Advertisement

Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 1285–1293 | Cite as

Propaganda substances in the cuckoo antLeptothorax kutteri and the slave-makerHarpagoxenus sublaevis

  • Anthony B. Allies
  • Andrew F. G. Bourke
  • Nigel R. Franks
Article

Abstract

This paper reports the first discovery of “propaganda substances” in a workerless inquiline ant, the European myrmicineLeptothorax kutteri Buschinger. These substances are used by the parasite queen as a chemical weapon for defense against hostile workers of the host speciesL. acervorum. The substances also have an unusual behavioral effect: they cause host workers to attack each other, and they therefore appear to override nestmate recognition in host colonies. Laboratory experiments show that the source of these substances is the Dufour's gland of theL. kutteri queen. Our experiments also confirm the hypothesis that the closely related slave-making antHarpagoxenus sublaevis uses its Dufour's gland secretions as a chemical weapon during slave raids and colony foundation. The behavioral effect of these slave-maker secretions is identical to that ofL. kutteri queens.

Key Words

Dufour's gland Formicidae Hymenoptera inquiline ant slave-making ant Harpagoxenus sublaevis Leptothorax kutteri Leptothorax acervorum pheromone nestmate recognition 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alloway, T. 1979. Raiding behavior of two species of slave-making ants,Harpagoxenus americanus (Emery) andLeptothorax duloticus (Wesson) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Anim. Behav. 27:202–210.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, W.L. 1955. The first social parasite in the ant tribe Dacetini.Insectes Soc. 2:181–186.Google Scholar
  3. Buschinger, A. 1965.Leptothorax (Mychothorax) kutteri n.sp., eine sozial-parasitische Ameise (Hymenoptera, Formicidae).Insectes Soc. 12:327–334.Google Scholar
  4. Buschinger, A. 1974a. Experimente und Beobachtung zur Gründung und Entwicklung neuer Societäten der sklavenhaltenden AmeiseHarpagoxenus sublaevis (Nyl).Insectes Soc. 21:381–406.Google Scholar
  5. Buschinger, A. 1974b. Zur Biologie der sozialparasitischen AmeiseLeptothorax goesswaldi Kutter (Hym., Formicidae).Insectes Soc. 21:133–144.Google Scholar
  6. Buschinger, A. 1981. Biological and systematic relationships of social parasitic Leptothoracini from Europe and North America, pp. 211–222,in P.E. Howse, J.L, Clément (eds.). Bio-systematics of Social Insects. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Buschinger, A., Ehrhardt, W., andWinter, U. 1980. The organization of slave raids in dulotic ants—a comparative study (Hymenoptera; Formicidae).Z. Tierpsychol. 53:245–264.Google Scholar
  8. Douwes, P., andBuschinger, A. 1983. Två för Nordeuropa nya myror.Entomol. Tidskr. 104:1–4.Google Scholar
  9. Dumpert, K. 1981. The Social Biology of Ants. Translated by C. Johnson. Pitman, London.Google Scholar
  10. Gösswald, K. 1953. Histologische Untersuchungen an der arbeiterlosen AmeiseTeleutomyrmex schneideri Kutter (Hym. Formicidae).Mitt. Schweiz. Entomol. Ges. 26:81–128.Google Scholar
  11. Gösswald, K. 1954. Unsere Ameisen. Kosmos, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  12. Hölldobler, B. 1970. Zur Physiologie der Gast-Wirt-Beziehungen (Myrmecophilie) bei Ameisen. II. Das Gastverhältnis des imaginalenAtemeles pubicollis Bris. (Col, Staphylinidae) zuMyrmica undFormica (Hym. Formicidae). Z.Vergl. Physiol. 66:176–189.Google Scholar
  13. Hölldobler, B. 1971. Communication between ants and their guests.Sci. Am. 224(3):86–93.Google Scholar
  14. Kistner, D.H. 1979. Social and evolutionary significance of social insect symbionts, pp. 339–413,in H.R. Hermann (ed.). Social Insects, Vol. I. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Kutter, H. 1969. Die sozialparasitischen Ameisen der Schweiz.Neujahrsblatt hrsg. von der Naturf. Ges. Zurich 171:1–62.Google Scholar
  16. Passera, L. 1964. Données biologiques sur la fourmi parasitePlagiolepis xene Starcke.Insectes Soc. 11:59–70.Google Scholar
  17. Regnier, F.E., andWilson, E.O. 1971. Chemical communication and “propaganda” in slave-maker ants.Science 172:267–269.Google Scholar
  18. Rissing, S.W. 1983. Natural history of the workerless inquiline antPogonomyrmex colei (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Psyche 90:321–332.Google Scholar
  19. Stumper, R. 1950. Les associations complexes des fourmis. Commensalisme, symbiose et parasitisme.Bull. Biol. Fr. Belg. 84:376–399.Google Scholar
  20. Vander Meer, R., Wojcik, D. 1982. Chemical mimicry in the myrmecophilous beetleMyrmecaphodius excavaticollis.Science 218:806–808.Google Scholar
  21. Wheeler, W.M. 1910. Ants: Their Structure, Development and Behavior. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Wilson, E.O. 1971. The Insect Societies. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  23. Winter, U. 1979. Untersuchungen zum Raubzugverhalten der dulotischen AmeiseHarpagoxenus sublaevis (Nyl).Insectes Soc. 26:123–135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony B. Allies
    • 1
  • Andrew F. G. Bourke
    • 1
  • Nigel R. Franks
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of Bath Claverton DownBathUK

Personalised recommendations