Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 66, Issue 9, pp 1267–1276 | Cite as

Experimental evidence that workers recognize reproductives through cuticular hydrocarbons in the ant Odontomachus brunneus

  • Adrian A. SmithEmail author
  • Jocelyn G. Millar
  • Lawrence M. Hanks
  • Andrew V. Suarez
Original Paper


Eusociality is characterized by a reproductive division of labor, wherein workers respond to the presence of reproductive individuals by refraining from reproduction themselves and restricting the reproductive efforts of others. Our understanding of how eusociality is maintained therefore depends on characterizing the mechanism by which workers detect the presence of a reproductive. Variations in cuticular hydrocarbons correspond to changes in reproductive ability in ants, and experimental studies are beginning to reveal the function of hydrocarbons as signals. In this study, we compare the cuticular hydrocarbon profiles of dominant and reproductive workers and queens of the ant Odontomachus brunneus with profiles of non-reproductive workers. Using split/reunification tests we document the existence of worker policing in both queenless and queenright colonies; supernumerary reproductives were treated aggressively by nestmates. Finally, we induce aggression and replicate queen-like submissive nestmate responses by supplementing the hydrocarbon profile of workers with (Z)-9-nonacosene, a compound that was significantly more abundant on the cuticles of reproductives. In three bioassays, we compare this manipulation to various control manipulations of the hydrocarbon profile and demonstrate that workers gauge the reproductive activity of nestmates through changes in their cuticular hydrocarbon profiles.


Cuticular hydrocarbon Fertility signal Pheromone Policing Dominance 



We thank Walter R. Tschinkel for collection assistance and Fred Larabee for supplying additional colonies.

Supplementary material

Video 1

Aggression of nestmate ants of the species Odontomachus brunneus to a newly established reproductive and dominant worker upon reintroduction to her original queenless colony. The ant with a red paint mark on her abdomen is the reintroduced reproductive. The lid of the colony was removed for clarity. Several bouts of rapid antennation can be seen as well as aggression elevating to multiple workers biting, holding, and pulling on the reintroduced worker (WMV 12,575 kb)

Video 2

Response of nestmate ants of the species Odontomachus brunneus to workers treated with Z9:C29 (with yellow paint mark on thorax). Response by rapid antennation and submissive reactions can be seen multiple times (WMV 4,630 kb)


  1. Blomquist GC, Bagnères A-G (2010) Insect hydrocarbons: biology, biochemistry, and chemical ecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bos N, Dreier S, Jorgensen CG, Nielsen J, Guerrieri FJ, d'Ettorre P (2012) Learning and perceptual similarity among cuticular hydrocarbons in ants. J Insect Physiol 58:138–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourke AFG (1988) Worker reproduction in the higher eusocial Hymenoptera. Q Rev Biol 63:291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cuvillier-Hot V, Gadagkar R, Peeters C, Cobb M (2002) Regulation of reproduction in a queenless ant: aggression, pheromones and reduction in conflict. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1295–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cuvillier-Hot V, Lenoir A, Crewe R, Malosse C, Peeters C (2004) Fertility signalling and reproductive skew in queenless ants. Anim Behav 68:1209–1219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cuvillier-Hot V, Renault V, Peeters C (2005) Rapid modification in the olfactory signal of ants following a change in reproductive status. Naturwissenschaften 92:73–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Denis D, Chameron S, Costille L, Pocheville A, Chaline N, Fresneau D (2008) Workers agonistic interactions in queenright and queenless nests of a polydomous ant society. Anim Behav 75:791–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. D'Ettorre P, Heinze J (2005) Individual recognition in ant queens. Curr Biol 15:2170–2174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D'Ettorre P, Heinze J, Schulz C, Francke W, Ayasse M (2004) Does she smell like a queen? Chemoreception of a cuticular hydrocarbon signal in the ant Pachycondyla inversa. J Exp Biol 207:1085–1091PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dietemann V, Peeters C, Liebig J, Thivet V, Hölldobler B (2003) Cuticular hydrocarbons mediate discrimination of reproductives and nonreproductives in the ant Myrmecia gulosa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:10341–10346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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
  12. Foitzik A, Fröba J, Rüger MH, Witte V (2011) Competition over workers: fertility signalling in wingless queens of Hypoponera opacior. Insect Soc 58:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ginzel MD, Moreira JA, Ray AM, Millar JG, Hanks LM (2006) (Z)-9-nonacosene-major component of the contact sex pheromone of the beetle Megacyllene caryae. J Chem Ecol 32:435–451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gobin B, Ito F (2003) Sumo wrestling in ants: major workers fight over male production in Acanthomyrmex ferox. Naturwissenschaften 90:318–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hart LM, Tschinkel WR (2012) A seasonal natural history of the ant, Odontomachus brunneus. Insect Soc 59:45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heinze J, d'Ettorre P (2009) Honest and dishonest communication in social Hymenoptera. J Exp Biol 212:1775–1779PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heinze J, Oberstadt B (1999) Worker age, size and social status in queenless colonies of the ant Leptothorax gredleri. Anim Behav 58:751–759PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heinze J, Hölldobler B, Peeters C (1994) Conflict and cooperation in ant societies. Naturwissenschaften 81:489–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heinze J, Trunzer B, Oliveira PS, Hölldobler B (1996) Regulation of reproduction in the neotropical ponerine ant, Pachycondyla villosa. J Insect Behav 9:441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heinze J, Puchinger W, Hölldobler B (1997) Worker reproduction and social hierarchies in Leptothorax ants. Anim Behav 54:849–864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heinze J, Stengl B, Sledge MF (2002) Worker rank, reproductive status and cuticular hydrocarbon signature in the ant, Pachycondyla cf. inversa. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Holman L, Jorgensen CG, Nielsen J, d'Ettorre P (2010) Identification of an ant queen pheromone regulating worker sterility. Proc R Soc B 277:3793–3800PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Howard RW, Blomquist GJ (2005) Ecological, behavioral, and biochemical aspects of insect hydrocarbons. Annu Rev Entomol 50:371–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Izzo A, Wells M, Huang Z, Tibbetts E (2010) Cuticular hydrocarbons correlate with fertility, not dominance, in a paper wasp, Polistes dominulus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:857–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keller L, Nonacs P (1993) The role of queen pheromones in social insects—queen control or queen signal. Anim Behav 45:787–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kocher SD, Grozinger CM (2011) Cooperation, conflict, and the evolution of queen pheromones. J Chem Ecol 37:1263–1275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Le Conte Y, Hefetz A (2008) Primer pheromones in social Hymenoptera. Annu Rev Entomol 53:523–542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liebig J (2010) Hydrocarbon profiles indicate fertility and dominance status in ant, bee, and wasp colonies. In: Blomquist GJ, Bagnères A-G (eds) Insect hydrocarbons: biology, biochemistry, and chemical ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 254–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liebig J, Peeters C, Oldham NJ, Markstadter C, Hölldobler B (2000) Are variations in cuticular hydrocarbons of queens and workers a reliable signal of fertility in the ant Harpegnathos saltator? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:4124–4131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lockey KH (1988) Lipids of the insect cuticle—origin, composition and function. Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol 89:595–645Google Scholar
  31. Martin S, Drijfhout F (2009a) A review of ant cuticular hydrocarbons. J Chem Ecol 35:1151–1161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin SJ, Drijfhout FP (2009b) How reliable is the analysis of complex cuticular hydrocarbon profiles by multivariate statistical methods? J Chem Ecol 35:375–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martin SJ, Drijfhout FP (2009c) Nestmate and task cues are influenced and encoded differently within ant cuticular hydrocarbon profiles. J Chem Ecol 35:368–374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Medeiros FLN, Lopes NP, Moutinho PRS, Oliveira PS, Hölldobler B (1992) Functional polygyny, agonistic interactions and reproductive dominance in the neotropical ant Odontomachus chelifer (Hymenoptera, Formicidae, Ponerinae). Ethology 91:134–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Millar JG (2010) Chemical synthesis of insect cuticular hydrocarbons. In: Blomquist GJ, Bagnères A-G (eds) Insect hydrocarbons: biology, biochemistry, and chemical ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 163–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Monnin T (2006) Chemical recognition of reproductive status in social insects. Ann Zool Fenn 43:515–530Google Scholar
  37. Monnin T, Ratnieks FLW (2001) Policing in queenless ponerine ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nunes TM, Turatti ICC, Lopes NP, Zucchi R (2009) Chemical signals in the stingless bee, Frieseomelitta varia, indicate caste, gender, age, and reproductive status. J Chem Ecol 35:1172–1180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oliveira PS, Hölldobler B (1990) Dominance orders in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla apicalis (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:385–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peeters C, Monnin T, Malosse C (1999) Cuticular hydrocarbons correlated with reproductive status in a queenless ant. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:1323–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Powell S, Tschinkel WR (1999) Ritualized conflict in Odontomachus brunneus and the generation of interaction-based task allocation: a new organizational mechanism in ants. Anim Behav 58:965–972PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ratnieks FLW, Foster KR, Wenseleers T (2006) Conflict resolution in insect societies. Annu Rev Entomol 51:581–608PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Seeley TD (1985) Honeybee ecology: a study of adaptation in social life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  44. Sledge MF, Boscaro F, Turillazzi S (2001) Cuticular hydrocarbons and reproductive status in the social wasp Polistes dominulus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:401–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith AA, Hölldobler B, Liebig J (2008) Hydrocarbon signals explain the pattern of worker and egg policing in the ant Aphaenogaster cockerelli. J Chem Ecol 34:1275–1282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith AA, Hölldobler B, Liebig J (2009) Cuticular hydrocarbons reliably identify cheaters and allow enforcement of altruism in a social insect. Curr Biol 19:78–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith AA, Hölldobler B, Liebig J (2011) Reclaiming the crown: queen to worker conflict over reproduction in Aphaenogaster cockerelli. Naturwissenschaften 98:237–240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith AA, Hölldobler B, Liebig J (2012) Queen-specific signals and worker punishment in the ant Aphaenogaster cockerelli: the role of the Dufour's gland. Anim Behav 83:587–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van Walsum E, Gobin B, Ito F, Billen J (1998) Worker reproduction in the ponerine ant Odontomachus simillimus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 32:427–440Google Scholar
  50. van Wilgenburg E, Sulc R, Shea KJ, Tsutsui ND (2010) Deciphering the chemical basis of nestmate recognition. J Chem Ecol 36:751–758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. van Zweden JS (2010) The evolution of honest queen pheromones in insect societies. Commun Integr Biol 3:50–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilson EO (1971) The Insect Societies. Belknap, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian A. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jocelyn G. Millar
    • 2
  • Lawrence M. Hanks
    • 1
  • Andrew V. Suarez
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Department of EntomologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA
  3. 3.Department of Animal BiologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations