Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 34, Issue 10, pp 1275–1282 | Cite as

Hydrocarbon Signals Explain the Pattern of Worker and Egg Policing in the Ant Aphaenogaster cockerelli

  • Adrian A. Smith
  • Bert Hölldobler
  • Jürgen Liebig
Article

Abstract

In ant societies, worker reproduction is regulated through policing behaviors, such as physical aggression or egg eating. The information used by policing individuals is thought to be in blends of hydrocarbons present on the cuticle and the surface of eggs. These fertility signals have been studied in numerous genera. However, signaling patterns that emerge across distinct subfamilies of ants have yet to be explained. We investigated policing behavior and the chemical signaling upon which policing behaviors are informed in the ant Aphaenogaster cockerelli. We found that worker-produced eggs are not policed, and we showed that there is a lack of chemical signaling for effective egg policing to occur in this species. Furthermore, we identified the available signals that demarcate workers to be policed physically. We showed that in A. cockerelli, a species with derived social organization, workers produce fertility signals identical to the queen. This queen-like signaling may be due to workers maintaining a high level of ovarian activity, linked to trophic egg production, in the presence of the queen.

Keywords

Physical policing Egg policing Cuticular hydrocarbons Worker reproduction Fertility signal 

References

  1. Arthur, C. L., and Pawliszyn, J. 1990. Solid-phase microextraction with thermal-desorption using fused-silica optical fibers. Anal. Chem. 62:2145–2148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourke, A. F. G. 1988. Worker reproduction in the higher eusocial Hymenoptera. Q. Rev. Biol. 63:291–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brian, M. V., and Rigby, C. 1978. Trophic eggs of Myrmica rubra L. Insectes Soc. 25:89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Choe, J. C. 1988. Worker reproduction and social evolution in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), pp. 163–187, in J. C. Trager (ed.). Advances in MyrmecologyLeiden, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Cole, B. J. 1986. The social-behavior of Leptothorax allardycei (Hymenoptera, Formicidae)—time budgets and the evolution of worker reproduction. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 18:165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cuvillier-Hot, V., Lenoir, A., Crewe, R., Malosse, C., and Peeters, C. 2004. Fertility signaling and reproductive skew in queenless ants. Anim. Behav. 68:1209–1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. D’ettorre, P., Heinze, J., and Ratnieks, F. L. W. 2004. Worker policing by egg eating in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla inversa. Proc. R. Soc. Lond., Ser. B: Biol. Sci. 271:1427–1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dietemann, V., Liebig, J., Hölldobler, B., and Peeters, C. 2005. Changes in the cuticular hydrocarbons of incipient reproductives correlate with triggering of worker policing in the bulldog ant Myrmecia gulosa. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 58:486–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dietemann, V., Peeters, C., Liebig, J., Thivet, V., and Hölldobler, B. 2003. Cuticular hydrocarbons mediate discrimination of reproductives and nonreproductives in the ant Myrmecia gulosa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100:10341–10346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Endler, A., Holldobler, B., and Liebig, J. 2007. Lack of physical policing and fertility cues in egg-laying workers of the ant Camponotus floridanus. Anim. Behav. 74:1171–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Endler, A., Liebig, J., and Hölldobler, B. 2006. Queen fertility, egg marking and colony size in the ant Camponotus floridanus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 59:490–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Endler, A., Liebig, J., Schmitt, T., Parker, J. E., Jones, G. R., Schreier, P., and Hölldobler, B. 2004. Surface hydrocarbons of queen eggs regulate worker reproduction in a social insect. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101:2945–2950.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hammond, R. L., and Keller, L. 2004. Conflict over male parentage in social insects. PLoS Biol. 2:1472–1482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hartmann, A., Wantia, J., Torres, J. A., and Heinze, J. 2003. Worker policing without genetic conflicts in a clonal ant. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100:12836–12840.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Helanterä, H., and Sundström, L. 2007. Worker policing and nest mate recognition in the ant Formica fusca. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61:1143–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hölldobler, B., and Carlin, N. 1989. Colony founding, queen control and worker reproduction in the ant Aphaenogaster (=Novomessor) cockerelli (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Psyche 96:131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hölldobler, B., and Wilson, E. O. 1990. The Ants. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany.Google Scholar
  18. Kikuta, N., and Tsuji, K. 1999. Queen and worker policing in the monogynous and monandrous ant, Diacamma sp. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 46:180–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Le Conte, Y., and Hefetz, A. 2008. Primer pheromones in social Hymenoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 53:523–542.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liebig, J., Peeters, C., Oldham, N. J., Markstadter, C., and Hölldobler, B. 2000. Are variations in cuticular hydrocarbons of queens and workers a reliable signal of fertility in the ant Harpegnathos saltator? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97:4124–4131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lockey, K. H. 1988. Lipids of the insect cuticle—origin, composition and function. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B: Biochem. Mol. Biol. 89:595–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lommelen, E., Johnson, C. A., Drijfhout, F. P., Billen, J., Wenseleers, T., and Gobin, B. 2006. Cuticular hydrocarbons provide reliable cues of fertility in the ant Gnamptogenys striatula. J. Chem. Ecol. 32:2023–2034.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Monnin, T. 2006. Chemical recognition of reproductive status in social insects. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 43:515–530.Google Scholar
  24. Monnin, T., Malosse, C., and Peeters, C. 1998. Solid-phase microextraction and cuticular hydrocarbon differences related to reproductive activity in queenless ant Dinoponera quadriceps. J. Chem. Ecol. 24:1423–1423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Monnin, T., and Peeters, C. 1997. Cannibalism of subordinates’ eggs in the monogynous queenless ant Dinoponera quadriceps. Naturwissenschaften 84:499–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Monnin, T., and Ratnieks, F. L. W. 2001. Policing in queenless ponerine ants. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50:97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ratnieks, F. L. W. 1988. Reproductive harmony via mutual policing by workers in eusocial Hymenoptera. Am. Nat. 132:217–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ratnieks, F. L. W., Foster, K. R., and Wenseleers, T. 2006. Conflict resolution in insect societies. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 51:581–608.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith, A. A., and Haight, K. L. 2008. Army ants as research and collection tools. J. Insect Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
  30. Wenseleers, T., Helanterä, H., Hart, A., and Ratnieks, F. L. W. 2004. Worker reproduction and policing in insect societies: an ESS analysis. J. Evol. Biol. 17:1035–1047.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian A. Smith
    • 1
  • Bert Hölldobler
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jürgen Liebig
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Life Sciences and Center for Social Dynamics and ComplexityArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Biozentrum, Zoologie IIUniversität WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations