Steering intermediate courses: desert ants combine information from various navigational routines
- 492 Downloads
A number of systems of navigation have been studied in some detail in insects. These include path integration, a system that keeps track of the straight-line distance and direction travelled on the current trip, the use of panoramic landmarks and scenery for orientation, and systematic searching. A traditional view is that only one navigational system is in operation at any one time, with different systems running in sequence depending on the context and conditions. We review selected data suggesting that often, different navigational cues (e.g., compass cues) and different systems of navigation are in operation simultaneously in desert ant navigation. The evidence suggests that all systems operate in parallel forming a heterarchical network. External and internal conditions determine the weights to be accorded to each cue and system. We also show that a model of independent modules feeding into a central summating device, the Navinet model, can in principle account for such data. No central executive processor is necessary aside from a weighted summation of the different cues and systems. Such a heterarchy of parallel systems all in operation represents a new view of insect navigation that has already been expressed informally by some authors.
KeywordsDesert ant navigation Navinet model Path integration Sky compass Terrestrial panorama
Funding for RW to visit Macquarie University to draft this manuscript with KC was provided by the Australian Research Council (DP110100608 to KC and RW) and by Macquarie University. The research reviewed here complies with the ethical standards of each of the countries in which it was performed. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- Cheng K (2012) Arthropod navigation: ants, bees, crabs, spiders finding their way. In: Zentall TR, Wasserman EA (eds) The Oxford handbook of comparative cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 347–365Google Scholar
- el Jundi B, Pfeiffer K, Heinze S, Homberg U (2014) Integration of polarization and chromatic cues in the insect sky compass. J Comp Physiol A 200:575–589Google Scholar
- Fukushi T (2001) Homing in wood ants, Formica japonica: use of the skyline panorama. J Exp Biol 206:535–541Google Scholar
- Hoinville T, Wehner R, Cruse H (2012) Learning and retrieval of memory elements in a navigation task. Proc Int Conf, Living Mach 7375:120–131Google Scholar
- Ronacher B (2008) Path integration as the basic navigation mechanism of the desert ant Cataglyphis fortis (Forel, 1902) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol News 11:53–62Google Scholar
- Santschi F (1911) Sur le mécanisme de l’orientation chez les fourmis. Revue Suisse Zool 19:303–338Google Scholar
- Schultheiss P, Stannard T, Pereira S, Reynolds AM, Wehner R, Cheng K (2016) Similarities and differences in path integration and search in two species of desert ants inhabiting a visually rich and a visually barren habitat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. doi: 10.1007/s00265-016-2140-0
- Wehner R (1970) Die Konkurrenz von Sonnenkompass- und Horizontmarken-Orientierung bei der Wüstenameise Cataglyphis bicolor (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Verhandlung Deutschen Zool Gesellschaft 64:238–242Google Scholar
- Wehner R (1981) Spatial vision in arthropods. In: Autrum H (ed) Handbook of sensory physiology, vol VII//6c. Springer, Berlin, pp 287–616Google Scholar
- Wehner R (1994) The polarization-vision project: championing organismic biology. Fortschritte Zool 39:103–143Google Scholar
- Wehner R (2009) The architecture of the desert ant’s navigational toolkit (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol News 12:85–96Google Scholar