Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 70, Issue 2, pp 221–235 | Cite as

Limited flexibility and unusual longevity shape forager allocation in the Florida harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex badius)

  • Christina L. KwapichEmail author
  • Walter R. Tschinkel
Original Article


The benefits of behavioral flexibility in social insect societies are well known, but the advantages of limited flexibility have seldom been considered. Florida harvester ant colonies maintain a stable forager population size for much of their active season, and despite seasonal variation in chronological age, foragers die within 27 days of initiating foraging. To determine how colonies balance forager mortality and forager replacement, we tested the relative influences of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on forager membership, retention, and longevity. Potential and realized forager longevity differed significantly. Residual lifespan increased by 57 % when colonies were penned for 20 days, and up to 8-fold when foragers were retained in the laboratory. Increased forager longevity inhibited the movement of new workers into the forager population. In contrast, increased mortality and starvation did not stimulate the addition of new foragers and forager population size declined when mortality exceeded 4 % per day. Experimental increases in forager number, body fat, and the ratio of larvae to foragers did not induce behavioral reversion in existing foragers. These results suggest an unidirectional allocation strategy, with foragers that are less disposable and less behaviorally flexible than the well-studied honey bee. In P. badius, forager membership is maintained not by young ants detecting increased demand, but by workers developing at rates that allow forager replacement and prevent excessive worker depletion. In the absence of a lifespan matched to predictable risks, opportunistic increases in forager survival may promote colony growth by inhibiting the scheduled and irreversible transitions of younger workers.


Pogonomyrmex Labor allocation Lifespan Extrinsic mortality Age at first foraging Behavioral reversion Social inhibition Colony size Behavioral flexibility Intrinsic development rate 



We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for suggestions that improved this manuscript and to Tyler C. Murdock for his assistance at the microbalance. This work was conducted under the U.S. Forest Service permit number APA583, with the support of the National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant, IOS-1311473 and WRT’s National Science Foundation grant, IOS-1021632.


  1. Amdam GV, Rueppell O, Fondrk MK, Page RE, Nelson CM (2009) The nurse’s load: early life exposure to brood-rearing affects behavior and lifespan in honey bees (Apis mellifera). Exp Gerontol 44:467–471PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernadou A, Busch J, Heinze J (2015) Diversity in identity: behavioral flexibility, dominance, and age polyethism in a clonal ant. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol: 1-11Google Scholar
  3. Blanchard GB, Orledge GM, Reynolds SE, Franks NR (2000) Division of labour and seasonality in the ant Leptothorax albipennis: worker corpulence and its influence on behaviour. Animal Behav 59:723–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calderone NW (1995) Temporal division of labor in the honey bee, Apis mellifera: a developmental process or the result of environmental influences? Can J Zool 73:1410–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Couvillon MJ, Jandt JM, Bonds J, Helm BR, Dornhaus A (2011) Percent lipid is associated with body size but not task in the bumble bee Bombus impatiens. J Comp Physiol A 197(11):1097–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dolezal AG, Brent CS, Hölldobler B, Amdam GV (2012) Worker division of labor and endocrine physiology are associated in the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex californicus. The J of Exp Bio 215(3):454–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dukas R (2008) Mortality rates of honey bees in the wild. Insectes Soc 55:252–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Free JB, Spencer-Booth Y (1959) The longevity of worker honey bees (Apis mellifera). Proc R Entomol Soc London 34(A):141–150Google Scholar
  9. Gentry JB (1974) Response to predation by colonies of the Florida harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius. Ecology 55:1328–1338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giraldo YM, Traniello JF (2014) Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68(12):1901–1919PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gordon DM, Hölldobler B (1987) Worker longevity in harvester ants (Pogonomyrmex). Psyche 94:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gordon DM, Chu J, Lillie A, Tissot M, Pinter N (2005) Variation in the transition from inside to outside work in the red harvester ant Pogonomyrmex barbatus. Insect Soc 52:212–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harrison JS, Gentry JB (1981) Foraging pattern, colony distribution, and foraging range of the Florida harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius. Ecology 62:1467–1473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1971) Recruitment trails in the harvester ant Pogonomyrmex badius. Psyche 77:385–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The Ants. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Howard DF, Tschinkel WR (1981) The flow of food in colonies of the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta: a multifactorial study. Physiol Entomol 6:297–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang Z, Robinson GE (1996) Regulation of honey bee division of labor by colony age demography. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:147–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirkwood TBL (1977) Evolution of ageing. Nature 270:301–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kirkwood TBL, Austad SN (2000) Why do we age? Nature 408:233–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kwapich CL, Tschinkel WR (2013) Demography, demand, death, and the seasonal allocation of labor in the Florida harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex badius). Behav Ecol and Sociobiol 67:2011–2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee RD (2003) Rethinking the evolutionary theory of aging: transfers, not births, shape senescence in social species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:9637–9642PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leoncini I, Le Conte Y, Costagliola G, Plettner E, Toth AL, Wang M, Huang Z, Bécard J-M, Crauser D, Slessor KN, Robinson GE (2004) Regulation of behavioral maturation by a primer pheromone produced by adult worker honey bees. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:17559–17564PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lincoln FC (1930) Calculating Waterfowl Abundance on the Basis of Banding Returns. United States Department of Agriculture Circular 118, Washington D.C., pp 1–4Google Scholar
  24. Maurizio A (1950) The influence of pollen feeding and brood rearing on the length of life and physiological conditions of the honeybee. Bee World 31:9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Medawar PB (1952) An unsolved problem in biology. Lewis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Mersch DP, Crespi A, Keller L (2013) Tracking individuals shows spatial fidelity is a key regulator of ant social organization. Science 340:1090–1093PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Münch D, Amdam GV (2010) The curious case of aging plasticity in honey bees. FEBS Lett 584:2496–2503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Münch D, Kreibich CD, Amdam GV (2013) Aging and its modulation in a long-lived worker caste of the honey bee. J Exp Biol 216(9):1638–1649PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oettler J, Johnson RA (2009) The old ladies of the seed harvester ant Pogonomyrmex rugosus: foraging performed by two groups of workers. J Insect Behav 22:217–226PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Oster GF, Wilson EO (1978) Caste and ecology in the social insects. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  31. Porter SD, Jorgensen CD (1981) Foragers of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex owyheei: a disposable caste? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9:247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL
  33. Remolina SC, Hafez DM, Robinson GE, Hughes KA (2007) Senescence in the worker honey bee Apis mellifera. J Insect Physiol 53:1027–1033PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Robinson GE, Page RE, Strambi C, Strambi A (1992) Colony integration in honey bees: mechanisms of behavioral reversion. Ethology 90:336–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robinson GE, Huang ZY (1998) Colony integration in honey bees: genetic, endocrine and social control of division of labor. Apidologie, Springer Verlag 29(1-2):159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rüppell O, Kirkman R (2005) Extraordinary starvation resistance in Temnothorax rugatulus (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) colonies: demography and adaptive behavior. Insectes Soc 52:282–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rüppell O, Bachelier C, Fondrk MK, Page RE Jr (2007) Regulation of life history determines lifespan of worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Exp Gerontol 42:1020–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schmid-Hempel P (1983). Foraging ecology and colony structure of two sympatric species of desert ants, Cataglyphis bicolor and Cataglyphis albicans, Doctoral Dissertation, Universität ZürichGoogle Scholar
  39. Schmid-Hempel P, Schmid-Hempel R (1984) Life duration and turnover of foragers in the ant Cataglyphis bicolor (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insectes Soc 31:345–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seeley TD (1982) Adaptive significance of the age polyethism schedule in honeybee colonies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:287–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Seid MA, Traniello JFA (2006) Age-related repertoire expansion and division of labor in Pheidole dentata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): a new perspective on temporal polyethism and behavioral plasticity in ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:631–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith CR, Tschinkel WR (2006) The sociometry and sociogenesis of reproduction in the Florida harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius. J Insect Sci 6(32):11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith CR (2007) Energy use and allocation in the Florida harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius: are stored seeds a buffer? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:1479–1487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith CR, Schoenick C, Anderson KE, Gadau J, Suarez AV (2007) Potential and realized reproduction by different worker castes in queen-less and queen-right colonies of Pogonomyrmex badius. Insectes Soc 54:260–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith CR, Suarez AV (2010) The trophic ecology of castes in harvester ant colonies. Funct Ecol 24:122–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith CR, Tschinkel WR (2009) Ant fat extraction with a Soxhlet extractor. Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2009(7):5243–5247Google Scholar
  47. Traniello JFA, Rosengaus RB (1997) Ecology, evolution, and division of labour in social insects. Anim Behav 53:209–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tschinkel WR (1988a) Seasonal life history and nest architecture of a winter-active ant, Prenolepis imparis. Insectes Soc 34:143–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tschinkel WR (1988b) Social control of egg-laying rate in queens of the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. Physiol Entomol 13:327–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tschinkel WR, Porter SD (1988) Efficiency of sperm use in queens of the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 81:777–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tschinkel WR (1995) Stimulation of fire ant queen fecundity by a highly specific brood stage. Ann Entomol Soc Am 88(6):876–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tschinkel WR (1998) Sociometry and sociogenesis of colonies of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius: worker characteristics in relation to colony size and season. Insectes Soc 45:385–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tschinkel WR (1999) Sociometry and sociogenesis of colonies of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius: distribution of workers, brood and seeds within the nest in relation to colony size and season. Ecol Entomol 24:222–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tschinkel WR (2006) The fire ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 747–716Google Scholar
  55. Tschinkel WR (2010) The organization of foraging in the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. J Insect Sci 10:26Google Scholar
  56. Tschinkel WR (2011) Back to basics: sociometry and sociogenesis of ant societies (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol News 14:49–54Google Scholar
  57. Tschinkel WR (2015) Biomantling and bioturbation by colonies of the Florida harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius. PlosOne 10(3):e0120407. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tschinkel WR, Rink WJ, Kwapich CL (2015) Sequential subterranean transport of excavated sand and foraged seeds in nests of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius. PLoS ONE 10(10):e0139922. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139922
  59. Wehner R, Harkness RD, Schmid-Hempel P (1983) Foraging strategies in individually searching ants, Cataglyphis bicolor (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). In: Lindauer M (ed) Information Processing in Animals. Fischer, Stuttgart, pp 1–79Google Scholar
  60. Whitford WG, Bryant M (1979) Behavior of a predator and its prey: The horned Lizard (Phrynosoma Cornutum) and harvester ants (Pogonomyrmex spp.). Ecology 60(4):686–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Life SciencesArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological ScienceFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations