Advertisement

Energetics of trail clearing in the leaf-cutter ant Atta

  • Thomas BochynekEmail author
  • Bernd Meyer
  • Martin Burd
Original Article

Abstract

Few ant species construct cleared trails. Among those that do, leaf-cutting Atta ants build the most prominent networks, with single colonies clearing debris and obstructions from hundreds of meters of trails annually. Workers on cleared paths move at higher speed than they do over uncleared litter, and one measurement of the time and energetic costs of trail clearance suggests that benefits of trail usage far outweigh the investment costs of trail clearing. The ecological basis of trail clearing remains uncertain, however, because no full account has been made of benefits and costs in common units that allow comparison. We make such an account using a scalable, integrative model of trail investment and foraging energetics. Contrary to assumptions in previous work, we find that trail clearing needs not always be energetically profitable for leaf-cutting ants. Profitability depends on the workforce composition, specifically, on how many ants in a traffic stream act as maintenance workforce to respond to sudden and unpredictable obstructions, such as leaf fall. Such maintenance patrols have not previously been recognized as a cost of trail building. If the patrolling workforce is not too large, the energetic savings from foraging over cleared trails offset the investment and maintenance costs within a few days. Under some conditions, however, amortization can take weeks or months, or trail clearing can become unprofitable altogether. This suggests that Atta colonies must have a mechanism to regulate the intensity of their trail clearing behavior. We explore possible mechanisms and make testable predictions for future research.

Significance statement

Leaf-cutter ants build prominent, cleared trails of up to 200 m length through rainforest undergrowth. Construction of such trails appears costly, yet little is known about the energetics of cleared trails. No research exists on the benefits of their use, and only a single case study investigated parts of the construction costs. While this case study concludes that trail clearing is “relatively inexpensive,” we argue that it failed to include a deciding factor in the cost/benefit analysis: the cost of providing a standby clearing workforce, which is distinct from the foraging workers. We construct a full, scalable cost-benefit model from our own empirical measurements and literature. Contrary to previous results, we find that trail clearing is not always profitable, but profitability depends on the foraging conditions. This prediction offers a new perspective on the occurrence of uncleared trails in the field.

Keywords

Cleared trails Trunk trails Leaf-cutter ants Atta Cost/benefit model Unladen workers 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and its staff in Panama for providing research facilities, as well as the Neurobiology and Behavior workgroup at the University of Konstanz, Germany and its members for many stimulating discussions.

We are further grateful for the valuable input of two anonymous reviewers which helped us improve the quality of the submission.

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

TB was supported by Monash University postgraduate scholarships and by CSIRO Data61. Model development and field work were partially supported by Australian Research Council grants A19800465 (to MB) and DP110101413 (to BM).

Supplementary material

265_2016_2237_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1146 kb)
265_2016_2237_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (51 kb)
ESM 2 (XLSX 50 kb)
265_2016_2237_MOESM3_ESM.nd (221 kb)
ESM 3 (ND 220 kb)

References

  1. Acosta FJ, López F, Serrano JM (1993) Branching angles of ant trunk trails as an optimization cue. J Theor Biol 160:297–310. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1993.1020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollazzi M, Roces F (2011) Information needs at the beginning of foraging: grass-cutting ants trade off load size for a faster return to the nest. PLoS One 6:e17667–e17669. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017667 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouchebti S (2015) Comportement d’approvisionnement des fourmis coupeuses de feuilles : de la piste chimique à la piste physique. Dissertation, Université Paul SabatierGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruce AI, Burd M (2012) Allometric scaling of foraging rate with trail dimensions in leaf-cutting ants. P Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 279:2442–2447. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.2583 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burd M (1996) Foraging performance by Atta colombica, a leaf-cutting ant. Am Nat 148:597. doi: 10.1086/285942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cherrett JM (1968) The foraging behaviour of Atta cephalotes L. (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). J Anim Ecol 37:387. doi: 10.2307/2955 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cherrett JM (1972) Some factors involved in the selection of vegetable substrate by Atta cephalotes (L.) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in tropical rain forest. J Anim Ecol 41:647. doi: 10.2307/3200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Da-Silva AC, Navas CA, Ribeiro PL (2012) Dealing with water deficit in Atta ant colonies: large ants scout for water while small ants transport it. Biol Open 1:827–830. doi: 10.1242/bio.2012703 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Evison SEF, Hart AG, Jackson DE (2008) Minor workers have a major role in the maintenance of leafcutter ant pheromone trails. Anim Behav 75:963–969. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.07.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farji-Brener AG, Barrantes G, Laverde O, Fierro-Calderón K, Bascopé F, López A (2007) Fallen branches as part of leaf-cutting ant trails: their role on resource discovery and on leaf transport rates in Atta cephalotes. Biotropica 39:211–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farji-Brener AG, Chinchilla F, Umaña MN et al (2014) Branching angles reflect a tradeoff between reducing trail maintenance costs or travel distances in leaf-cutting ants. Ecology 96:510–517. doi: 10.1890/14-0220.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freeman B, Chaves-Campos J (2016) Branch width and height influence the incorporation of branches into foraging trails and travel speed in leafcutter ants Atta cephalotes (L.) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Neotrop Entomol 45:258–264. doi: 10.1007/s13744-016-0362-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fewell JH (1988) Energetic and time costs of foraging in harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex occidentalis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:401–408. doi: 10.1007/BF00294977 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gamboa GJ (1975) Foraging and leaf-cutting of the desert gardening ant Acromyrmex versicolor versicolor (Pergande) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Oecologia 20:103–110. doi: 10.1007/BF00364324 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Greaves T, Hughes RD (1974) The population biology of the meat ant. Aust J Entomol 13:329–351. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-6055.1974.tb02212.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Griffiths HM, Hughes WOH (2010) Hitchhiking and the removal of microbial contaminants by the leaf-cutting ant Atta colombica. Ecol Entomol 35:529–537. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2311.2010.01212.x Google Scholar
  17. Herbers JM (1981) Reliability theory and foraging by ants. J Theoret Biol 89:175–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hodgson ES (1955) An ecological study of the behavior of the leaf-cutting ant Atta cephalotes. Ecology 36:293. doi: 10.2307/1933235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Howard JJ (2001) Costs of trail construction and maintenance in the leaf-cutting ant Atta colombica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:348–356. doi: 10.1007/s002650000314 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  21. Leigh EG, Windsor DM (1982) Forest production and regulation of primary consumers on Barro Colorado Island. In: Leigh EG, Rand AS, Windsor DM (eds) The ecology of a tropical forest: seasonal rhythms and long-term changes. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, pp. 111–122Google Scholar
  22. Lewis T, Pollard GV, Dibley GC (1974a) Rhythmic foraging in the leaf-cutting ant Atta cephalotes (L.) (Formicidae: Attini). J Anim Ecol 43:129. doi: 10.2307/3162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lewis T, Pollard GV, Dibley GC (1974b) Micro-environmental factors affecting diel patterns of foraging in the leaf-cutting ant Atta cephalotes (L.) (Formicidae: Attini). J Anim Ecol 43:143. doi: 10.2307/3163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lighton JRB, Bartholomew GA, Feener DH (1987) Energetics of locomotion and load carriage and a model of the energy cost of foraging in the leaf-cutting ant Atta colombica Guer. Physiol Zool 60:524–537. doi: 10.2307/30156127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Littledyke M, Cherrett JM (1976) Direct ingestion of plant sap from cut leaves by the leaf-cutting ants Atta cephalotes (L.) and Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich) (Formicidae, Attini). Bull Entomol Res 66:205–217. doi: 10.1017/S0007485300006647 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lugo AE, Farnworth EG, Pool D et al (1973) The impact of the leaf cutter ant Atta colombica on the energy flow of a tropical wet forest. Ecology 54:1292. doi: 10.2307/1934191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lutz FE (1929) Observations on leaf-cutting ants. Am Mus Novit 388:1–21. doi: 10.1206/0003-0082(2006)502[0001:NSAFRS]2.0.CO;2 Google Scholar
  28. Marlin JC (1971) The mating, nesting and ant enemies of Polyergus lucidus Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Am Midl Nat 86:181–189. doi: 10.2307/2423698 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moll K, Federle W, Roces F (2012) The energetics of running stability: costs of transport in grass-cutting ants depend on fragment shape. J Exp Biol 215:161–168. doi: 10.1242/jeb.063594 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Plowes NJ, Johnson RA, Hölldobler B (2013) Foraging behavior in the ant genus Messor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae). Myrmecol News 18:33–49Google Scholar
  31. Roces F, Lighton JRB (1995) Larger bites of leaf-cutting ants. Nature 373:392–393. doi: 10.1038/373392a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rockwood LL, Hubbell SP (1987) Host-plant selection, diet diversity, and optimal foraging in a tropical leafcutting ant. Oecologia 74:55–61. doi: 10.1007/BF00377345 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Shepherd JD (1982) Trunk trails and the searching strategy of a leaf-cutter ant, Atta colombica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:77–84. doi: 10.2307/4599518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Theraulaz G, Bonabeau E, Deneubourg J-L (1998) Response threshold reinforcement and division of labour in insect societies. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:327–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Villesen P, Gertsch PJ, Frydenberg J et al (1999) Evolutionary transition from single to multiple mating in fungus-growing ants. Mol Ecol 8:1819–1825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Wetterer JK (1995) Forager size and ecology of Acromyrmex coronatus and other leaf-cutting ants in Costa Rica. Oecologia 104:409–415. doi: 10.1007/BF00341337 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Wirth R, Beyschlag W, Ryel RJ, Hölldobler B (2009) Annual foraging of the leaf-cutting ant Atta colombica in a semideciduous rain forest in Panama. J Trop Ecol 13:741. doi: 10.1017/S0266467400010907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wirth R, Herz H, Ryel RJ, et al. (2003) The natural history of leaf-cutting ants. In: Herbivory of leaf-cutting ants. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 5–48Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Information TechnologyMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.CSIRO Data61CanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations