Nest-site limitation and nesting resources of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in urban green spaces

Environmental Entomology

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 600-607

  Friedrich, Russell ^a   Philpott, Stacy M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

Author keywords

Ant nest; Nest site limitation; Urban ecology

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; ANT; GREENSPACE; HABITAT AVAILABILITY; NEST SITE; NESTING; URBAN AREA; URBAN ECOSYSTEM; URBANIZATION;

NORTH AMERICA; OHIO; TOLEDO [OHIO]; UNITED STATES;

FORMICIDAE; HEXAPODA; HYMENOPTERA;

ANIMAL; ANT; ARTICLE; CITY; ECOSYSTEM; NESTING; POPULATION DENSITY;

ANIMALS; ANTS; CITIES; ECOSYSTEM; NESTING BEHAVIOR; POPULATION DENSITY;

EID: 68049114434     PISSN: 0046225X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1603/022.038.0311     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Armbrecht, I., I. Perfecto, and J. Vandermeer. 2004. Enigmatic biodiversity correlations: ant diversity responds to diverse resources. Science 304: 284-286.
2. Armbrecht, I., I. Perfecto, and E. Silverman. 2006. Limitation of nesting resources for ants in Colombian forests and coffee plantations. Ecol. Entomol. 31: 403-410.
3. Banschbach, V. S., N. Levit, and J. M. Herbers. 2007. Nest temperatures and nest preferences of a forest ant species: is seasonal polydomy a thermoregulatory mechanism? Ins. Soc. 44: 109-122.
4. Benfield, F. K., M. D. Raimi, and D. D. Chen. 1999. Once there were greenfields. National Resource Defense Council, New York.
5. Buczkowski, G., and G. W. Bennett. 2006. Dispersed central-place foraging in the polydomous odorous house ant, Tapinoma sessile as revealed by a protein marker. Ins. Soc. 53: 282-290.
6. Byrne, M. M. 1994. Ecology of twig-dwelling ants in a wet lowland tropical forest. Biotropica 26: 61-72.
7. Cerda, X., and J. Retana. 1998. Interference interactions and nest usurpation between two subordinate ant species. Oecologia (Berl.) 113: 577-583.
8. Colwell, R. K. 2005. EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 7.5. (http://purl.oclc.org/ estimates).
9. Coovert, G. A. 2005. The ants of Ohio (Hymenoptera: For-micidae). Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey New Series, Columbus, OH.
10. Davidson, D. W., R. R. Snelling, and J. T. Longino. 1989. Competition among ants for myrmechophytes and the significance of plant trichomes. Biotropica 21: 64-73.
11. Debout, G., B. Schatz, M. Elias, and D. McKey. 2007. Polydomy in ants: what we know, what we think we know, and what remains to be done. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 90: 319-348.
12. Foitzik, S., and J. Heinze. 1998. Nest site limitation and colony takeover in the ant Leptothorax nylanderi. Behav. Ecol. 9: 367-375.
13. Fonseca, C. R. 1999. Amazonian ant-plant interactions and the nesting space limitation hypothesis. J. Trop. Ecol. 15: 807-825.
14. Gaston, K. J., R. M. Smith, K. Thompson, and P. H. Warren. 2005. Urban domestic gardens (II): experimental tests of methods for increasing biodiversity. Biodivers. Conserv. 14: 395-413.
15. Hasegawa, E. 1993. Nest defense and early production of the major workers in the dimorphic ant Colobopsis nipponicus (Wheeler) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 33: 73-77.
16. Herbers, J. M. 1986. Nest site limitation and facultative polygyny in the ant Leptothorax longispinosus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 19: 115-122.
17. HöIIdobler, B. 1976. Recruitment behavior, home range orientation and territoriality in harvester ants, Pogonomtjrmex. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1: 3-44.
18. HöIIdobler, B., and E. O. Wilson. 1990. The ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. Kaspari, M. 1996. Testing resource-based models of patch-iness in four Neotropical litter ant assemblages. Oikos 76: 443-454.
20. Mclntyre, N. E., J. Rango, W. F. Fagan, and S. H. Faeth. 2001. Ground arthropod community structure in a heterogeneous urban environment. Landscape Urban Plan. 52: 257-274.
21. McKinney, M. L. 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 51: 883-890.
22. Pacheco, R., and H. L. Vasconcelos. 2007. Invertebrate conservation in urban areas: ants in the Brazilian Cerrado. Landscape Urban Plan. 81: 193-199.
23. Philpott, S. M., and P. F. Foster. 2005. Nest-site limitation in coffee agroecosystems: artificial nests promote maintenance of arboreal ant diversity. Ecol. Applic. 15: 1478-1485.
24. Pratt, S., and N. Pierce. 2001. The cavity dwelling ant Leptothorax curvispinosus uses nest geometry to discriminate between potential homes. Anim. Behav. 62: 281-287.
25. Smith, D. R. 1979. SuperfamilyFormicoidea, pp. 1323-1467. In K. V. Krombein, P. D. Hurd, Jr., D. R. Smith, and B. D. Burks (eds.), Catalog of Hymenoptera in America North of Mexico. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
26. Toledo Grows. 2007. Toledo botanical garden. (http://www. toledogarden.org/content/information/).
27. Toledo Metroparks. 2008. Metroparks Toledo area, (htrp://www.metroparkstoledo.com/metroparks/development/).
28. U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Population, housing units, area, and density: 2000. (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/GCTTable?-bm=y&-geo-id= 04000US39&--box-head-nbr=GCT-PHl&-ds-name=DEC-2000-SFl-U&-format= ST-7).
29. Vasconcelos, H. 1993. Ant colonization of Maieta guianensis seedlings, an Amazon ant-plant. Oecologia (Berl.) 95: 439-443.
30. Wesson, L. G., Jr., and R. G. Wesson. 1940. A collection of ants from southcentral Ohio. Am. Midland Nat. 24: 89-103.
31. Yamaguchi, T. 1992. Interspecific interference for nest sites between Leptothorax congruus and Monomorium intrudens. Ins. Soc. 39: 117-127.