Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative foraging ecology of north temperate ants: The role of worker size and cooperative foraging in prey selection

Ecologie comparée du fourragement de fourmis de régions tempérées du nord: le rôle de la taille de l'ouvrière et du fourragement coopératif sur la sélection des proies

  • Published:
Insectes Sociaux Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The common North Temperate open-field antsLasius neoniger, Formica schaufussi, Myrmica americana, andMonomorium minimum overlap temporally in foraging activity as well as in the sizes of arthropod prey in their diets. Arthropod prey were taken by both individual workers and cooperative worker groups, and species differed in the proportion of prey in the diet retrieved by each method. Although prey size was significantly correlated with worker size for individually retrieved prey, when cooperative foraging was considered worker size did not serve as a consistent predictor of prey choice. Contrasting social strategies of foraging and the evolution of worker body size differences are discussed.

Resume

L'influence de la taille des ouvrières et du comportement coopératif sur l'activité de récolte a été analysé chez 4 fourmis communes de prairie de la zone tempérée nordaméricaine:Lasius neoniger, Formica schaufussi, Myrmica americana, etMonomorium minimum. Les niches de ces espèces se recouvrent au niveau de la taille de leurs proies (arthropodes) et de leur activité temporelle de récolte. Les arthropodes sont ramenés par des fourrageuses solitaires ou par des groupes d'ouvrières qui coopèrent. Les espèces diffèrent par les proportions de proies ramenées suivant l'une ou l'autre méthode. Dans le cas du transport solitaire, la taille des proies est corrélée à celle des fourrageuses, mais cette corrélation disparaît dans le cas du transport coopératif. Enfin, il est discuté les différentes stratégies sociales de fourragement et l'évolution de la taille des ouvrières.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams E.A., Traniello J.F.A., 1981. — Chemical interference competition byMonomorium minimum.Oecologia, 51, 265–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein R., 1971. —The ecology of ants in the Mojave Desert: their interspecific relationships, resource utilization, and diversity. Ph. D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein R., 1974. — Seasonal food abundance and foraging activity in some desert ants.Am. Nat., 108, 490–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein R., 1975. — Foraging strategies of ants in response to variable food density.Ecology, 56, 213–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breise D.T., Macauley B.J. 1981. — Food collection within an ant community in semi-arid Australia, with special reference to seed harvesters.Austr. J. Ecol., 6, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brian M.V., Hible J., Stradling D.J., 1965. — Ant pattern and density in a southern English heath.J. Anim. Ecol., 34, 544–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll C.R., Janzen D.H., 1972. — Ecology of foraging by ants.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 4, 231–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chew R.M., Chew A.E., 1980. — Body size as a determinant of small-scale distribution of ants in evergreen woodland southeastern Arizona.Ins. Soc., 27, 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chew R.M., DeVita J., 1980. — Foraging characteristics of a desert ant assemblage: functional morphology and species separation.J. Arid Env., 3, 75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culver D., 1974. — Species packing in Caribbean and north temperate ant communities.Ecology, 55, 974–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson D. 1977a. — Species diversity and community organization in desert seed-eating ants.Ecology, 58, 711–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson D., 1977b. — Foraging ecology and community organization in desert seed-eating ants.Ecology, 58, 725–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson D., 1978. — Size variability in the worker caste of a social insect (Veromessor pergandei Mayr) as a function of the competitive environment.Am. Nat., 112, 523–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein E., 1973. —Ecology and biogeography of island ants. Ph. D. thesis. Yale University, New Haven, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B., 1978. — The economics of insect sociality. InBehavioral Ecology (eds. J. Krebs and N. Davies). Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hespenheide H.A., 1973. — Ecological inferences from morphological data.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 4, 213–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hespenheide H.A., 1975. — Prey characteristics and predator niche width. pp. 158–180. In:Ecology and Evolution of Communities (M.L. Cody and J.M. Diamond, eds.) Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B., 1983. — Chemical manipulation, enemy specification and intercolony communication in ant communities. Chapter V. 3. In:Neuroethology and Behav-ioral Physiology (eds. F. Huber and H. Mark), Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B., Stanton R., Markl H., 1978. — Recruitment and food-retrieving behavior inNovomessor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). I. Chemical signals.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 4, 163–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch J.F., Balinsky E.C., Vail S.G., 1980. — Foraging patterns in three sympatric forest ant species,Prenolepis imparis Paratrechina melanderi, andAphaenogaster rudis Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Ecol. Entomol., 5, 353–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur R.A., Levins R., 1967. — The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species.Am. Nat., 101, 377–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oster G., Wilson E.O., 1978. —Caste and Ecology in the Social Insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. xv +352 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissing S.W., 1981. — Foraging specializations of individual seed-harvester ants.Behav. Ecol. Socobiol., 9, 149–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rissing S.W., Pollock G.B., 1984. — Worker size variability and foraging efficiency inVeromessor pergandei (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 15, 121–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoener T.W., 1974. — Resource partitioning in ecological communities.Science, 185, 27–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Talbot M., 1953. — Ants of an old-field community on the Edwin S. George Reserve, Livingston County, Michigan.Contributions from the Laboratory of Vertebrate Biology, Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor,63, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traniello J.F.A., 1980. —Studies on the behavioral ecology of North Temperate ants. Ph. D. thesis Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traniello J.F.A., 1983. — Social organization and foraging success inLasius neoniger Hymenoptera: Formcidae): behavioral and ecological aspects of recruitment communication.Oecologia, 59, 94–100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traniello J.F.A., Levings S.C., 1986. — Intra- and intercolony patterns of nest dispersion in the antLasius neoniger: correlations with territoriality and foraging ecology.Oecology., 69, 413–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehner R., Schmid-Hempel P., Harkness R.D., 1983. — Foraging Strategies in Individually Searching AntsCataglyphis bicolor. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson D.S., 1975. — The adequacy of body size as a niche indicator.Am. Nat. 109, 769–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E.O., 1971. —The Insect Societies. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Traniello, J.F.A. Comparative foraging ecology of north temperate ants: The role of worker size and cooperative foraging in prey selection. Ins. Soc 34, 118–130 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223830

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02223830

Keywords

Navigation