Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 61, Issue 9, pp 1449–1457 | Cite as

“Selfish worker policing” controls reproduction in a Temnothorax ant

  • Nathalie Stroeymeyt
  • Elisabeth Brunner
  • Jürgen Heinze
Original Paper

Abstract

Animal societies, including those of humans, are under constant threat by selfish individuals, who attempt to enforce their own interests at the cost of the group. In the societies of bees, wasps, and ants, such individual selfishness can be prevented by “policing,” whereby workers or queens impede the reproduction of other individuals by aggression, immobilization, or egg eating. In this study, we report on a particular kind of reproduction control in the ant Temnothorax unifasciatus, which can be considered as a selfish act itself. We experimentally induced workers to lay eggs by dividing several colonies into two halves, one with and one without a queen. In queenless colonies, workers established rank orders by aggression and several top-ranking workers started to reproduce. Upon reunification, egg-laying workers mostly stopped behaving aggressively. They were neither attacked by the queen nor by random workers, but instead received infrequent, nondestructive, targeted aggression from a few workers, most of which became fertile when the queen was later removed. The introduction of differentially stained worker-laid and queen-laid eggs in queenright fragments did not lead to a selective removal of worker-laid eggs. Hence, there appears to be no collective worker policing in T. unifasciatus. Instead, reproduction appears to be controlled mostly through a few attacks from high-ranking workers, which, in this way, might attempt to selfishly increase their chances of future reproduction.

Keywords

Kin conflict Worker policing Dominance Temnothorax unifasciatus 

References

  1. Bourke AFG (1988) Worker reproduction in the higher eusocial Hymenoptera. Q Rev Biol 63:291–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourke AFG (1991) Queen behavior, reproduction and egg cannibalism in multiple-queen colonies of the ant Leptothorax acervorum. Anim Behav 42(2):295–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourke AFG (2005) Genetics, relatedness and social behaviour in insect societies. In: Fellowes MDE, Holloway GJ, Rolff J (eds) Insect evolutionary ecology. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp 1–30Google Scholar
  4. Bourke AFG, Franks NR (1995) Social evolution in ants. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  5. Buschinger A (1974) Experimente und Beobachtung zur Gründung und Entwicklung neuer Sozietäten der sklavenhaltenden Ameise Harpagoxenus sublaevis. Insectes Soc 15:217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buschinger A, Alloway TM (1978) Caste polymorphism in the slave-making ant, Harpagoxenus canadensis M. R. Smith (Hym., Formicidae). Insectes Soc 25:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cnaani J, Schmid-Hempel R, Schmidt J (2002) Colony development, larval development and worker reproduction in Bombus impatiens Cresson. Insectes Soc 49:164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cole BJ (1981) Dominance hierarchies in Leptothorax ants. Science 212:83–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Ettorre P, Heinze J, Ratnieks FLW (2004) Worker policing by egg eating in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla inversa. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:1427–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Endler A, Liebig J, Schmitt T, Parker JE, Jones GR, Schreier P, Hölldobler B (2004) Surface hydrocarbons of queen eggs regulate worker reproduction in a social insect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:2945–2950PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Foitzik S, Heinze J (1998) Nest site limitation and colony take-over in the ant Leptothorax nylanderi. Behav Ecol 9(4):367–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foster KR, Ratnieks FLW (2001) The effect of sex-allocation biasing on the evolution of worker policing in Hymenopteran societies. Am Nat 158:615–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Foster KR, Gulliver J, Ratnieks FLW (2002) Worker policing in the European hornet Vespa crabo. Insectes Soc 49:41–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frank SA (1996) Policing and group cohesion when resources vary. Anim Behav 52:1163–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frank SA (2003) Perspective: repression of competition and the evolution of cooperation. Evolution 57(4):693–705PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Franks NR, Scovell E (1983) Dominance and reproductive success among slave-making worker ants. Nature 304:724–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Franks NR, Dornhaus A, Fitzsimmons JP, Stevens M (2003) Speed versus accuracy in collective decision making. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:2457–2463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gobin B, Billen J, Peeters C (1999) Policing behaviour towards virgin egg layers in a polygynous ponerine ant. Anim Behav 58:1117–1122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hammond RL, Keller L (2004) Conflict over male parentage in social insects. PLOS Biol 2:e248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hartmann A, Wantia J, Torres JA, Heinze J (2003) Worker policing without genetic conflicts in a clonal ant. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:12836–12840PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heinze J (2004) Reproductive conflict in insect societies. Adv Stud Behav 34:1–57Google Scholar
  22. Heinze J, Ortius D (1991) Social organization of Leptothorax acervorum from Alaska (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 98:227–240Google Scholar
  23. Heinze J, Cover SP, Hölldobler B (1995) Neither worker, nor queen: an ant caste specialized in the production of unfertilized eggs. Psyche 102:173–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heinze J, Puchinger W, Hölldobler B (1997) Worker reproduction and social hierarchies in Leptothorax ants. Anim Behav 54:849–864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Helanterä H, Sundström L (2005) Worker reproduction in the ant Formica fusca. J Evol Biol 18:162–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The Ants. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Iwanishi S, Hasegawa E, Ohkawara K (2003) Worker oviposition and policing behaviour in the myrmicine ant Aphaenogaster smythiesi japonica Forel. Anim Behav 66:513–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jadwiszczak P (2003) Rundom projects 2.01 Lite. Statistical software available from the web site http://pjadw.tripod.com
  29. Keller L, Nonacs P (1993) The role of queen pheromones in social insects: queen control or queen signal? Anim Behav 45:787–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kikuta N, Tsuji K (1999) Queen and worker policing in the monogynous and monandrous ant, Diacamma sp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:180–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koedam D, Velthuis HHD, Dohmen MR, Imperatriz-Fonseca VL (2001) The behaviour of laying workers and the morphology and viability of their eggs in Melipona bicolor bicolor. Physiol Entomol 26(3):254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liebig J, Peeters C, Hölldobler B (1999) Worker policing limits the number of reproductives in a ponerine ant. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:1865–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mallon EB, Pratt SC, Franks NR (2001) Individual and collective decision-making during nest-site selection by the ant Leptothorax albipennis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:352–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Michener CD (1974) The social behavior of bees: a comparative study. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  35. Michener CD, Brothers DJ (1974) Were workers of eusocial Hymenoptera initially altruistic or oppressed? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 71:671–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Möglich M (1978) Social organization of nest emigration in Leptothorax (Hym., Form.). Insectes Soc 25:205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Monnin T, Peeters C (1997) Cannibalism of subordinates’ eggs in the monogynous queenless ant Dinoponera quadriceps. Naturwissenschaften 84:499–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Monnin T, Peeters C (1999) Dominance hierarchy and reproductive conflicts among subordinates in a monogynous queenless ant. Behav Ecol 10:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Monnin T, Ratnieks FLW (2001) Policing in queenless ponerine ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nakata K, Tsuji K (1996) The effect of colony size on conflict over male-production between gamergate and dominant workers in the ponerine ant Diacamma sp. Ethol Ecol Evol 8:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Oliveira PS, Hölldobler B (1990) Dominance orders in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla apicalis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:385–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pamilo P (1991) Evolution of colony characteristics in social insects. II. Number of reproductive individuals. Am Nat 138:412–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Peeters C, Tsuji K (1993) Reproductive conflict among ant workers in Diacamma sp. from Japan: dominance and oviposition in the absence of the gamergate. Insectes Soc 40:119–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pratt SC (2005) Behavioral mechanisms of collective nest-site choice by the ant Temnothorax curvispinosus. Insectes Soc 52:383–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pratt SC, Mallon EB, Sumpter DJT, Franks NR (2002) Quorum sensing, recruitment, and collective decision-making during colony emigration by the ant Leptothorax albipennis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pratt SC, Sumpter DJT, Mallon EB, Franks NR (2005) An agent-based model of collective nest choice by the ant Temnothorax albipennis. Anim Behav 70:1023–1036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ratnieks FLW (1988) Reproductive harmony via mutual policing by workers in eusocial Hymenoptera. Am Nat 132:217–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ratnieks FLW (1992) Evidence for an egg-marking pheromone in the honeybee. Am Bee J 132:813Google Scholar
  49. Ratnieks FLW, Reeve HK (1992) Conflict in single-queen Hymenopteran societies: the structure of conflict and processes that reduce conflict in advanced eusocial species. J Theor Biol 158:33–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ratnieks FLW, Visscher PK (1989) Worker policing in the honeybee. Nature 342:796–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ratnieks FLW, Wenseleers T (2005) Policing insect societies. Science 307:54–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ratnieks FLW, Foster KR, Wenseleers T (2006) Conflict resolution in insect societies. Annu Rev Entomol 51:581–608PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ross KG, Matthews RW (1991) The social biology of wasps. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  54. Saigo T, Tsuchida K (2004) Queen and worker policing in monogynous and monandrous colonies of a primitively eusocial wasp. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:S509–S512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Visscher PK (1996) Reproductive conflict in honey bees: a stalemate of worker egg-laying and policing. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Visscher KP, Dukas R (1995). Honey bees recognize development of nestmates’ ovaries. Anim Behav 49:542–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Watson JAL, Okot-Kotber BM, Noirot C (1985) Caste differentiation in social insects. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  58. Wenseleers T, Ratnieks FLW (2006) Comparative analysis of worker reproduction and policing in eusocial Hymenoptera supports relatedness theory. Am Nat 168:E163–E179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wenseleers T, Hart AG, Ratnieks FLW (2004a) When resistance is useless: policing and the evolution of reproductive acquiescence in insect societies. Am Nat 164:E154–E167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wenseleers T, Helanterä H, Hart AG, Ratnieks FLW (2004b) Worker reproduction and policing in insect societies: an ESS analysis. J Evol Biol 17:1035–1047PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wenseleers T, Tofilski A, Ratnieks FLW (2005) Queen and worker policing in the tree wasp Dolichovespula sylvestris. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 58:80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Whitlock MC (2005) Combining probability from independent tests: the weighted Z-method is superior to Fisher’s approach. J Evol Biol 18(5):1368–1373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wilson EO (1971) The insect societies. Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathalie Stroeymeyt
    • 1
    • 2
  • Elisabeth Brunner
    • 1
  • Jürgen Heinze
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl Biologie IUniversität RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.Ecole Normale SupérieureParis cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations