Which portion of the natural panorama is used for view-based navigation in the Australian desert ant?

Original Paper

Abstract

Ants that forage in visually rich environments often develop idiosyncratic routes between their nest and a profitable foraging ground. Such route knowledge is underpinned by an ability to use visual landmarks for guidance and place recognition. Here we ask which portions of natural visual scenes are essential for visually guided navigation in the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti whose foragers navigate through a habitat containing grass tussocks, shrubs and trees. We captured M. bagoti foragers after they had returned to their nest from a feeder, but before they had entered their nest, and tested their ability to home accurately from a series of release locations. We used this simple release paradigm to investigate visually guided navigation by monitoring the accuracy of nestwards orientation when parts of the ants’ visual field were obscured. Results show that the lower portion of the visual panorama is more important for visually guided homing than upper portions. Analysis of panoramic images captured from the release and nest locations support the hypothesis that the important visual information is provided by the panoramic contour, where terrestrial objects contrast against sky, rather than by a limited number of salient landmarks such as tall trees.

Keywords

Ants Navigation Visual landmarks Snapshot View-based homing 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Rachel Barwick for assistance with data collection, Sebastian Schwarz and everybody at the CSIRO Centre for Arid Zone Research for help and support, and Lincoln Smith for construction of the turntable. Funds were provided by the Australian Research Council, and PG was supported by a Leverhulme Trust fellowship.

References

  1. Andel D, Wehner R (2004) Path integration in desert ants, Cataglyphis: how to make a homing ant run away from home. Proc R Soc B 271(1547):1485–1489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baader AP (1996) The significance of visual landmarks for navigation of the giant tropical ant, Paraponera clavata (Formicidae, Ponerinae). Insectes Soc 43(4):435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Batschelet E (1981) Circular statistics in biology. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bregy P, Sommer S, Wehner R (2008) Nest-mark orientation versus vector navigation in desert ants. J Exp Biol 211(12):1868–1873PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cartwright BA, Collett TS (1983) Landmark learning in bees. J Comp Physiol A 151(4):521–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng K, Shettleworth SJ, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ (2007) Bayesian integration of spatial information. Psychol Bull 133:625–637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng K, Narendra A, Sommer A, Wehner R (2009) Traveling in clutter: navigation in the Central Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti. Behav Processes 80(3):261–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collett TS, Dillmann E, Giger A, Wehner R (1992) Visual landmarks and route following in desert ants. J Comp Physiol A 170(4):435–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Collett M, Collett TS, Bisch S, Wehner R (1998) Local and global vectors in desert ant navigation. Nature 394:269–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collett TS, Graham P, Harris RA (2007) Novel landmark-guided routes in ants. J Exp Biol 210(12):2025PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deneve S, Pouget A (2004) Bayesian multisensory integration and cross-modal spatial links. J Physiol Paris 98(1–3):249–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Durier V, Graham P, Collett TS (2003) Snapshot memories and landmark guidance in wood ants. Curr Biol 13(18):1614–1618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Durier V, Graham P, Collett TS (2004) Switching destinations: memory change in wood ants. J Exp Biol 207(14):2401–2408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dyer FC, Gould JL (1983) Honey bee navigation. Am Sci 71(6):587–597Google Scholar
  15. Fourcassié V (1991) Landmark orientation in natural situations in the red wood ant Formica lugubris Zett (Hymenoptera; Formicidae). Ethol Ecol Evol 3:89–99Google Scholar
  16. Frisch KV, Lindauer M (1954) Himmel und Erde in Konkurrenz bei der Orientierung der Bienen. Die Naturwissenschaften 41(11):245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fukushi T (2001) Homing in wood ants, Formica japonica: use of the skyline panorama. J Exp Biol 204(12):2063–2072PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fukushi T, Wehner R (2004) Navigation in wood ants Formica japonica: context dependent use of landmarks. J Exp Biol 207(19):3431–3439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Graham P, Fauria K, Collett TS (2003) The influence of beacon-aiming on the routes of wood ants. J Exp Biol 206(3):535–541PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Graham P, Durier V, Collett TS (2004) The binding and recall of snapshot memories in wood ants (Formica rufa L.). J Exp Biol 207(3):393–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harris RA, Graham P, Collett TS (2007) Visual cues for the retrieval of landmark memories by navigating wood ants. Curr Biol 17(2):93–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harrison JF, Fewell JH, Stiller TM, Breed MD (1989) Effects of experience on use of orientation cues in the giant tropical ant. Anim Behav 37(5):869–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hölldobler B (1980) Canopy orientation: a new kind of orientation in ants. Science 210(4465):86–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klotz JH (1987) Topographic orientation in two species of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Insectes Soc 34(4):236–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kohler M, Wehner R (2005) Idiosyncratic route-based memories in desert ants, Melophorus bagoti: how do they interact with path-integration vectors? Neurobiol Learn Mem 83(1):1–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Körding K (2007) Decision theory: what “should” the nervous system do? Science 318(5850):606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Macquart D, Garnier L, Combe M, Beugnon G (2006) Ant navigation en route to the goal: signature routes facilitate way-finding of Gigantiops destructor. J Comp Physiol A 192(3):221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Möller R (2001) Do insects use templates or parameters for landmark navigation? J Theor Biol 210(1):33–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Möller R, Vardy A (2006) Local visual homing by matched-filter descent in image distances. Biol Cybern 95(5):413–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Müller M, Wehner R (1988) Path integration in desert ants, Cataglyphis fortis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85(14):5287–5290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Muser BA, Sommer SB, Wolf HA, Wehner RB (2005) Foraging ecology of the thermophilic Australian desert ant, Melophorus bagoti. Aust J Zoo 53(5):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Narendra A (2007a) Homing strategies of the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti I. Proportional path-integration takes the ant half-way home. J Exp Biol 210(10):1798PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Narendra A (2007b) Homing strategies of the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti II. Interaction of the path integrator with visual cue information. J Exp Biol 210(10):1804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Narendra A, Si A, Sulikowski D, Cheng K (2007) Learning, retention and coding of nest-associated visual cues by the Australian desert ant, Melophorus bagoti. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61(10):1543–1553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosengren R, Fortelius W (1986) Ortstreue in foraging ants of the Formica rufa group—Hierarchy of orienting cues and long-term memory. Insectes Soc 33(3):306–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rosengren R, Pamilo P (1978) Effect of winter timber felling on behaviour of foraging wood ants (Formica rufa group) in early spring. Memorab Zool 29:143–155Google Scholar
  37. Santschi F (1913) Comment s’orientent les fourmis. Rev Suisse Zool 21:347–425Google Scholar
  38. Stürzl W, Zeil J (2007) Depth, contrast and view-based homing in outdoor scenes. Biol Cybern 96:519–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Towne WF, Moscrip H (2008) The connection between landscapes and the solar ephemeris in honeybees. J Exp Biol 211:3729–3736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wehner R (1987) Spatial organization of foraging behavior in individually searching desert ants, Cataglyphis (Sahara Desert) and Ocymyrmex (Namib Desert). Experientia Suppl 54:15–42Google Scholar
  41. Wehner R, Räber F (1979) Visual spatial memory in desert ants, Cataglyphis bicolor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Cell Mol Life Sci 35(12):1569–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wehner R, Srinivasan MV (1981) Searching behaviour of desert ants, genus Cataglyphis (Formicidae, Hymenoptera). J Comp Physiol A 142(3):315–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wehner R, Michel B, Antonsen P (1996) Visual navigation in insects: coupling of egocentric and geocentric information. J Exp Biol 199:129–140PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Wolf H, Wehner R (2000) Pinpointing food sources: olfactory and anemotactic orientation in desert ants. J Exp Biol 203:857–868PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Zeil J, Hoffmann MI, Chahl JS (2003) Catchment areas of panoramic images in outdoor scenes. J Opt Soc Am A 20:450–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zollikofer CPE, Wehner R, Fukushi T (1995) Optical scaling in conspecific Cataglyphis ants. J Exp Biol 198:1637–1646PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Life SciencesUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  2. 2.Department of Brain, Behaviour and EvolutionMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations