Advertisement

Naturwissenschaften

, Volume 98, Issue 8, pp 651–659 | Cite as

Tandem carrying, a new foraging strategy in ants: description, function, and adaptive significance relative to other described foraging strategies

  • Benoit GuénardEmail author
  • Jules Silverman
Original Paper

Abstract

An important aspect of social insect biology lies in the expression of collective foraging strategies developed to exploit food. In ants, four main types of foraging strategies are typically recognized based on the intensity of recruitment and the importance of chemical communication. Here, we describe a new type of foraging strategy, “tandem carrying”, which is also one of the most simple recruitment strategies, observed in the Ponerinae species Pachycondyla chinensis. Within this strategy, workers are directly carried individually and then released on the food resource by a successful scout. We demonstrate that this recruitment is context dependent and based on the type of food discovered and can be quickly adjusted as food quality changes. We did not detect trail marking by tandem-carrying workers. We conclude by discussing the importance of tandem carrying in an evolutionary context relative to other modes of recruitment in foraging and nest emigration.

Keywords

Ants Foraging behavior Pachycondyla chinensis Recruitment Tandem carrying 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Rob R. Dunn and Eleanor Rice for their valuable comments on the manuscript, and Kenji Matsuura, Toshihisa Yashiro and Ken Shimizu for their assistance in Japan. Support for this work came from the Funding Blanton J. Whitmire Endowment at North Carolina State University, and BG was supported by the Department of Energy-National Institute for Climate Change Research, DOE-NICCR grant.

Supplementary material

114_2011_814_MOESM1_ESM.doc (44 kb)
Supplement 1 Number of P. chinensis tandem-carrying events over time in response to food type. Cell “A” held cockroach nymphs at the beginning of the experiment and then a pinned adult cockroach after 45 min. Cell “B” held a pinned adult cockroach at the beginning of the experiment and then cockroach nymphs after 45 min. *P < 0.05 (significant difference; paired Wilcoxon’s test). (DOC 44 kb)
114_2011_814_MOESM2_ESM.doc (221 kb)
Supplement 2 Adult transport in Camponotus castaneus (Latreille) observed in the context of a nest emigration in April 2009 in Cary, NC. Notice the posture and the points of contact on the mandibles of the workers. (DOC 221 kb)

References

  1. Abraham M, Pasteels JM (1980) Social behaviour during nest-moving in the ant Myrmica rubra L. (Hym. Form.). Insectes Sociaux 27(2):127–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agbogba C (1984) Observations sur le comportement de marche en tandem chez deux espèces de fourmis Ponerines: Mesoponera caffraria (Smith) et Hypoponera sp. (Hym. Formicidae). Insectes Sociaux 31(3):264–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Araujo A, Rodrigues Z (2006) Foraging behavior of the queenless ant Dinoponera quadriceps Santschi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Neotrop Entomol 35(2):159–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aron S, Deneubourg JL, Pasteels JM (1988) Visual cues and trail-following idiosyncrasy in Leptothorax unifasciatus: an orientation process during foraging. Insectes Sociaux 35(4):355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baroni Urbani C (1989) Phylogeny and behavioural evolution in ants, with a discussion of the role of behaviour in evolutionary processes. Ethol Ecol Evol 1:137–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baroni Urbani C (1993) The diversity and evolution of recruitment behavior in ants, with a discussion of the usefulness of parsimony criteria in the reconstruction of evolutionary histories. Insectes Sociaux 40:233–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beckers R, Goss S, Deneubourg JL, Pasteels JM (1989) Colony size, communication and ant foraging strategy. Psyche 96:239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beckers R, Deneubourg JL, Goss S, Pasteels JM (1990) Collective decision making through food recruitment. Insectes Sociaux 37(3):258–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bernstein RA (1975) Strategies of ants in response to variable food density. Ecology 56(1):213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breed MD, Harrison JM (1987) Individually discriminable recruitment trails in a ponerine ant. Insectes Sociaux 34(3):22–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Breed MD, Fewell JH, Moore AJ, Williams KR (1987) Graded recruitment in a ponerine ant. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20:407–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cammaerts MC, Cammaerts R (1980) Food recruitment strategies of the ants Myrmica sabuleti and Myrmica ruginodis. Behav Processes 5(3):251–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Caroll CR, Janzen DH (1973) Ecology of foraging by ants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:231–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cassill D (2003) Rules of supply and demand regulate recruitment to food in an ant society. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collett TS, Collett M (2002) Memory use in insect visual navigation. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:542–552PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Collett TS, Collett M, Wehner R (2001) The guidance of desert ants by extended landmarks. J Exp Biol 204:1635–1639PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Collett TS, Graham P, Durier V (2003) Route learning by insects. Curr Opin Neurobiol 13(6):718–725PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Daly-Schveitzer S, Beugnon G, Lachaud JP (2007) Prey weight and overwhelming difficulty impact the choice of retrieval strategy in the Neotropical ant Gnamptogenys sulcata (F. Smith). Insectes Sociaux 54:319–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Danchin E, Giraldeau LA, Cezilly F (2008) Behavioral ecology. Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. de Biseau JC, Pasteels JM (1994) Regulated food recruitment through individual behavior of scouts in the ant, Myrmica sabuleti (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Insect Behav 7(6):767–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dean WRJ (1989) Foraging and forager-recruitment in Ophthalmopone hottentota Emery (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 96:123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dejean A, Lachaud JP (2010) The hunting behavior of the African ponerine ant Pachycondyla pachyderma. Behav Processes. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2010.11.004
  23. Dejean A, Lachaud JP, Beugnon G (1993a) Efficiency in the exploitation of patchy environment by the ponerine ant Paltothyreus tarsatus: an ecological consequence of the flexibility of prey capture behavior. J Ethol 11:43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dejean A, Beugnon G, Lachaud JP (1993b) Spatial components of foraging behavior in an African ponerine ant, Paltothyreus tarsatus. J Insect Behav 6(3):271–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Duelli P (1973) Astrotaktisches heimfindevermogen tragender und getragener Ameisen (Cataglyphis bicolor Fabr. Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Rev Suisse Zool 80(3):712–719Google Scholar
  26. Fourcassié V, Oliveira PS (2002) Foraging ecology of the giant Amazonian ant Dinoponera gigantea (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Ponerinae): activity schedule, diet and spatial foraging patterns. J Nat Hist 36:2211–2227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fourcassié V, Dahbi A, Cerda X (2000) Orientation and navigation during adult transport between nests in the ant Cataglypis iberica. Naturwissenschaften 87:355–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fresneau D (1985) Individual foraging and path fidelity in a Ponerine ant. Insects Sociaux 32(2):109–116Google Scholar
  29. Graham P, Cheng K (2009) Ants use the panoramic skyline as a visual cue during navigation. Curr Biol 19(20):935–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Guénard B, Dunn RR (2010) A new (old), invasive ant in the hardwood forests of eastern North America and its potentially widespread impacts. PLoSONE 5(7):e11614. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011614 Google Scholar
  31. Harris RA, Graham P, Collett TS (2007) Visual cues for the retrieval of landmark memories by navigating wood ants. Curr Biol 17:93–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hölldobler B (1974) Communication by tandem-running in the ant Camponotus sericeus. J Comp Physiol 90:105–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hölldobler B (1977) Communication in social Hymenoptera. In: Sebeok A (ed) How animals communicate? Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 418–471Google Scholar
  34. Hölldobler B (1980) Canopy orientation: a new kind of orientation in ants. Science 210:86–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Hölldobler B, Möglich M, Maschwitz U (1974) Communication by tandem running in the ant Camponotus sericeus. J Comp Physiol 90:105–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hölldobler B, Stanton RC, Markl H (1978) Recruitment and food-retrieving behavior in Novomessor (Formicidae, Hymenoptera). I. Chemical signals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 4:163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Holway DA, Lach L, Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND, Case TJ (2002) Causes and consequences of ant invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:181–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jackson DE, Ratnieks FLW (2006) Communication in ants. Current Biology 16(15):570–574Google Scholar
  40. Jaffe K, Ramos C, Lagalla C, Parra L (1990) Orientation cues used by ants. Insectes Sociaux 37(2):101–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jessen K, Maschwitz U (1985) Individual specific trails in the ant Pachycondyla tesserinoda (Formicidae; Ponerinae). Naturwissenschaften 72:549–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jessen K, Maschwitz U (1986) Orientation and recruitment behavior in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla tesserinoda (Emery): laying of individual-specific trails during tandem running. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:151–155Google Scholar
  43. Johnson CA, Lommelen E, Allard D, Gobin B (2003) The emergence of collective foraging in the arboreal Gnamptogenys menadensis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Naturwissenschaften 90:332–336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lachaud JP, Dejean A (1994) Predatory behavior of a seed eating ant: Brachyponera senaarensis. Entomol Exp Appl 72:145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lenoir A, Jaisson P (1982) Evolution et rôle des communications antennaires chez les insectes sociaux. In: Jaisson P (ed) Social insect in the tropic, vol 1. Université Paris-Nord, Paris, pp 157–180Google Scholar
  46. Levieux J, Diomande T (1978) La nutrition des fourmis granivores. II. Cycle d’activité et régime alimentaire de Brachyponera senaarensis (Mayr) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insectes Sociaux 25(3):187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mailleux AC, Deneubourg JL, Detrain C (2000) How do ants assess food volume? Anim Behav 59:1061–1069PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Markl H, Hölldobler B (1978) Recruitment and food-retrieving behavior in Novomessor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).II. Vibration signals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 4:183–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Maschwitz U, Lenz S, Buschinger A (1986) Individual specific trails in the ant Leptothorax affinis (Formicidae: Myrmicinae). Cell Mol Life Sci 42(10):1173–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McLeman MA, Pratt SC, Franks NR (2002) Navigation using visual landmarks by the ant Leptothorax albipennis. Insectes Sociaux 49:203–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mercier JL, Lenoir A (1999) Individual flexibility and choice of foraging strategy in Polyrhachis laboriosa F. Smith (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insectes Sociaux 46:267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Möglich M (1978) Social organization of nest emigration in Leptothorax (Hym., Form.). Insectes Sociaux 25(3):205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Möglich M, Hölldobler B (1974) Social carrying behavior and division of labor during nest moving in ants. Psyche 81(2):219–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Passera L, Aron S (2006) Les fourmis: comportement, organisation sociale et évolution. CNRC-NRC Press, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  55. Peeters C, Crewe R (1987) Foraging and recruitment in ponerine ants: solitary hunting in the queenless Ophthalmopone berthoudi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 94:201–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Planqué R, Bouwe van den Berg J, Franks NR (2010) Recruitment strategies and colony size in ants. PlosOne 5(8):e11664. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011664 Google Scholar
  57. Portha S, Deneubourg JL, Detrain C (2002) Self-organized asymmetries in ant foraging: a functional response to food type and colony needs. Behav Ecol 13(6):776–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ruano F, Tinaut A (2004) The assault process of the slave-making ant Rossomyrmex minuchae (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Sociobiology 43(2):201–209Google Scholar
  59. SAS (2009) JMP-statistical discovery software. SAS Institute, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  60. Schatz B, Lachaud JP, Beugnon G (1997) Graded recruitment and hunting strategies linked to prey weight and size in the ponerine ant Ectatomma ruidum. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 40:337–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Takimoto T (1988) Carrying behavior for the recruitment of workers in Brachyponera chinensis. Ari 16:21–22 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  62. Tinaut A, Ruano F (1998) Implications phylogenetiques du mechanism de recrutement chez Rossomyrmex minuchae (Hym. Formicidae). Actes Colloques Insectes Sociaux 11:125–132Google Scholar
  63. Traniello JFA (1983) Social organization and foraging success in Lasius neoniger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): behavioral and ecological aspects of recruitment communication. Oecologia 59:94–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Traniello JFA (1989) Foraging strategies in ants. Annu Rev Entomol 34:191–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Traniello JFA, Hölldobler B (1984) Chemical communication during tandem running in Pachycondyla obscuricornis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Chem Ecol 10(5):783–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wehner R, Michel B, Antonsen P (1996) Visual navigation in insects: coupling of egocentric and geocentric information. J Exp Biol 199:129–140PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Wilson EO (1971) The insects societies. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  68. Witte V, Schliessmann D, Hashim R (2010) Attack or call for help? Rapid individual decisions in a group-hunting ant. Behav Ecol. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arq,100:1040-1047
  69. Yamamoto A, Ishihara S, Ito F (2009) Fragmentation or transportation: mode of large prey retrieval in arboreal and ground nesting ants. J Insect Behav 22:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Department of EntomologyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations