Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 12, Issue 10, pp 2135–2146 | Cite as

Structure of ground-foraging ant assemblages in relation to land-use change in the northwestern Mediterranean region

  • Crisanto Gómez
  • David Casellas
  • Jordi Oliveras
  • Josep M. Bas


The abandonment by humans of marginal and less productive zones signifies an important change in land use in North Mediterranean agroecosystems. Human perturbations have led to a highly diversified landscape, with a mosaic made up of patches of land at different stages of succession, from cultivated fields to closed forest. Our aim here is to characterize ant assemblages and their functional groups in response to these land-use changes. This progressive abandonment results in an initial increase in ant richness and abundance, which can reach high levels if the succession proceeds as far as woodland. In terms of the ant functional groups, this land-use change implies: (1) the appearance of Subordinate Camponotini; (2) an increase in Generalized Myrmicinae, Cryptics and Cold-climate specialists in terms of ant species richness, overall abundance and, for Generalized Myrmicinae and Cryptics, an increase in abundance percentage; (3) a decrease in percentage abundance of Opportunists; (4) a progressive decrease in species richness as well as overall and percentage abundance of Hot-climate Specialists throughout the transformation from crops to woodlands; and (5) an initial increase of Dominant Dolichoderinae followed by a decrease in ant species richness, overall abundance and percentage abundance. Using the ant functional group approach for the clearly separate stages of the regeneration process is a promising method for comparing responses of ant communities to human land use.

Ants Functional groups Indicator species Land-use change Mediterranean region 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersen A.N. 1990. The use of ant communities to evaluate change in Australian terrestrial ecosystems: a review and a recipe. Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia 16: 347–357.Google Scholar
  2. Andersen A.N. 1991. Responses of ground-foraging ant communities to three experimental fire regimes in a savanna forest of tropical Australia. Biotropica 23: 575–585.Google Scholar
  3. Andersen A.N. 1993. Ants as indicators of restoration success at a uranium mine in tropical Australia. Restoration Ecology 1: 156–167.Google Scholar
  4. Andersen A.N. 1995. A classification of Australian ant communities, based on functional groups which parallel plant life-forms in relation to stress and disturbance. Journal of Biogeography 22: 15–29.Google Scholar
  5. Andersen A.N. 1997a. Functional groups and patterns of organization in North American ant communities: a comparison with Australia. Journal of Biogeography 24: 433–460.Google Scholar
  6. Andersen A.N. 1997b. Using ants as bioindicators: multiscale issues in ant community ecology. Conservation Ecology (on-line) 1: 8.Google Scholar
  7. Andersen A.N. 1999. My bioindicators or yours? Making the selection. Journal of Insect Conservation 3: 61–64.Google Scholar
  8. Andersen A.N. 2000. A global ecology of rainforest ants: functional groups in relation to environmental stress and disturbance. In: Agosti D., Majer J.D., Alonso L. and Schultz R. (eds), Ants. Standard Methods for Measuring and Monitoring Biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 25–34.Google Scholar
  9. Bestelmeyer B. and Wiens J.A. 1996. The effects of land use on the structure of ground-foraging ant communities in the Argentine Chaco. Ecological Applications 6: 1225–1240.Google Scholar
  10. Briese D.T. and Macauley B.J. 1977. Physical structure of an ant community in semi-arid Australia. Australian Journal of Ecology 2: 107–120.Google Scholar
  11. Brown W.L. 2000. Diversity of ants. In: Agosti D., Majer J.D., Alonso L. and Schultz R. (eds), Ants. Standard Methods for Measuring and Monitoring Biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 45–79.Google Scholar
  12. Buckley R.C. 1982. Ant¶plant interactions: a world review. In: Buckley R.C. (ed.), Ant¶Plant Interactions in Australia. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands, pp. 111–141.Google Scholar
  13. Cerdá X., Retana J. and Cros S. 1997. Thermal disruption of transitive hierarchies in Mediterranean ant communities. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 363–374.Google Scholar
  14. Cros S., Cerdá X. and Retana J. 1997. Spatial and temporal variations in the activity patterns of Mediterranean ant communities. Ecoscience 4: 269–278.Google Scholar
  15. David J.F., Devernay G., Loucougaray G. and Le Floc'lh E. 1999. Belowground biodiversity in a Mediterranean landscape: relationships between saprophagous macroarthropod communities and vegetation structure. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 753–767.Google Scholar
  16. Dufrêne M. and Legendre P. 1997. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs 67: 345–366.Google Scholar
  17. Folgarait P.J. 1998. Ant biodiversity and its relationship to ecosystem functioning: a review. Biodiversity and Conservation 7: 1221–1244.Google Scholar
  18. Hölldobler B. and Wilson E.O. 1990. The Ants. Belknap Press Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  19. Lavorel S., Rochette C. and Lebreton J. 1999. Functional groups for response to disturbance in Mediterranean old fields. Oikos 84: 480–498.Google Scholar
  20. Lepart J. and Debussche M. 1992. Human impact on landscape patterning: Mediterranean examples. In: Di Castri F. and Hansen A.J. (eds), Landscape Boundaries: Consequences for Biotic Diversity and Ecological Flows. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 76–106.Google Scholar
  21. Lobry de Bruyn L.A. 1999. Ants as bioindicators of soil function in rural environments. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 74: 425–441.Google Scholar
  22. Lobry de Bruyn L.A. and Conacher A.J. 1994. The bioturbation activity of ants in agricultural and naturally vegetated habitats in semi-arid environments. Australian Journal of Soil Research 32: 555–570.Google Scholar
  23. Luff M.L. and Woiwod I.P. 1995. Insects as indicators of land-use change: a European perspective, focusing on moths and ground beetles. In: Harrington R. and Stork N.E. (eds), Insects in a Changing Environment. Academic Press, London, pp. 399–422.Google Scholar
  24. Majer J.D. 1985. Recolonisation by ants of rehabilitated mineral sand mines on North Stardbroke Island, Queensland, with particular reference to seed removal. Australian Journal of Ecology 10: 31–48.Google Scholar
  25. McCune B. and Mefford M.J. 1999. PC-ORD. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data, v. 4. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, Oregon.Google Scholar
  26. Niemela J., Kotze J., Ashworth A., Brandmayr P., Desender K., New T. et al. 2000. The search for common anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity: a global network. Journal of Insect Conservation 4: 3–9.Google Scholar
  27. Peck S.L., Mcquaid B. and Campbell C.L. 1998. Using ant species (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) as a biological indicator of agroecosystem condition. Environmental Entomology 27: 1102–1110.Google Scholar
  28. Read J.L. and Andersen A.N. 2000. The value of ants as early warning bioindicators: responses to pulsed grazing at an Australian arid zone locality. Journal of Arid Environments 45: 231–251.Google Scholar
  29. Sala O., Stuart Chapin F. III, Armesto J., Berlow E., Bloomfield J., Dirzo R. et al. 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287: 1770–1774.Google Scholar
  30. Stuart Chapin F. III, Zavaleta E., Evine V., Naylor R., Vitousek P., Reynolds H. et al. 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405: 234–242.Google Scholar
  31. Usher M.B. 1995. A world of change: land-use patterns and arthropod communities. In: Harrington R. and Stork N.E. (eds), Insects in a Changing Environment. Academic Press, London, pp. 371–397.Google Scholar
  32. VerdÚ J.R., Crespo M.B. and Galante E. 2001. Conservation strategy of a nature reserve in Mediterranean ecosystems: the effects of protection from grazing on biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 1707–1721.Google Scholar
  33. Zechmeister H.G. and Moser D. 2001. The influence of agricultural land-use intensity on bryophyte richness. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1609–1625].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Crisanto Gómez
  • David Casellas
  • Jordi Oliveras
  • Josep M. Bas

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations