Intraspecific competition influences the symmetry and intensity of aggression in the Argentine ant

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 472-481

  Thomas, Melissa L ^a   Tsutsui, Neil D ^b   Holway, David A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggression symmetry; Intraspecific competition; Invasive species; Nest mate recognition; Unicoloniality

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; ANT; INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION; RECOGNITION; SOCIAL INSECT; SYMMETRY;

ARGENTINA (FISH); FORMICIDAE; HEXAPODA; INSECTA; LINEPITHEMA HUMILE;

EID: 14644435172     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/ari014     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Breed MD, Bennett B, 1987. Kin recognition in highly eusocial insects. In: Kin recognition in animals (Fletcher DJC, Michener CD, eds). New York: John Wiley; 243-285.
2. Buczkowski G, Vargo EL, Silverman J, 2004. The diminutive supercolony: the Argentine ants of the southeastern United States. Mol Ecol 13:2235-2242.
3. Buss LW, 1987. The evolution of individuality. New York: Columbia University Press.
4. Carlin NF, Hölldobler B, 1986. The kin recognition system of carpenter ants (Camponotus spp.); I. Hierarchical cues in small colonies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:123-134.
5. Cerdá X, Retana J, Cros S, 1998. Prey size reverses the outcome of interference interactions of scavenger ants. Oikos 82:99-110.
6. Dunn R, Messier S, 1999. Evidence for the opposite of the dear-enemy phenomenon in termites. J Insect Behav 9:461-464.
7. Fellers JH, 1987. Interference and exploitation in a guild of woodland ants. Ecology 68:1466-1478.
8. Girand T, Pedersen JS, Keller L, 2002. Evolution of supercolonies: the Argentine ants of southern Europe. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:6075-6079.
9. Gordon DM, 1989. Ants distinguish neighbours from strangers. Oecologia 81:198-200.
10. Grosberg RK, 1988. The evolution of allorecognition specificity in clonal invertebrates. Q Rev Biol 63:377-412.
11. Hölldobler B, 1976. Recruitment behavior, home range orientation and territoriality in harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1:3-44.
12. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO, 1990. The ants. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press.
13. Holway DA, 1999. Competitive mechanisms underlying the displacement of native ants by the invasive Argentine ant. Ecology 80:238-251.
14. Holway DA, Lach L, Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND, Case TJ, 2002. The causes and consequences of ant invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:181-233.
15. Holway DA, Suarez AV, 2004. Colony structure variation and interspecific competitive ability in the invasive Argentine ant. Oecologia 138:216-222.
16. Holway DA, Suarez AV, Case TJ, 1998. Loss of intraspecific aggression in the success of a widespread invasive social insect. Science 282:949-952.
17. Horton JR, 1918. The Argentine ant in relation to citrus groves. U S Dept Agric Bull 647:1-73.
18. Janeway CA, Travers P, 1997. Immunobiology: the immune system in health and disease, 3rd ed. London: Current Biology Ltd.
19. Jutsum AR, Saunders TS, Cherrett JM, 1979. Intraspecific aggression in the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex octospinosus. Anim Behav 27:839-844.
20. Langen TA, Tripet F, Nonacs P, 2000. The red and the black: habituation and the dear-enemy phenomenon in two desert Pheidole ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 48:285-292.
21. Le Breton J, Delabie JHC, Chazeau J, Dejean A, Jourdan H, 2004. Experimental evidence of large-scale unicoloniality in the tramp ant Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger). J Insect Behav 17:263-271.
22. Markin GP, 1968. Nest relationship of the Argentine ant, Iridomyrmex humilis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 41:511-516.
23. Maynard-Smith J, Szathmáry E, 1995. The major transitions in evolution. New York: WH Freeman & Co.
24. Morrison LW, 1999. Indirect effects of phorid fly parasitoids on the mechanisms of interspecific competition among ants. Oecologia 121:113-122.
25. Newell W, Barber TC, 1913. The Argentine ant. Washington DC: USDA Bur Entomol Bull 122:1-98.
26. Nonacs P, 1993. The effects of polygyny and colony life history on optimal sex investment. Queen number and sociality in insects. (Keller L, ed). New York: Oxford University Press; 110-131.
27. Passera L, 1994. Characteristics of tramp species. In: Exotic ants: biology, impact and control of introduced species (Williams DF, ed). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press; 23-43.
28. Queller DC, 2000. Relatedness and the fraternal major transitions. Proc R Soc Lond B 355:1647-1655.
29. Queller DC, Strassmann JE, 2002. The many selves of social insects. Science 296:311-313.
30. Ross K, Keller L, 1995. Ecology and evolution of social organization: insights from fire ants and other highly eusocial insects. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 26:631-656.
31. Ross KG, Vargo EL, Keller L, 1996. Social evolution in a new environment: the case of introduced fire ants. Proc Natl Acad Sci 93:3021-3025.
32. Roulston TH, Buczkowski G, Silverman J, 2003. Nestmate discrimination in ants: effect of bioassay on aggressive behavior. Insectes Soc 50:151-159.
33. Sanada-Morimura S, Minai M, Yokoyama M, Hirota T, Satoh T, Obara Y, 2003. Encounter-induced hostility to neighbors in the ant Pristomyrmex pungens. Behav Ecol 14:713-718.
34. Sherman PW, Reeve HK, Pfennig DW, 1997. Recognition systems. In: Behavioral ecology: an evolutionary approach, 4th ed (Krebs JR, Davies NB, eds). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 69-96.
35. Suarez AV, Holway DA, Liang D, Tsutsui ND, Case TJ, 2002. Spatiotemporal patterns of intraspecific aggression in the invasive Argentine ant. Anim Behav 64:697-708.
36. Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND, Holway DA, Case TJ, 1999. Behavioral and genetic differentiation between native and introduced populations of the Argentine ant. Biol Invasion 1:43-53.
37. Thomas ML, Parry LJ, Allen RA, Elgar MA, 1999. Geographic affinity, cuticular hydrocarbons and colony recognition in the Australian meat ant Iridomyrmex purpureus. Naturwissenschaften 86:87-92.
38. Tsutsui ND, Case TJ, 2001. Population genetics and colony structure of the Argentine ant (Linepithema humile) in its native and introduced ranges. Evolution 55:976-985.
39. Tsutsui ND, Suarez AV, 2003. The colony structure and population biology of invasive ants. Conserv Biol 17:48-58.
40. Tsutsui ND, Suarez AV, Grosberg RK, 2003. Genetic diversity, asymmetrical aggression, and recognition in a widespread invasive species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:1078-1083.
41. Tsutsui ND, Suarez AV, Holway DA, Case TJ, 2000. Reduced genetic variation and the success of an invasive species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97:5948-5953.
42. Way MJ, Cammell ME, Paiva MR, Collingwood CA, 1997. Distribution and dynamics of the Argentine ant Linepithema (Iridomyrmex) humile (Mayr) in relation to vegetation, soil conditions, topography and native competitor ants in Portugal. Insectes Soc 44:415-433.
43. Wilkinson L, 1998. SYSTAT 9.0 for Windows. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
44. Ydenberg RC, Giraldeau LA, Falls JB, 1988. Neighbours, strangers, and the asymmetrical war of attrition. Anim Behav 36:343-347.