Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 27, Issue 10, pp 2029–2040

Chemical Recognition of Partner Plant Species by Foundress Ant Queens in Macaranga–Crematogaster Myrmecophytism

  • Yoko Inui
  • Takao Itioka
  • Kaori Murase
  • Ryohei Yamaoka
  • Takao Itino


The partnership in the CrematogasterMacaranga ant–plant interaction is highly species-specific. Because a mutualistic relationship on a Macaranga plant starts with colonization by a foundress queen of a partner Crematogaster species, we hypothesized that the foundress queens select their partner plant species by chemical recognition. We tested this hypothesis with four sympatric Macaranga species and their Crematogaster plant-ant species. We demonstrated that foundress Crematogaster queens can recognize their partner Macaranga species by contact with the surface of the seedlings, that they can recognize compounds from the stem surface of seedlings of their partner plant species, and that the gas chromatographic profiles are characteristic of the plant species. These findings support the hypothesis that foundress queens of the Crematogaster plant-ant species select their partner Macaranga species by recognizing nonvolatile chemical characteristics of the stem surfaces of seedlings.

partner-plant selection partner-plant recognition ant–plant interactions mutualism chemical recognition myrmecophyte ant dispersal insect–plant coevolution 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. BONAVITA, C. A., CLÈMENT, J. L., and LANGE, C. 1987. Nestmate recognition: The role of cuticular hydrocarbons in ant Camponotus vagus Scop. J. Entomol. Sci. 22:1-10.Google Scholar
  2. BUCKLEY, R. C. 1982. Ant-Plant Interactions in Australia. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  3. DAVIDSON, D. W. and MCKEY, D. 1993. The evolutionary ecology of symbiotic ant-plant relationships. J. Hym. Res. 2:13-83.Google Scholar
  4. DAVIES, S. J., PALMIOTTO, P. A., ASHTON, P. S., LEE, H. S., and LAFRANKIE, J. V. 1998. Comparative ecology of 11 sympatric species of Macaranga in Borneo:Tree distribution in relation to horizontal and vertical resource heterogeneity. J. Ecol. 86:662-673.Google Scholar
  5. FIALA, B. and MASCHWITZ, U. 1990. Studies on the South East Asian ant-plant association C. borneeensis-Macaranga: Adaptations of the ant-partner. Insectes Soc. 37:212-231.Google Scholar
  6. FIALA, B. and MASCHWITZ, U. 1991. Extrafloral nectaries in genus Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae) in Malaysia: Comparative studies of their possible significance as predispositions for myrmecophytism. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 44:287-305.Google Scholar
  7. FIALA, B. and MASCHWITZ, U. 1992a. Domatia as most important adaptations in the evolution of myrmecophytes in the paleotropical tree genus Macaranga (Euphrobiaceae). Plant Syst. Evol. 180:53-64.Google Scholar
  8. FIALA, B. and MASCHWITZ, U. 1992b. Food bodies and their significance for obligate ant-association in the tree genus Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 110:61-75.Google Scholar
  9. FIALA, B., MASCHWITZ, U., THO, Y. P., and HELBIG, A. J. 1989. Studies of a South East Asian ant-plant association: Protection of Macaranga trees by Crematogaster borneensis. Oecologia 79:463-470.Google Scholar
  10. FIALA, B., JACOB, A., MASCHWITZ, U., and LINSENMAIR, E. 1999. Diversity, evolutionary specialization and geographic distribution of a mutualistic ant-plant complex: Macaranga and Crematogaster in South East Asia. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 66:305-331.Google Scholar
  11. HEIL, M., FIALA, B., LINSENMAIR, K. E., ZOTZ, G., MENKE, P., and MASCHWITZ, U. 1997. Food body production in Macaranga triloba (Euphorbiaceae): A plant investment in antiherbivore defence via symbiotic ant partners. J. Ecol. 85:847-861.Google Scholar
  12. HöLLDOBLER, B. and CARLIN, N. F. 1987. Anatomy and specificity in the chemical communication signals of social insects. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 161:567-581.Google Scholar
  13. HUXLEY, C. R. and CUTLER, D. F. 1991. Ant-Plant Interactions, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. INOUE, T. and HAMID, A. A. 1994. Plant Reproductive System and Animal Seasonal Dynamics (Long-Term Study of Dipterocarp Forests in Sarawak). Center for Ecological Research,Kyoto University, Otsu, Japan.Google Scholar
  15. ITIOKA, T., NOMURA, M., INUI, Y., ITINO, T., and INOUE, T. 2000. Difference in intensity of ant defense among three species of Macaranga myrmecophytes in a Southeast Asian dipterocarp forest. Biotropica 32:318-326.Google Scholar
  16. JANZEN, D. H. 1966. Coevolution of mutualism between ants and acacias in Central America. Evolution 20:249-275.Google Scholar
  17. JESSEN, K. and MASCHWITZ, U. 1986. Orientation and recruitment behavior in the ponerine ant Pachycondyla tesserinoda (Emery): Laying of individual-specific trails during tandem running. Behav. Ecol. Sciobiol. 19:151-155.Google Scholar
  18. KATO, M., INOUE, T., HAMID, A. A., NAGAMASU, T., MERDEK, M. B., NONA, A. R., ITINO, T., YAMANE, S. K., and YUMOTO, T. 1995. Seasonality and vertical structure of light-attracted insect communities in a dipterocarp forest in Sarawak. Res. Pop. Ecol. 37:59-79.Google Scholar
  19. MCKEY, D. and DAVIDSON, D. W. 1993. Ant-plant symbioses in Africa and the neotropics: History, biogeography and diversity, pp. 568-606, in P. Goldblatt (ed.). Biological Relationships between Africa and South America. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  20. NAGAMASU, H. and MOMOSE, K. 1997. Flora of Lambir Hills National Park, Sarawak, with special reference to the Canopy Biology Plot, pp. 20-67, in T. Inoue and A. A. Hamid (eds.). General Flowering of Tropical Rainforests in Sarawak. Center for Ecological Research, Kyoto University, Otsu, Japan.Google Scholar
  21. NOMURA, M., ITIOKA, T., and ITINO, T. 2000. Variations in abiotic defense within myrmecophytic and non-myrmecophytic species of Macaranga in a Bornean dipterocarp forest. Ecol. Res. 15:1-11.Google Scholar
  22. RICKSON, F. R. 1980. Developmental anatomy and ultrastructure of the ant-food bodies of Macaranga triloba and M. hypoleuca. Am. J. Bot. 67:285-292.Google Scholar
  23. TRANIELLO, J. F. A. 1980. Colony specificity in the trail pheromone of an ant. Naturwissenschaften 67:361-362.Google Scholar
  24. WATSON, H. 1985. Lambir Hills National Park: Resource Inventory with Management Recommendations. National Parks and Wildlife Office, Forest Department, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  25. WHITMORE, T. C. 1969. First thoughts on species evolution in Malayan Macaranga (Studies in Macaranga III). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 1:223-231.Google Scholar
  26. YU, D. W. and DAVIDSON, D. W. 1997. Experimental studies of species-specificity in Cecropia-ant relationships. Ecol. Monogr. 67:273-294.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yoko Inui
    • 1
  • Takao Itioka
    • 2
  • Kaori Murase
    • 2
  • Ryohei Yamaoka
    • 3
  • Takao Itino
    • 4
  1. 1.Center for Ecological ResearchKyoto UniversityÔtsuJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Bioagricultural SciencesNagoya UniversityChikusa-ku, NagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Applied BiologyKyoto Institute of TechnologySakyô-ku, KyotoJapan
  4. 4.Faculty of AgricultureKagawa UniversityMiki-chô, Kita-gun, KagawaJapan

Personalised recommendations