Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 449–458 | Cite as

Evolutionary transitions of complex labile traits: Silk weaving and arboreal nesting in Polyrhachis ants

  • Simon K. A. Robson
  • Rudy J. Kohout
  • Andrew T. Beckenbach
  • Corrie S. Moreau
Original Paper

Abstract

Understanding the maintenance and evolution of complex group behavioural systems has broad significance to our understanding of social evolution, yet we have little insight into how these systems have evolved. Nest-weaving, a rare group behaviour considered a pinnacle of cooperative action in social insects, involves the coordination of workers and larvae by incorporating larval silk into the nest structure. To investigate the evolution of this complex behaviour in the ant genus Polyrhachis, we used comparative analysis and an inferred molecular phylogeny based on three mitochondrial genes COI, COII and CytB, and three nuclear genes EF1 a-F2, Wg and Tf. Our results showed that arboreality and nest-weaving are closely associated, but in contrast to the previous hypotheses, represent the ancestral state in the monophyletic genus. Nest-weaving within the genus, moreover, is remarkably labile. Arboreality and nest-weaving have been lost and partially regained on at least two occasions: two non-weaving subterranean species (sister taxa likely reflecting a single evolutionary event) have reverted to arboreal nesting habits without regaining the use of silk nests, while a third subterranean species has transitioned to nesting in silk nests on the sides of rocks, obtaining silk from spiders and not their own larvae. The loss of larval cocoons, which is correlated with the most complex form of nest-weaving behavior as typified in Oecophylla, has occurred independently on at least two occasions within Polyrhachis. The repeated loss of nest-weaving behaviour and its partial regaining within the genus provides the first example of a complex group-level trait that did not arise through behavioural progression from simple to complex states. The evolution and loss of complex group-level traits may be more evolutionarily labile than previously appreciated.

Keywords

Complex systems Evolution Reversal Phylogeny Character evolution 

Supplementary material

265_2014_1857_MOESM1_ESM.docx (166 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 165 kb)

References

  1. Anderson C, Franks NR (2003) Teamwork in animals, robots, and humans. Adv Study Behav 33:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckenbach AT, Robson SK, Crozier RH (2005) Single nucleotide +1 frameshifts in an apparently functional mitochondrial cytochrome b gene in ants of the genus Polyrhachis. J Mol Evol 60:141–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beekman M, Sumpter DJ, Ratnieks FL (2001) Phase transition between disordered and ordered foraging in Pharaoh’s ants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98:9703–9706PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bochynek T, Robson SKA (2014) Physical and biological determinants of collective behavioural dynamics in complex systems: Pulling chain formation in the nest-weaving ant Oecophylla smaragdina. PLoS ONE 9:e95112PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bollback J (2006) SIMMAP: Stochastic character mapping of dicrete traits on phylogenies. BMC Bioinforma 7:88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolton B (2014) An online catalog of the ants of the world. Available from http://antcat.org. (accessed 15.xi.2014)
  7. Bonabeau E, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg J-LL, Aron S, Camazine S (1997) Self-organization in social insects. Trends Ecol Evol 12:188–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonabeau E, Dorigo M, Theraulaz G (2000) Inspiration for optimization from social insect behaviour. Nature 406:39–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brady SG (2003) Evolution of the army ant syndrome: the origin and long-term evolutionary stasis of a complex of behavioral and reproductive adaptations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:6575–6579PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Britton N, Franks NR, Pratt S, Seeley T (2002) Deciding on a new home: how do honeybees agree? Proc Roy Soc Lond B 269:1383–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burd M, Archer D, Aranwela N, Stradling DJ (2002) Traffic dynamics of the leaf-cuttingant, Atta cephalotes. Am Nat 159:283–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camazine S (1991) Self-organizing pattern-formation on the combs of honeybee colonies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 28:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ceccarelli FS, Crozier RH (2007) Dynamics of the evolution of Batesian mimicry: molecular phylogenetic analysis of ant-mimicking Myrmarachne (Araneae: Salticidae) species and their ant models. J Evol Biol 20:286–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Couzin ID (2009) Collective cognition in animal groups. Trends Cogn Sci 13:36–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crozier R, Newey PS, Schluns H, Robson SKA (2009) A masterpiece of evolution—Oecophylla weaver ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol News 13:57–71Google Scholar
  16. Degnan PH, Lazarus AB, Brock CD, Wernegreen JJ (2004) Host-symbiont stability and fast evolutionary rates in an ant-bacterium association: Cospeciation of Camponotus species and their endosymbionts, Candidatus Blochmannia. Syst Biol 53:95–110Google Scholar
  17. Deneubourg J-LL, Pasteels JM, Verhaeghe J (1983) Probabilistic behaviour in ants: a strategy of errors? J Theor Biol 105:259–271Google Scholar
  18. Deneubourg JL, Goss S, Franks N, Sendova-Franks A, Detrain C, Chrétien L (1991) The dynamics of collective sorting: Robot-like ants and ant-like robots. In: Meyer JA, Wilson EO (eds) Simulations of animal behavior: from animals to animals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 356–365Google Scholar
  19. Dorigo M, Stützle T (2004) Ant colony optimization. The MIT Press, CambrideCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dornhaus A, Powell S, Bengston S (2012) Group size and its effects on collective organization. Annu Rev Entomol 57:123–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dorow WHO (1995) Revision of the ant genus Polyrhachis Smith, 1857 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae) on subgenus level with keys, checklist of species and bibliography. Cour Forschungsinst Senckenb 185:1–113Google Scholar
  22. Drummond A, Ashton B, Buxton S, Cheung M, Cooper A, Duran C, Field M, Heled J, Kearse M, Markowitz S, Moir R, Stones-Havas S, Sturrock S, Thierer T, Wilson A (2012) Geneious v5.6. In, http://www.geneious.comGoogle Scholar
  23. Duarte A, Weissing FJ, Pen I, Keller L (2011) An evolutionary perspective on self-organized division of labor in social insects. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 42:91–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dussutour A, Fourcassié V, Helbing D, Deneubourg JL (2004) Optimal traffic organization in ants under crowded conditions. Nature 428:70–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Franks NR, Sendova-Franks AB (1992) Brood sorting by ants: Distributing the workload over the work-surface. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:109–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Franks NR, Pratt S, Mallon E, Britton N, Sumpter DJT (2002) Information flow, opinion polling and collective intelligence in house-hunting social insects. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond B 357:1567–1583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gordon DM (1996) The organization of work in social insect colonies. Nature 380:121–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Halloy J, Sempo G, Caprari G, Rivault C, Asadpour M, Tache F, Said I, Durier V, Canonge S, Ame JM, Detrain C, Correll N, Martinoli A, Mondada F, Siegwart R, Deneubourg J-LL (2007) Social integration of robots into groups of cockroaches to control self-organized choices. Science 318:1155–1158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1977) Weaver ants. Sci Am 237:146–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holldobler B, Wilson EO (1983) The evolution of communal nest-weaving in ants. Amer Sci 71:490–499Google Scholar
  31. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hölldobler B, Obermayer M, Plowes NJR, Fisher BL (2014) New exocrine glands in ants: the hypostomal gland and basitarsal gland in the genus Melissotarsus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Naturwiss 101:527–532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huelsenbeck J, Ronquist F (2001) MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17:754–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Huelsenbeck J, Nielsen R, Bollback J (2003) Stochastic mapping of morphological characters. Syst Biol 52:131–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hung A (1967) A revision of the ant genus Polyrhachis at the subgeneric level (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Trans Amer Ent Soc 93:395–422Google Scholar
  36. Jeanne RL (1975) The adaptiveness of social wasp nest architecture. Q Rev Biol 50:267–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson BR, Lam SK (2010) Self-organization, natural selection, and evolution: Cellular hardware and genetic software. Bioscience 60:879–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnson RN, Agapow P-M, Crozier RH (2003) A tree island approach to inferring phylogeny in the ant subfamily Formicinae, with especial reference to the evolution of weaving. Mol Phylogenet Evol 29:317–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Karsai I, Penzes Z (1998) Nest shapes in paper wasps: can the variability of forms be deduced from the same construction algorithm? Proc Roy Soc Lond B 265:1261–1268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kohout RJ (2006) Review of Polyrhachis (Cyrtomyrma) Forel (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae) of Australia, Borneo, New Guinea and the Solomon islands with descriptions of new species. Mem Qld Mus 52:87–146Google Scholar
  41. Kohout RJ (2010) A review of the Australian Polyrhachis ants of the subgenera Myrmhopla Forel and Hirtomyrma subgen. Nov. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae). Mem Qld Mus 55:167–204Google Scholar
  42. Kohout RJ (2013) Revision of Polyrhachis (Hagiomyrma) Wheeler, 1911 (Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Formicinae). Mem Qld Mus 56:487–577Google Scholar
  43. Kronauer DJ, Schoning C, Vilhelmsen LB, Boomsma JJ (2007) A molecular phylogeny of Dorylus army ants provides evidence for multiple evolutionary transitions in foraging niche. BMC Evol Biol 7:56PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Larget B, Simon D (1999) Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 16:750–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lioni A, Deneubourg J-LL (2004) Collective decision through self-assembling. Naturwiss 91:237–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lioni A, Sauwens C, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg JL (2001) Chain formation in Oecophylla longinoda. J Insect Behav 14:679–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lucky A, Trautwein MD, Guénard BS, Weiser MD, Dunn RR (2012) Tracing the rise of ants—Out of the ground. PloS ONE 8:e84012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Maddison W, Maddison D (2011) Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 2.75. In, http://mesquiteproject.org
  49. Miller M, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T (2010) Creating the CIPRES science gateway for inference of large phylogentic trees. In: Proceedings of the Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), 14 Nov. 2010, LA pp 1 - 8., New Orleans,, pp 1-8Google Scholar
  50. Moreau CS (2008) Unraveling the evolutionary history of the hyperdiverse ant genus Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 48:224–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Moreau CS, Bell CD (2013) Testing the museum versus cradle tropical biological diversity hypothesis: Phylogeny, diversification, and ancestral biogeographic range evolution of the ants. Evolution 67:2240–2257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Page RE, Mitchell SD (1998) Self-organization and the evolution of division of labor. Apidologie 29:171–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pagel M (1994) Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proc Roy Soc London B 255:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pagel M (1999) The maximum likelihood approach to reconstructing ancestral character states of dicrete characters on phylogenies. Syst Biol 48:612–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Posada D, Crandall K (2001) Selecting the best-fit model of nucleotide substitution. Syst Biol 50:580–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Poulsen M, Boomsma JJ (2005) Mutualistic fungi control crop diversity in fungus-growing ants. Science 307:741–744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Powell S, Franks NR (2006) Ecology and the evolution of worker morphological diversity: a comparative analysis with Eciton army ants. Func Ecol 20:1105–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pratt S, Mallon E, Sumpter D, Franks N (2002) Quorum sensing, recruitment, and collective decision-making during colony emigration by the ant Leptothorax albipennis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rannala B, Yang Z (1996) Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. J Mol Evol 43:304–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Reid CR, Sumpter DJT, Beekman M (2011) Optimisation in a natural system: Argentine ants solve the towers of Hanoi. J Exp Biol 214:50–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Richardson RC (2001) Complexity, self-organization and selection. Biol Philos 16:653–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Robson SKA, Kohout RJ (2005) Evolution of nest-weaving behaviour in arboreal nesting ants of the genus Polyrhachis Fr. Smith (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Aust J Entomol 44:164–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Robson SKA, Kohout RJ (2007) A review of the nesting habits and socioecology of the ant genus Polyrhachis Fr. Smith. Asian Myrmecol 1:81–99Google Scholar
  64. Robson SK, Traniello JFA (1998) Resource assessment, recruitment behavior, and organization of cooperative prey retrieval in the ant Formica schaufussi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Insect Behav 11:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Robson S, Traniello J (1999) Key individuals and the organisation of labour in ants. In:Detrain C, Pasteels J, Deneubourg J (eds) Information Processing in Social Insects. Verlag Press, pp 239-259Google Scholar
  66. Robson S, Traniello J (2002) Transient division of labor and behavioral specialization in the ant Formica schaufussi. Naturwiss 89:128–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schlüns E (2011) Molecular ecology and phylogenetics in Formicine ants. PhD thesis, James Cook University:1-109Google Scholar
  68. Schluter D, Price T, Mooers A, Ludwig D (1997) Likelihood of ancestor states in adaptive radiation. Evolution 51:1699–1711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schockaert S, De Cock M, Cornelis C, Kerre E (2007) Clustering web search results using fuzzy ants. Int J Intel Syst 22:455–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Schultz TR, Brady SG (2008) Major evolutionary transitions in ant agriculture. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:5435–5440PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Seeley TD (2002) When is self-organization used in biological systems? Biol Bull 202:314–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Seeley TD, Visscher PK (2004) Quorum sensing during nest-site selection by honeybee swarms. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:594–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sumpter DJ (2006) The principles of collective animal behaviour. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond B 361:5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Traniello J, Robson SKA (1995) Trail and teritorial communication in social insects. In, Chemical Ecology of Insects II (RT Carde, WJ Bell):241–286Google Scholar
  75. Ward PS, Brady SG, Fisher BL, Schultz TR (2010) Phylogeny and biogeography of dolichoderine ants: Effects of data partitioning and relict taxa on historical inference. Syst Biol 59:342–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon K. A. Robson
    • 1
  • Rudy J. Kohout
    • 2
  • Andrew T. Beckenbach
    • 3
  • Corrie S. Moreau
    • 4
  1. 1.Centre for Tropical Biodiversity & Climate Change, College of Marine & Environmental ScienceJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Biodiversity ProgramQueensland MuseumSouth BrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  4. 4.Department of Science and EducationField Museum of Natural HistoryChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations