Advertisement

Soziale Insekten

  • Alfred Buschinger

Zusammenfassung

Sozialverhalten kann prinzipiell alle auf Artgenossen, Sexualpartner, Nachkommen, Nahrungsund Revierkonkurrenten etc. bezogenen Verhaltensweisen umfassen. In diesem Kapitel soll jedoch überwiegend von hochsozialen, eusozialen Lebensformen die Rede sein, von den Taxa, die gemeinhin als Soziale oder Staatenbildende Insekten bekannt sind, also Termiten, Ameisen, sowie teilweise Bienen und Wespen.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Agosti, D., J.D. Majer, L.E. Alonso, T.R. Schultz, eds., (2000): Ants: Standard Methods for Measuring and Monitoring Biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Bolton, B. (1994): Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolton, B. (1995): A New General Catalogue of the Ants of the World. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  4. Bourke, A.F., N.R. Franks (1995): Social Evolution in Ants. Princeton University Press, Princeton N. J.Google Scholar
  5. Buschinger, A., Klein, R.W., Maschwitz, U. (1994): Colony structure of a bamboo-dwelling Tetraponera sp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Pseudomyrmecinae) from Malaysia. Ins. Soc. 41: 29–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dawkins, R. (1978): Das egoistische Gen. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Dawkins, R. (1979): Twelve misunderstandings of kin selection. Z.Tierpsychol. 51: 184–200Google Scholar
  8. Engels, W. (ed.) (1990): Social insects. An evolutionary approach to castes and reproduction. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans, H.E., West Eberhard, M.J. (1970): The wasps. The University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  10. Fiedler, K. (1991): Systematic, evolutionary, and ecological implications of myrmecophily within the Lycaenidae (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Bonner Zool. Monographien 31, 210 p.Google Scholar
  11. Frisch, K.v. (1974): Tiere als Baumeister. Ullstein, Frankfurt, Berlin, WienGoogle Scholar
  12. Gauld, I., Bolton, B. (1988): The Hymenoptera. Oxford University Press, British Museum (Nat. Hist.)Google Scholar
  13. Hachtel, W. (1999): Bakterien schützen die Pilzgärten von Blattschneiderameisen. Spektrum der Wissenschaft Sept. 1999, 14–17Google Scholar
  14. Hamilton, W.D. (1964): Genetical evolution of social behavior. I+II, J. Theoret. Biol. 7: 1–16; 17–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hermann, H.R. (ed.) (1979–1982): Social insects. Vol. I–IV. Academic Press, New York etc.Google Scholar
  16. Hermann, H.R. (ed.) (1984): Defensive mechanisms in social insects. Praeger Publ., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Hölldobler, B., Wilson, E.O. (1990): The ants. Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  18. Hölldobler, B., Wilson, E.O. (1994): Journey to the ants. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  19. Kemper, H., Döhring, E. (1967): Die sozialen Faltenwespen Mitteleuropas. Paul Parey, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  20. Kloft, W., Gruschwitz, M. (1988): Ökologie der Tiere. Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  21. Krishna, K., Weesner, F.M. (eds.) (1969, 1970): Biology of termites, Vol. I+II. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Lin, N., Michener, C.D. (1972): Evolution of sociality in insects. Quart. Rev. Biol. 47: 131–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maidl, F. (1934): Die Lebensgewohnheiten und Instinkte der staatenbildenden Insekten. F. Wagner, WienGoogle Scholar
  24. Markl, H. (1967): Die Verständigung durch Stridulationssignale bei Blattschneiderameisen. I. Die biologische Bedeutung der Stridulation. Z. vergl. Physiol. 57: 299–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maschwitz, U., Dorow, W. H.O., Buschinger, A., Kalytta, G. (2000): Social parasitism involving ants of different subfamilies: Polyrhachis lama (Formicinae) an obligatory inquiline of Diacamma sp. (Ponerinae) in Java. Insectes soc. 47, 27–35, 2000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Michener, C.D. (1974): The social behavior of the bees: A comparative study. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  27. Michener, C.D. (2000): The Bees of the World. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  28. Michener, C.D., Brothers, D.J. (1974): Were workers of eusocial Hymenoptera initially altruistic or oppressed? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71: 671–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moritz, R.F.A., Southwick, E.E. (1992): Bees as super-organisms. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  30. Nieh, J.C. (1998): The food recruitment dance of a stingless bee, Melipona panamica. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 43, 133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ross, K.G., Matthews, R.W. (1991): The social biology of wasps. Cornell Univ. Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmidt, G.H. (ed.) (1974): Sozialpolymorphismus bei Insekten. Wiss. Verlagsges., StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  33. Trivers, R. (1985): Social evolution. The Benjamin/Cummings Publ. Comp., Menlo Park, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  34. Wheeler, W.M. (1965): Ants, their structure, development, and behavior. Columbia Univ. Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Wilson, E.O. (1971): The insect societies. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilson, E.O. (1975): Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson, E.O. (1984): The relation between caste ratios and division of labor in the ant genus Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 16: 89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wilson, E.O. (1990): Success and dominance in ecosystems: The case of the social insects. Oldendorf/LuheGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfred Buschinger
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für ZoologieTH DarmstadtDarmstadt

Personalised recommendations