Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 61, Issue 12, pp 1809–1821 | Cite as

Vibrational signals in a gregarious sawfly larva (Perga affinis): group coordination or competitive signaling?

  • Lynn E. FletcherEmail author
Original Paper


Group living confers both benefits and costs to the individuals involved. Benefits may include enhanced defense, thermoregulation, and increased foraging efficiency while costs often involve competition for resources such as food, shelter, and mates. Communication provides a medium of exchange among individuals engaged in either cooperative or competitive interactions. The functional analysis of signals within groups therefore requires testing both cooperative and competitive functions, although the latter is infrequently done. In this paper, I study the use of two vibrational signals in a gregarious, processionary Australian sawfly larva, Perga affinis: tapping and contractions. Tapping involves striking the substrate with the sclerotized portion of the abdominal tail and a contraction is a fast, whole-body twitch, which is both tactile and vibrational in its transmission. For tapping, I first demonstrate that it is a form of communication, as tapping of one larva elicits tapping in another, and that it is transmitted through substrate vibrations. I then test whether the signal is mostly cooperative or competitive in nature by examining it in light of two hypotheses: (1) the Group Coordination hypothesis, stating that the signal functions to maintain group cohesiveness and (2) the Competitive Signaling hypothesis, stating that tapping serves as a competitive assessment signal between larvae while feeding. For contractions, I test only the group coordination hypothesis that they serve to coordinate and initiate group movement. Results support the group coordination hypothesis for each signal. While feeding, lone larvae (without potential competitors) were significantly more likely to tap than those in groups, and this trend continued in non-feeding situations. Contractions regularly preceded periods of group movement during processions and were given with increasing frequency before departure from preforaging clusters. The vibrational signals in this processionary species likely function cooperatively to maintain group cohesiveness and coordinate movement.


Vibrational signals Cooperation Communication Group living Processionary larvae 



I would like to thank the Gurr Lab at University of Sydney at Orange and the Foley lab at the Australian National University for hosting me during my fieldwork, Rex Cocroft for the phonocartridge and instruction on recording vibrations, Bob Grotke for his help with the recording equipment, and Tom Eisner, Kern Reeve, Jayne Yack, Cole Gilbert, Meredith Cosgrove, Michael Braby and two anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript. I also thank Anita Tseng for help with video data analysis. Funding for this work was provided by an NSF Predoctoral Fellowship and a Sigma Xi grant. The experiments comply with the current laws in Australia.


  1. Axelrod R, Hamilton WD (1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science 211:1390–1396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Black JM (1988) Preflight signaling in swans—a mechanism for group cohesion and flock formation. Ethology 79:143–157Google Scholar
  3. Boland CRJ (2003) An experimental test of predator detection rates using groups of free-living emus. Ethology 109:209–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boomsma JJ, Ratnieks FLW (1996) Paternity in eusocial Hymenoptera. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 351:947–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourne GR (1992) Lekking behavior in the neotropical frog Ololygon rubra. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinuaer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  7. Carne P (1962) The characteristics and behaviour of the sawfly Perga affinis affinis (Hymenoptera). Aust J Zool 10:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carne P (1966) Primitive forms of social behaviour and their significance in the ecology of gregarious insects. Proc Ecol Soc Aust 1:75–78Google Scholar
  9. Carne P (1969) On the population dynamics of the eucalypt-defoliating sawfly Perga affinis affinis Kirby (Hymenoptera). Aust J Zool 17:113–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cocroft RB (2005) Vibrational communication facilitates cooperative foraging in a phloem-feeding insect. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 272:1023–1029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cocroft RB, Rodriguez RL (2005) The behavioral ecology of insect vibrational communication. Bioscience 55:323–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cokl A, Doberlet MV (2003) Communication with substrate-borne signals in small plant-dwelling insects. Annu Rev Entomol 48:29–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Costa J, Louque R (2001) Group foraging and trail following behavior of the red-headed pine sawfly Neodiprion lecontei (Fitch; Hymenoptera: Symphyta: Diprionidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 94:480–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Costa JT, Fitzgerald TD, Pescador-Rubio A, Mays J, Janzen DH (2004) Social behavior of larvae of the Neotropical processionary weevil Phelypera distigma (Boheman; Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Hyperinae). Ethology 110:515–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cummings DLD, Gamboa GJ, Harding BJ (1999) Lateral vibrations by social wasps signal larvae to withhold salivary secretions (Polistes fuscatus, Hymenoptera: Vespidae). J Insect Behav 12:465–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Kort SR, Emery NJ, Clayton NS (2006) Food sharing in jackdaws, Corvus monedula: what, why and with whom? Anim Behav 72:297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dias RI (2006) Effects of position and flock size on vigilance and foraging behaviour of the scaled dove Columbina squammata. Behav Processes 73:248–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eberhard MJW (1975) Evolution of social behavior by kin selection. Q Rev Biol 50:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans J (1934) Notes on the behavior of the larval communities of Perga dorsalis Leach (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae). Trans R Entomol Soc Lond 82:455–460Google Scholar
  20. Fernandez-Juricic E, Siller S, Kacelnik A (2004) Flock density, social foraging, and scanning: an experiment with starlings. Behav Ecol 15:371–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fitzgerald T, Peterson S (1988) Cooperative foraging and communication in caterpillars. BioScience 38:20–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fitzgerald TD (1995) The tent caterpillars. Comstock, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  23. Fitzgerald TD (2003) Role of trail pheromone in foraging and processionary behavior of pine processionary caterpillars Thaumetopoea pityocampa. J Chem Ecol 29:513–532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fitzgerald TD, Pescador-Rubio A (2002) The role of tactile and chemical stimuli in the formation and maintenance of the processions of the social caterpillar Hylesia lineata (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). J Insect Behav 15:659–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fitzgerald TD, Pescador-Rubio A, Turna MT, Costa JT (2004) Trail marking and processionary behavior of the larvae of the weevil Phelypera distigma (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J Insect Behav 17:627–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fletcher LE, Yack JE, Fitzgerald TD, Hoy RR (2006) Vibrational communication in the cherry leaf roller caterpillar Caloptilia serotinella (Gracillarioidea: Gracillariidae). J Insect Behav 19:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fordyce JA (2003) Aggregative feeding of pipevine swallowtail larvae enhances hostplant suitability. Oecologia 135:250–257PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ghent AW (1960) A study of the group-feeing behavior of larvae of the jack pine sawfly, Neodiprion pratti banksianae Roh. Behaviour 16:110–147Google Scholar
  29. Gueron S, Levin SA, Rubenstein DI (1996) The dynamics of herds: from individuals to aggregations. J Theor Biol 182:85–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Guerra PA, Mason AC (2005) Male competition and aggregative behaviour are mediated by acoustic cues within a temporally unstructured aggregation. Behaviour 142:71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hainsworth FR (1989) Wing movements and positioning for aerodynamic benefit by Canada geese flying in formation. Can J Zool 67:585–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Harding BJ, Gamboa GJ (1998) The sequential relationship of body oscillations in the paper wasp, Polistes fuscatus (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Great Lakes Entomol 31:191–194Google Scholar
  33. Hograefe T (1984) Subtrat-stridulation bei den koloniebildended Blattwespenlarven von Hemichroa crocea (Geoff.) (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Zool Anz 213:234–241Google Scholar
  34. Holldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Janik VM, Slater PJ (1998) Context-specific use suggests that bottlenose dolphin signature whistles are cohesion calls. Anim Behav 56:829–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jarvis JUM, Oriain MJ, Bennett NC, Sherman PW (1994) Mammalian eusociality—a family affair. Trends Ecol Evol 9:47–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jolivet P, Vasconcellos-Neto J, Weinstein P (1990) Cycloalexy: a new concept in the larval defence of insects. Insecta Mundi 4:133–142Google Scholar
  38. Klingner R, Richter K, Schmolz E, Keller B (2005) The role of moisture in the nest thermoregulation of social wasps. Naturwissenschaften 92:427–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Langbauer WR (2000) Elephant communication. Zoo Biol 19:425–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lingle S (2001) Anti-predator strategies and grouping patterns in white-tailed deer and mule deer. Ethology 107:295–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lissaman PB, Shollenberger C (1970) Formation flight of birds. Science 168:1003–1005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mesterton-Gibbons M, Dugatkin LA (1992) Cooperation among unrelated individuals-evolutionary factors. Q Rev Biol 67:267–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Michelsen A, Flemming F, Gogala M, Traue D (1982) Plants as transmission channels for insect vibrational songs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moller P (1976) Electric signals and schooling behavior in a weakly electric fish, Marcusenius cyprinoides L (Mormyriformes). Science 193:697–699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Morrow P, Bellas T, Eisner T (1976) Eucalyptus oils in the defensive oral discharge of Australian sawfly larvae (Hymenoptera: Pergidae). Oecologia 24:193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nelson MC, Fraser J (1980) Sound production in the cockroach, Gromphadorhina portentosa—evidence for communication by hissing. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 6:305–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Oldroyd BP, Wongsiri S (2006) Asian honey bees: biology, conservation and human interactions. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Parrish JK, Edelstein-Keshet L (1999) Complexity, pattern, and evolutionary trade-offs in animal aggregation. Science 284:99–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Radford AN (2004a) Vocal coordination of group movement by green woodhoopoes (Phoeniculus purpureus). Ethology 110:11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Radford AN (2004b) Vocal mediation of foraging competition in the cooperatively breeding green woodhoopoe (Phoeniculus purpureus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:279–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reeve HK (1991) Polistes. In: Ross KG, Matthews RW (eds) The social biology of wasps. Comstock, Ithaca, pp 99–148Google Scholar
  52. Reid SF (2004) Group foraging, navigation and morphology of the sawfly larvae Pergagrapta (Hymenoptera: Symphyta: Pergidae). In: School of botany and zoology. University of Australia, Canberra, pp 56Google Scholar
  53. Ruf C, Costa JT, Fiedler K (2001) Trail-based communication in social caterpillars of Eriogaster lanestris (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae). J Insect Behav 14:231–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Russ K (1969) Beiträge zum Territorialverhalten der Raupen des Springwurmwicklers, Sparganothis pilleriana Schiff (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pflanzenschutz Ber Wein 40:1–9Google Scholar
  55. Savoyard JL, Gamboa GJ, Cummings DLD, Foster RL (1998) The communicative meaning of body oscillations in the social wasp, Polistes fuscatus (Hymenoptera, Vespidae). Insectes Soc 45:215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Silk JB, Alberts SC, Altmann J (2006) Social relationships among adult female baboons (Papio cynocephalus) II. Variation in the quality and stability of social bonds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simpson J (1961) Nest climate regulation in honey bee colonies-honey bees control their domestic environment by methods based on their habit of clustering together. Science 133:1327–1333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Spieler M (2005) Can aggregation behaviour of Phrynomantis microps tadpoles reduce predation risk? Herpetol J 15:153–157Google Scholar
  59. Stein AC, Uy JAC (2006) Plumage brightness predicts male mating success in the lekking golden-collared manakin, Manacus vitellinus. Behav Ecol 17:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tibbetts EA (2002) Visual signals of individual identity in the wasp Polistes fuscatus. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 269:1423–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vulinec K (1990) Collective security: aggregation by insects in defense. In: Evans L, Schmidt J (eds) Insect defenses. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 251–288Google Scholar
  62. Watt PJ, Nottingham SF, Young S (1997) Toad tadpole aggregation behaviour: evidence for a predator avoidance function. Anim Behav 54:865–872PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wheeler GS (2001) Host plant quality factors that influence the growth and development of Oxyops vitiosa, a biological control agent of Melaleuca quinquenervia. Biol Control 22:256–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wheeler GS, Center TD (1996) The influence of Hydrilla leaf quality on larval growth and development of the biological control agent Hydrellia pakistanae (Diptera: Ephydridae). Biol Control 7:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yack J, Smith M, Weatherhead P (2001) Caterpillar talk: acoustically mediated territoriality in larval Lepidoptera. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:11371–11375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Mudd HallCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations