Advertisement

Insectes Sociaux

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 217–225 | Cite as

Gamergate number and control over reproduction inPachycondyla krugeri (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

  • M. H. Wildman
  • R. M. Crewe
Article

Summary

Colonies of the queenless antPachycondyla krugeri were collected at different times of the year in order to determine the number of gamergates present. Dissection revealed that no colony contained more than one gamergate, suggesting that some form of regulation of gamergate numbers is present in this species. Groups of uninseminated workers kept in the laboratory began to lay reproductive eggs one month after removal from the influence of a gamergate, indicating that gamergates seem to regulate the reproductive activity of thir nestmates. Neither single reproductives nor reproductive regulation have previously been reported for species with gamergates.

Keywords

Reproductive Activity Reproductive Regulation Single Reproductives 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Die Anzahl der Gamergaten und deren Kontrolle über die Fortpflanzung inPachycondyla krugeri (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Zusammenfassung

Kolonien der königinlosen AmeisePachycondyla krugeri wurden zu verschiedenen Zeiten des Jahres gesammelt, um die Anzahl von Gamergaten zu bestimmen. Präparationen verdeutlichten, daß in jeder Kolonie nur eine Gamergate vorkommt. Die Anzahl der Gamergaten bei dieser Ameisenart muß somit in einer bestimmten Weise reguliert sein. Gruppen von unbegatteten, im Labor gehaltenen Arbeiterinnen legten fruchtbare Eier, einen Monat nachdem sie von einer Gamergate getrennt wurden. Diese Untersuchung veranschaulicht, daß die Gamergaten das Fortpflanzungsverhalten Ihrer Nestgenossen beinflussen können. Weder einzelne Gamergaten, noch eine Regulation der Fortpflanzung wurden bisher bei Ameisenarten mit Gamergaten festgestellt.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bier K. 1954. — Uber den Einfluß der Königin auf die Arbeiterinnenfertilität im Ameisenstaat.Insectes Soc., 1, 7–19.Google Scholar
  2. Crewe R.M., Velthuis H.H.W., 1980. — False queens: A consequence of mandibular gland signals in worker honeybees.Naturwiss., 67, 467–468.Google Scholar
  3. Fletcher D.J.C., Blum M.S., 1983. — Regulation of queen number by workers in colonies of social insects.Science, 219 312–314.Google Scholar
  4. Fletcher D.J.C., Ross K.G., 1985. — Regulation of reproduction in eusocial Hymenoptera.Ann. Rev. Entomol., 30, 319–343.Google Scholar
  5. Forsyth A., 1980. — Worker control of queen density in Hymenopteran societies.Am. Nat., 116, 895–898.Google Scholar
  6. Hölldobler B., Wilson E.O., 1977. — The number of queens: an important trait in ant evolution.Naturwiss., 64, 8–15.Google Scholar
  7. Hölldobler B., Wilson E.O., 1983. — Queen control in colonies of weaver ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 76, 235–238.Google Scholar
  8. Pamilo P., Crozier R.H., Fraser J., 1985. — Inter-nest interactions, nest autonomy, and reproductive specialization in an Australian arid-zone ant,Rhytidoponera sp. 12.Psyche, 92, 217–236.Google Scholar
  9. Peeters C.P., 1984. —Social organization, breeding biology and the process of reproductive differentiation inOphthalmopone berthoudi, a ponerine ant.Ph. D. Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa.Google Scholar
  10. Peeters C.P., Crewe R.M., 1984. — Insemination controls the reproductive division of labour in a ponerine ant.Naturwiss., 71, 50–51.Google Scholar
  11. Peeters C.P., Crewe R.M., 1985a — Worker reproduction in the ponerine antOphthalmopone berthoudi: an alternative form of eusocial organization.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 18, 29–37.Google Scholar
  12. Peeters C.P., Crewe R.M., 1985b. — Queenlessness and reproductive differentiation inOphthalmopone hottentota.S. Afr. J. Zool., 20, 268.Google Scholar
  13. Peeters C.P., Crewe R.M., 1986a. — Queenright and queenless breeding systems within the genusPachycondyla Hymenoptera: Formicidae.J. Ent. Soc. sth. Afr., 49, 251–255.Google Scholar
  14. Peeters C.P., Crewe R.M., 1986b. — Male biology in the queenless ponerine antOphthalmopone berthoudi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Psyche, 93, 277–284.Google Scholar
  15. Peeters C.P., 1987a. — The diversity of reproductive systems in ponerine and other primitive ants.In, J. Eder and H. Rembold (eds),Chemistry and Biology of Social Insects, Verlag J. Peperny: Munchen, pp. 253–254.Google Scholar
  16. Peeters C.P., 1987b. — The reproductive division of labour in the queenless ponerine antRhytidoponera sp. 12.Insectes Soc., 34, 75–86.Google Scholar
  17. Vargo E.L., Fletcher D.J.C., 1986. — Queen number and the production of sexuals in the fire ant,Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 19, 41–47.Google Scholar
  18. Vargo E.L., Fletcher D.J.C., 1987. — Effect of queen number on the production of sexuals in natural populations of the fire ant,Solenopsis invicta.Physiol. Entomol., 12, 109–116.Google Scholar
  19. Ward P.S., 1983. — Genetic relatedness and colony organization in a species complex of ponerine ants.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 12, 285–299.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Masson 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. H. Wildman
    • 1
  • R. M. Crewe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of the WitwatersrandSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations