Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 359–374 | Cite as

Shift in frequency-dependent selection across the life-cycle in obligately interbreeding harvester ant lineages

Original Paper

Abstract

The long-term persistence of hybridogenetic systems, in which one genetic lineage is dependent on another as a sperm host, is paradoxical because they require continual coexistence between ecological competitors. Several species of ants display a social form of hybridogenesis, in which two distinct genetic lineages obligately interbreed to produce sterile workers, while intra-lineage progeny become the reproductives. A recent model suggests that persistence of such a system depends on the relative strengths of negative frequency-dependent selection acting during colony growth and positive frequency-dependent selection during reproduction. We used path analysis to investigate the effect of lineage frequency on reproductive output and colony sex ratio over a single reproductive season in a natural population of the H1/H2 lineage pair in the genus Pogonomyrmex. Results suggest that lineage frequency does impact reproduction via two opposing routes: the more common lineage procures more same-lineage mates, resulting in a higher proportion of same-lineage mates increases reproduction through higher queen-egg availability, but the rarer lineage procures more alternate-lineage mates, yielding a more genetically diverse worker caste that increases productivity. As a result, lineage frequency has only a weakly positive overall effect on colony reproduction, and overall frequency-dependence in this system across the entire life cycle is likely to be negative as predicted by the persistence model.

Keywords

Genetic caste determination Hybridogenesis Frequency-dependent selection Pogonomyrmex Reproduction Sex ratio 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the 2003 Earthwatch Institute Student Challenge Awards Program team of high school students for their hard work and diligence in constructing traps and conducting alate collections. J. Gadau was gracious enough to share his unpublished microsatellite primers with us, for which we are very appreciative. A number of volunteers from the research volunteer program at the Southwestern Research Station also provided much-needed field assistance. C. Bernasconi conducted the majority of the genotyping for this project. B. Cole provided constructive comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This work was partially funded by a generous research grant from the Earthwatch Institute.

References

  1. Anderson KE, Hölldobler B, Fewell JH, Mott BM, Gadau J (2006) Population-wide lineage frequencies predict genetic load in the seed-harvester ant Pogonomyrmex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:13433–13438CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold SJ, Wade MJ (1984) On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: applications. Evolution 38:720–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton NH, Hewitt GM (1989) Adaptation, speciation, and hybrid zones. Nature 341:497–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger L (1973) Systematics and hybridization in European green frogs of the Rana esculenta complex. J Herpetol 7:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beukeboom LW, Vrijenhoek RC (1998) Evolutionary genetics and ecology of sperm-dependent parthenogenesis. J Evol Biol 11:755–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boomsma JJ (1989) Sex investment ratios in ants: has female bias been systematically overestimated? Am Nat 133:517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boomsma JJ (1993) Sex ratio variation in polygynous ants. In: Keller L (ed) Queen number and sociality in insects. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 86–109Google Scholar
  8. Brown WD, Keller L (2006) Resource supplements cause a change in colony sex-ratio specialization in the mound-building ant, Formica exsecta. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:612–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carmona JA, Sanjur OI, Doadrio I, Machurdom A, Vrijenhoek RC (1997) Hybridogenetic reproduction and maternal ancestry of polyploidy in Iberian fish: the Trophidophoxinellus alburnoides complex. Genetics 146:983–993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Clémencet J, Doums C (2007) Habitat-related microgeographic variation of worker size and colony size in the ant Cataglyphis cursor. Oecologia 152:211–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cole BJ, Wiernasz DC (1999) The selective advantage of low relatedness. Science 285:891–893CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Deslippe RJ, Savolainen R (1995) Sex investment in a social insect—the proximate role of food. Ecology 76:375–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisher RA (1958) The genetical theory of natural selection, 2nd edn. Dover Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Foitzik S, Haberl M, Gadau J, Heinze J (1997) Mating frequency of Leptothorax nylanderi ant queens determined by microsatellite analysis. Insectes Soc 44:219–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gadau J, Strehl C-P, Oettler J, Hölldobler B (2003) Determinants of intracolonial relatedness in Pogonomyrmex rugosus: mating frequency and brood raids. Mol Ecol 12:1931–1938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gordon DM (1995) The development of an ant colony’s foraging range. Anim Behav 49:649–659Google Scholar
  17. Gordon DM, Kulig AW (1996) Founding, foraging and fighting: colony size and the spatial distribution of harvester ant nests. Ecology 77:2393–2409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hellriegel B, Reyer H-U (2000) Factors influencing the composition of mixed populations of a hemiclonal hybrid and its sexual host. J Evol Biol 13:906–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Helms Cahan S, Keller L (2003) Complex hybrid origin of genetic caste determination in harvester ants. Nature 424:306–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Helms Cahan S, Vinson SB (2003) Reproductive division of labor between hybrid and non-hybrid offspring in a fire ant hybrid zone. Evolution 57:1562–1570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Helms Cahan S, Parker JD, Rissing SW, Johnson RA, Polony TS, Weiser MD, Smith DR (2002) Extreme genetic differences between queens and workers in hybridizing Pogonomyrmex harvester ants. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 269:1871–1877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Helms Cahan S, Julian GE, Rissing SW, Schwander T, Parker JD, Keller L (2004) Loss of phenotypic plasticity explains genotype-caste association in harvester ants. Curr Biol 14:2277–2282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hölldobler B (1976) The behavioural ecology of mating in harvester ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1:405–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hotz H, Semlitsch RD, Gutmann E, Guex GD, Beerli P (1999) Spontaneous heterosis in larval life-history traits of hemiclonal frog hybrids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:2171–2176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hughes WOH, Boomsma JJ (2004) Genetic diversity and disease resistance in leaf-cutting ant societies. Evolution 58:1251–1260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Julian GE, Helms Cahan S (2006) Behavioral differences between Pogonomyrmex rugosus and two dependent lineages (H1/H2). Ecology 87:2207–2214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Julian GE, Fewell JH, Gadau J, Johnson RA, Larrabee D (2002) Genetic determination of the queen caste in an ant hybrid zone. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:8157–8160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Linksvayer TA, Wade MJ, Gordon DM (2006) Genetic caste determination in harvester ant: possible origin and maintenance by cyto-nuclear interactions. Ecology 87:2185–2193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Mackay W (1981) A comparison of the nest phenologies of three species of Pogonomyrmex harvester ants. Psyche 88:25–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mantovani B, Scali V (1992) Hybridogenesis and androgenesis in the stick-insect Bacillus rossiusgrandii benazzii. Evolution 46:783–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oldroyd BP, Fewell JH (2007) Genetic diversity promotes homeostasis in insect colonies. Trends Ecol Evol 22:408–413CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Pamilo P (1993) Polyandry and allele frequency differences between the sexes in the ant Formica aquilonia. Heredity 70:472–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Parker JD (2004) A major evolutionary transition to more than two sexes? Trends Ecol Evol 19:83–86CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Pfeiffer KJ, Crailsheim K (1998) Drifting of honeybees. Insect Soc 45:151–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reber A, Castella G, Christe P, Chapuisat M (2008) Experimentally increased group diversity improves disease resistance in an ant species. Ecol Lett 11:682–689CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Reuter M, Helms KR, Lehmann L, Keller L (2004) Effects of brood manipulation costs on optimal sex allocation in social hymenoptera. Am Nat 164:E73–E82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Schultz RJ (1969) Hybridization, unisexuality and polyploidy in the teleost Poeciliopsis and other vertebrates. Am Nat 103:605–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schwander T, Helms Cahan S, Keller L (2006) Genetic caste determination in Pogonomyrmex harvester ants imposes costs during colony founding. J Evol Biol 19:402–409CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Schwander T, Keller L, Helms Cahan S (2007) Two alternate mechanisms contribute to the persistence of interdependent lineages in Pogonomyrmex harvester ants. Mol Ecol 16:3533–3543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Soltis DE, Soltis PS (1999) Polyploidy: recurrent formation and genome evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 14:348–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Starr CK (1984) Sperm competition, kinship, and sociality in the aculeate Hymenoptera. In: Smith RL (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 427–464Google Scholar
  42. Suni SS, Gignoux C, Gordon DM (2007) Male parentage in dependent-lineage populations of the harvester ant Pogonomyrmex barbatus. Mol Ecol 16:5149–5155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Tschinkel WR (1993) Sociometry and sociogenesis of colonies of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta during one annual cycle. Ecol Monogr 63:425–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Umphrey GJ (2006) Sperm parasitism in ants: selection for interspecific mating and hybridization. Ecology 87:2148–2159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Volny VP, Gordon DM (2002a) Genetic basis for queen-worker dimorphism in a social insect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:6108–6111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Volny VP, Gordon DM (2002b) Characterization of polymorphic microsatellite loci in the red harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex barbatus. Mol Ecol Notes 2:302–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vorburger C (2001) Heterozygous fitness effects of clonally transmitted genomes in waterfrogs. J Evol Biol 14:602–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vrijenhoek RC (1979) Factors affecting clonal diversity and coexistence. Am Zool 19:787–797Google Scholar
  49. Wiernasz DC, Perroni CL, Cole BJ (2004) Polyandry and fitness in the western harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex occidentalis. Mol Ecol 13:1601–1606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wiernasz DC, Hines J, Parker DG, Cole BJ (2008) Mating for variety increases foraging activity in the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex occidentalis. Mol Ecol 17:1137–1144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Yamauchi A, Yamamura N (2006) Persistence conditions of symmetric social hybridogenesis in haplo-diploid hymenoptera. J Theor Biol 240:24–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologySouthwestern UniversityGeorgetownUSA

Personalised recommendations