Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 65, Issue 8, pp 1573–1579 | Cite as

Group leadership depends on energetic state in a nomadic collective foraging caterpillar

Original Paper

Abstract

Group living is a common strategy among animals and has arisen independently in over 300 species of Lepidoptera. Yet, activity synchrony between individuals is necessary to derive the benefits that ensue from an aggregated lifestyle. Which individuals decide which activities to perform and when to perform them is, therefore, a fundamental question. In some species of social caterpillars and sawflies, the role of a potential behavioral polyethism between individuals has been suggested, whereby certain individuals are consistently more likely to initiate and lead a foraging event. However, in these cases, evidence in support of division of labor is lacking. This study was undertaken to determine if certain individuals of Malacosoma disstria are more likely to be consistent group leaders or if transient leaders could be predicted by the differences in energetic states between individuals. The results of this study indicate that unfed caterpillars initiate foraging bouts and are more likely to lead locomotion. There was no size or sex-based bias in those individuals that acted as temporary leaders. Consistent behavioral differences between individuals, if they exist, are therefore not necessary to explain task allocation and synchronization during foraging in this species.

Keywords

Group behavior Foraging Forest tent caterpillar Sociality Malacosoma disstria Synchrony 

References

  1. Addy ND (1969) Rearing the forest tent caterpillar on an artificial diet. J Econ Entomol 62:270–271Google Scholar
  2. Barton Browne L (1993) Physiologically induced changes in resource-oriented behavior. Annu Rev Entomol 38:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beauchamp G (2000) Individual differences in activity and exploration influence leadership in pairs of foraging zebra finches. Behaviour 137:301–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bumann D, Krause J, Rubenstein DI (1997) Mortality risk of spatial positions in animal groups: the danger of being in the front. Behavior 134:1063–1076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Colasurdo N, Despland E (2005) Social cues and following behavior in the forest tent caterpillar. J Insect Behav 18:77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conradt L, List C (2009) Group decisions in humans and animals: a survey. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364:719–742PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Conradt L, Roper TJ (2005) Consensus decision making in animals. Trends Ecol Evol 20:449–456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornell JC, Stamp NE, Bowers MD (1988) Variation and developmental change in activity of gregarious caterpillars, Hemileuca lucina (Saturniidae). Psyche 95:45–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Couzin ID, Krause J, Franks NR, Levin SA (2005) Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature 433:513–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Despland E, Hamzeh S (2004) Ontogenetic changes in social behaviour in the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Despland E, Le Huu A (2007) Pros and cons of group living in the forest tent caterpillar: separating the roles of silk and of grouping. Entomol Exp Appl 122:181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Despland E, Simpson SJ (2006) Resource distribution mediates synchronization of physiological rhythms in locust groups. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273:1517–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dostalkova I, Spinka M (2007) Synchronization of behaviour in pairs: the role of communication and consequences in timing. Anim Behav 74:1735–1742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dussutour A, Simpson SJ, Despland E, Colasurdo N (2007) When the group denies individual nutritional wisdom. Anim Behav 74:931–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dyer JRG, Johansson A, Helbing D, Couzin IA, Krause J (2009) Leadership, consensus decision making and collective behaviour in humans. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364:781–789PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edgerly JS, Fitzgerald TD (1982) An investigation of behavioral variability within colonies of eastern tent caterpillar Malacosoma americanum (Lepidoptera:Lasiocampidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 55:145–155Google Scholar
  17. Fischhoff IR, Sundaresan S, Cordingley J, Larkin HM, Sellier MJ, Rubenstein D (2007) Social relationships and reproductive state influence leadership roles in movements of plains zebra, Equus burchellii. Anim Behav 73:825–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fitzgerald TD (1995) The tent caterpillars. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. Fitzgerald TD, Costa JT (1986) Trail-based communication and foraging behavior of young colonies of forest tent caterpillars (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 79:999–1007Google Scholar
  21. Fitzgerald TD, Costa JT (1999) Collective behavior in social caterpillars. In: Detrain C, Deneubourg JL, Pasteels JM (eds) Information processing in social insects. Birkhauser, BaselGoogle Scholar
  22. Gautrais J, Michelena P, Sibbald A, Bon R, Deneubourg JL (2007) Allelomimetic synchronization in Merino sheep. Anim Behav 74:1443–1454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Greenblatt JA, Witter JA (1976) Behavioral studies on Malacosoma disstria (Lepidoptera:Lasiocampidae). Can Entomol 108:1225–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grisdale D (1985) Malacosoma disstria. In: Singh P, Moore RF (eds) Handbook of insect rearing. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 369–379Google Scholar
  25. Halloy J, Sempo G, Caprari G, Rivault C, Asadpour M, Tâche F, Saïd I, Durier V, Canonge S, Amé JM, Detrain C, Correll N, Martinoli A, Mondada F, Siegwart R, Deneubourg JL (2007) Social integration of robots into groups of cockroaches to control self-organized choices. Science 318:1155–1158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harcourt JL, Ang TZ, Sweetman G, Johnstone RA, Manica A (2009) Social feedback and the ermergence of leaders and followers. Curr Biol 19:248–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holekamp KE, Boydston EE, Smale L (2000) Group travel in social carnivores. In: Boinski S, Garber PA (eds) On the move. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 587–627Google Scholar
  28. Huse G, Railsback S, Fernö A (2002) Modelling changes in migration pattern of herring: collective behaviour and numerical domination. J Fish Biol 60:571–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. King AJ, Cowlishaw G (2009) All together now: behavioural synchrony in baboons. Anim Behav 78:1381–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Krause J (1993) The relationship between foraging and shoal position in a mixed shoal of roach (Rutilus rutilus) and chub (Leuciscus cephalus): a field study. Oecologia 93:356–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krause J, Bumann D, Todt D (1992) Relationship between the position preference and nutritional state of individuals in schools of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:177–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Krause J, Reeves P, Hoare D (1998) Positioning behaviour in roach shoals: the role of body length and nutritional state. Behaviour 135:1031–1039Google Scholar
  33. Laux W (1962) Individuelle unterschiede in verhalten und leistung des ringelspinners, Malacosoma neustria (L.). Z Angew Zool 49:465–524Google Scholar
  34. Leblond C, Reebs SG (2006) Individual leadership and boldness in shoals of golden shiners (Notemigonus crysoleucas). Behaviour 143:1263–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Long DB (1955) Observations on subsocial behaviour in two species of lepidopterous larvae, Pieris brassicae L. and Plusia gamma L. Trans R Entomol Soc Lond 106:421–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McClure M, Despland E (2010) Collective foraging patterns of field colonies of Malacosoma disstria caterpillars. Can Entomol 142:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nemiroff L, Despland E (2007) Consistent individual differences in the foraging behaviour of forest tent caterpillars (Malacosoma disstria). Can J Zool 85:1117–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peters MI, Despland E (2006) Plasticity in forest tent caterpillar self-organized collective foraging. Ethology 112:521–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petit O, Bon R (2010) Decision-making processes: the case of collective movements. Behav Processes 84:635–647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ramseyer A, Thierry B, Boissy A, Dumont B (2009) Decision-making processes in group departures of cattle. Ethology 115:948–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rands SA, Cowlishaw G, Pettifor RA, Rowcliffe JM, Johnstone RA (2003) Spontaneous emergence of leaders and followers in foraging pairs. Nature 423:432–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reebs SG (2001) Influence of body size on leadership in shoals of golden shiners, Notemigonus crysoleucas. Behaviour 138:797–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ruf C (2002) Social life-styles in caterpilars: behavioral mechanisms and ecological consequences. Dissertation, Universität BayreuthGoogle Scholar
  44. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry: the principles and practices of statistics in biological research, 2nd edn. W.H Freeman and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Stewart KJ, Harcourt AH (1994) Gorillas’ vocalizations during rest periods: signals of impending departure? Behaviour 130:1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sumpter DJT, Pratt SC (2009) Quorum responses and consensus decision making. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364:743–753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Underwood DLA, Shapiro AM (1999) Evidence for division of labor in the social caterpillar Eucheira socialis (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:228–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Weinstein P, Maelzer DA (1997) Leadership behaviour in sawfly larvae Perga dorsalis (Hymenoptera: Pergidae). Oikos 79:450–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wellington WG (1957) Individual differences as a factor in population dynamics: the development of a problem. Can J Zool 35:293–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Werner EE, Anholt BR (1993) Ecological consequences of the tradeoff between growth and mortality rates mediated by foraging activity. Am Nat 142:242–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biology DepartmentConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations