meer RK (1999) Direct behavioral evidence for hydrocarbons as ant recognition discriminators. Naturwissenschaften 86:246–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lahav S, Soroker V, Vander Meer RK, Hefetz A (2001) Segregation of colony odor in the desert ant Cataglyphis niger. J Chem Ecol 27:927–943CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lavine BK, Davidson C, Vander Meer RK, Lahav S, Soroker V, Hefetz A (2003) Genetic algorithms for deciphering the complex chemosensory code of social insects. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 66:51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lenoir A, Fresneau D, Errard C, Hefetz A (1999) Individuality and colonial identity in ants: the emergence of the social representation concept. In: Detrain C, Deneubourg JL, Pasteels JM (eds) Information processing in social insects. Birkhauser, Basel, pp 219–237Google Scholar
  19. Lenoir A, Hefetz A, Simon T, Soroker V (2001) Comparative dynamics of gestalt odour formation in two ant species Camponotus fellah and Aphaenogaster senilis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Physiol Entomol 26:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ozaki M, Wada-Katsumata A, Fujikawa K, Iwasaki M, Yokohari F, Satoji Y, Nisimura T, Yamaoka R (2005) Ant nestmate and non-nestmate discrimination by a chemosensory sensillum. Science 309:311–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Provost E, Riviere G, Roux M, Morgan ED, Bagnères AG (1993) Change in the chemical signature of the ant Leptothorax lichtensteini Bondroit with time. Insect Biochem Mol Biol 23:945–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tentschert J, Bestmann HJ, Heinze J (2002) Cuticular compounds of workers and queens in two Leptothorax ant species—a comparison of results obtained by solvent extraction, solid sampling, and SPME. Chemoecology 12:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thomas ML, Parry LJ, Allan RA, Elgar MA (1999) Geographic affinity, cuticular hydrocarbons and colony recognition in the Australian meat ant Iridomyrmex purpureus. Naturwissenschaften 86:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Torres CW, Brandt M, Tsutsui ND (2007) The role of cuticular hydrocarbons as chemical cues for nestmate recognition in the invasive Argentine ant (Linepithema humile). Insectes Soc 54:363–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vander Meer RK, Alonso LE (2002) Queen primer pheromone affects conspecific fire ant (Solenopsis invicta) aggression. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:122–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vander Meer RK, Morel L (1998) Nestmate recognition in ants. In: Vander Meer RK, Breed M, Winston M, Espelie KE (eds) Pheromone communication in social insects: ants, wasps, bees and termites. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 79–103Google Scholar
  27. Vander Meer R, Preston C, Hefetz A (2008) Queen regulates biogenic amine level and nestmate recognition in workers of the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. Naturwissenschaften 95:1155–1158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wagner D, Tissot M, Cuevas W, Gordon DM (2000) Harvester ants utilize cuticular hydrocarbons in nestmate recognition. J Chem Ecol 26:2245–2257CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel/Switzerland 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Lalzar
    • 1
  • T. Simon
    • 1
  • R. K. Vander Meer
    • 2
  • Abraham Hefetz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Zoology, George S. Wise Faculty of Life SciencesTel Aviv UniversityRamat AvivIsrael
  2. 2.CMAVE, ARS, USDAGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations