Skip to main content
Log in

Monitoring Changes in Stressed Ecosystems Using Spatial Patterns of Ant Communities

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examined the feasibility of using changes in spatial patterns of ants-distribution on experimental plots as an indicator of response to environmental stress. We produced contour maps based on relative abundances of the three most common genera of ants based on pit-fall trap captures. Relative abundance of Conomyrma spp. decreased, relative abundance of Solenopsis spp. increased, and relative abundance of Pogonomyrmex spp. remained relatively unchanged. The contour maps showed long-term changes in foraging activity and/or distribution of colonies of ants in response to grazing by domestic livestock. This study demonstrated that analysis of spatial patterns of ant activity derived from relative abundances of ants in pit-fall traps provided interpretable data for developing an indicator of exposure to ecosystem stress.

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

  • Burbidge, A. H., K. Leicester, S. McDavitt, and I. D. Majer: 1992. Ants as indicators of disturbance of Yanchep National Park, Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society. West Australia. 75, 89–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson S. R., W. G. Whitford (1991) Ants mound influence on vegetation and soils in a semiarid mountain ecosystem. American Midland Naturalist 126:125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenslade, P. J. M. and P. Greenslade.: 1971, The use of baits and preservatives in pitfall traps. Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 10, 253–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrick, J. E., W. G. Whitford, A. G. deSoyza, J. Van Zee: 1995. Soil and vegetation indicators for assessment of rangeland condition (pp. 157–166) In: Celedonio AB, ed. North American workshop on Monitoring of Ecological Assessment of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystem. US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ft. Collins, Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holldobler, B. and E. O. Wilson: 1990, The Ants, Bellnap Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfecto, I. and R. Snelling.: 1995, Biodiversity and the transformation of a tropical agroecosystem: ants in coffee plantation. Ecological Application 5, 1084–1097.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, D. S., I. Perfecto, and B. Rathcke.: 1994, The effects of management systems on ground-foraging ant diversity in Costa Rica. Ecological Application 4, 423–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitford, W. G.: 1978, Foraging in seed-harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex spp Ecology 59:185–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitford, W. G. and R. DiMacro (1995). Variability in soils and vegetation associated with harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex rugosus) nests on a Chihuahuan Desert watershed. Biological and Fertility of Soils 20:169–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitford W. G. and G. S. Forbes, G. I. Kerley (1994). Diversity, spatial variability and functional roles of invertebrates in desert grassland ecosystems. Pp. 152–195. In McClaran MP, Van Devender TR (eds.) The Desert Grassland. University of Arizona Press, Tueson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitford, W. G., J. Van Zee, M. S. Nash, W. E. Smith, and J. E. Herrick.: In press, Ants as indicators of exposure to environmental stressors. Environmental Monitoring Assessment.

  • Whitford, W. G. and G. Ettershank.: 1975, Factors affecting foraging activity in Chihuahuan Desert harvester ants. Environmental Entomology 4: 689–696.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nash, M.S., Whitford, W.G., Van Zee, J. et al. Monitoring Changes in Stressed Ecosystems Using Spatial Patterns of Ant Communities. Environ Monit Assess 51, 201–210 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005939303426

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005939303426

Keywords

Navigation