Changes in the use of extrafloral nectaries of Vicia faba (Leguminosae) and honeydew of aphids by ants with increasing aphid density

Annals of the Entomological Society of America

Volumn 96, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 579-584

  Katayama, Noboru ^a   Suzuki, Nobuhiko ^a  

^a SAGA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Aphis craccivora; Extrafloral nectaries; Honeydew; Lasius niger; Tetramorium caespitum

Indexed keywords

ANT; APHID; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; HONEYDEW; HOST-SYMBIONT INTERACTION; NECTARY;

APHIDIDAE; APHIS CRACCIVORA; FABACEAE; FORMICIDAE; HEMIPTERA; HOMOPTERA; HYMENOPTERA; LASIUS NIGER; TETRAMORIUM CAESPITUM; VICIA FABA;

EID: 0242381195     PISSN: 00138746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1603/0013-8746(2003)096[0579:CITUOE]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Apple, J. L. and D. L. Feener Jr. 2001. Ant visitation of extrafloral nectaries of Passiflora: the effects of nectary attributes and ant behavior on patterns in facultative ant-plant mutualisms. Oecologia (Berl.) 127: 409-416.
2. Beattie, A. J. 1985. The evolutionary ecology of ant-plant mutualisms. Cambridge University Press, New York.
3. Becerra. J. X., and D. L. Venable. 1989. Extrafloral nectaries: a defense against ant-Homoptera mutualisms? Oikos. 55: 276-280.
4. Bentley, B. L. 1977a. The protective function of ants visiting the extrafloral nectaries of Bixa orellana (Bixaceae). J. Ecol. 65: 27-38.
5. Bentley, B. L. 1977b. Extrafloral nectaries and protection by pugnacious bodyguards. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 8: 407-427.
6. Blüthgen, N., M. Verhaagh, W. Goitía, K. Jaffé, W. Morawetz, and W. Barthlott. 2000. How plants shape the ant community in the Amazonian rainforest canopy: the key role of extrafloral nectaries and homopteran honeydew. Oecologia (Berl.). 125: 229-240.
7. Bonser, R., P. J. Wright, S. Bament, and U. O. Chukwu. 1998. Optimal patch use by foraging workers of Lasius fuliginosus, L. niger and Myrmica ruginodis. Ecol. Entomol. 23: 15-21.
8. Bristow, C. M. 1991. Whv are so few aphids ant tended?, pp. 104-119. In C. R. Huxley and D. F. Cutler (eds.), Antplant interaction. Oxford University Press, New York.
9. Buckley, R., and P. Gullan. 1991. More aggressive ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) provide better protection for soft scales and mealy bugs (Homoptera: Coccidae, Pseudococcidae). Biotropica. 23: 282-286.
10. Devigne, C. and C. Detrain. 2002. Collective exploration and area marking in the ant Lasius niger. Insectes Soc. 49: 357-362.
11. Douglas, A. E. 1993. The nutritional quality of phloem sap utilized by natural aphid populations. Ecol. Entomol. 18: 31-38.
12. Engel, V., M. K. Fischer, F. L. Wächers, and W. Völkl. 2001. Interactions between extrafloral nectaries, aphids and ants: are there competition effects between plant and homopteran sugar sources? Oecologia (Berl.). 129: 577-584.
13. Fiala, B. 1990. Extrafloral nectaries versus ant-Homoptera mutualisms; a comment on Becerra and Venable. Oikos. 59: 281-282.
14. Fischer, M. K., K. H. Hoffmann, and W. Völkl. 2001. Competition for mutualists in an ant-homopteran interaction mediated by hierarchies of ant attendance. Oikos. 92: 531-541.
15. Fischer, M. K., W. Völkl, R. Schopf, and K. H. Hoffmann. 2002. Age-specific patterns in honeydew production and honeydew composition in the aphid Metopeurum fuscoviride: implications for ant attendance. J. Insect. Physiol. 48: 319-326.
16. Floate, K. D., and T. G. Whitham. 1994. Aphid-ant interaction reduces chrysomelid herbivory in a cottonwood hybrid zone. Oecologia (Berl.). 97: 215-221.
17. Gibernau, M., and A. Dejean. 2001. Ant protection of a Heteropteran trophobiont against a parasitoid wasp. Oecologia (Berl.). 126: 53-57.
18. Helden, M. V., W. F. Tjallingii, and T.A.V. Beek. 1994. Phloem sap collection from lettuce (Latuca sativa L.): chemical comparison among collection methods. J. Chem. Ecol. 20: 3191-3206.
19. Horvitz, C. C., and D. W. Schemske. 1990. Spatiotemporal variation in insect mutualists of a neotropical herb. Ecology. 71: 1085-1097.
20. Inouye, D. W., and R. S. Inouye. 1980. The amino acids of extrafloral nectar from Helianthella quinquenervis (Asteraceae). Am. J. Bot. 67: 1394-1396.
21. Itioka, T., and T. Inoue. 1999. The alternation of mutualistic ant species affects the population growth of their trophobiont mealybug. Ecography. 22: 169-177.
22. Katayama, N., and N. Suzuki. 2002. Cost and benefit of ant attendance for Aphis craccivora (Hemiptera: Aphididae) with reference to aphid colony size. Can. Entomol. 134: 241-249.
23. Kawano, S., H. Azuma, M. Ito, and K. Suzuki. 1999. Extrafloral nectaries and chemical signals of Fallopia japonica and Fallopia sachalinensis (Polygonaceae), and their roles as defense systems against insect herbivory. Plant Species Biol. 14: 167-178.
24. Keeler, K. H. 1977. The extrafloral nectaries of Ipomoea carnea (Convolvulaceae). Am. J. Bot. 64: 1182-1188.
25. Keeler, K. H. 1989. Ant-plant interactions, pp. 207-242. In Abrahamson, W. G. (eds.), Plant-animal interactions. McGraw-Hill, New York.
26. Koptur, S. 1979. Facultative mutualism between weedy vetches bearing extrafloral nectaries and weedy ants in California. Am. J. Bot. 66: 1016-1020.
27. Koptur, S. 1992. Extrafloral nectary-mediate interactions between insects and plants. pp. 81-129. In E. Bernays (eds.), Insect-plant interaction, vol. IV. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
28. Rashbrook, V. K., S. G. Compton, and J. H. Lawton. 1992. Ant-herbivore interactions: reasons for the absence of benefits to a fern with foliar nectaries. Ecology. 73: 2167-2174.
29. Ruffener, G., and W. D. Clark. 1986. Extrafloral nectar of Ferocactus acanthodes (Cactaceae): composition and its importance to ants. Am. J. Bot. 73: 185-189.
30. Sakata, H. 1994. How an ant decides to prey on or to attend aphids. Res. Popul. Ecol. 36: 45-51.
31. Sakata, H. 1995. Density-dependent predation of the ant Lasius niger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) on two attended aphids Lachnus tropicalis and Myzocallis kuricola (Homoptera: Aphididae). Res. Popul. Ecol. 37: 159-164.
32. Sakata, H. 1999. Indirect interactions between two aphid species in relation to ant attendance. Ecol. Res. 14: 329-340.
33. Sakata, H., and Y. Hashimoto. 2000. Should aphids attract or repel ants? Effect of rival aphids and extrafloral nectaries on ant-aphid interactions. Popul. Ecol. 42: 171-178.
34. Smith, L. L., J. Lanza, and G. C. Smith. 1990. Amino acid concentrations in extrafloral nectar of Impatiens sultani increase after simulated herbivory. Ecology. 71: 107-115.
35. Swift, S., J. Bryant, and J. Lanza. 1994. Simulated herbivory on Passiflora incarnata causes increased ant attendance. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 75: 225.
36. Tilman, D. 1978. Cherries, ants and tent caterpillars: timing of nectar production in relation to susceptibility of caterpillars to ant predation. Ecology. 59: 686-692.
37. Völkl, W., J. Woodring, M. Fischer, M. W. Lorenz, and K. H. Hoffmann. 1999. Ant-aphid mutualisms: the impact of honeydew production and honeydew sugar composition on ant preferences. Oecologia (Berl.). 118: 483-491.
38. Way, M. J. 1963. Mutualism between ants and honeydew-producing Homoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 8: 307-344.
39. Yao, I., and S. Akimoto. 2001. Ant attendance changes the sugar composition of the honeydew of the drepanosiphid aphid Tuberculatus quercicola. Oecologia (Berl.). 128: 36-43.