Blending of heritable recognition cues among ant nestmates creates distinct colony gestalt odours but prevents within-colony nepotism

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 23, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1498-1508

  Van Zweden, J S ^a   Brask, J B ^a   Christensen, J H ^b   Boomsma, J J ^a   Linksvayer, T A ^a   d'Ettorre, P ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS 13   (France)

Author keywords

Cuticular hydrocarbons; Heritability; Kin recognition; Multivariate statistics; Social insects

Indexed keywords

ALKANE; ANT; BIOASSAY; COLONY; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EUSOCIALITY; HERITABILITY; HYDROCARBON; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEPOTISM; NESTMATE RECOGNITION; ODOR; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; WORKER CASTE;

FORMICA RUFIBARBIS; HEXAPODA;

ALKANE;

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ANT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CHEMISTRY; GERMANY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NESTING; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; ODOR; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION;

AGGRESSION; ALKANES; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ANIMALS; ANTS; CUES; GERMANY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NESTING BEHAVIOR; ODORS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 77954160731     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02020.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Akino T, Yamamura K, Wakamura S, Yamaoka R. Direct behavioral evidence for hydrocarbons as nestmate recognition cues in Formica japonica (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2004, 39:381-387.
2. Boomsma JJ, Franks NR. Social insects: from selfish genes to self organisation and beyond. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2006, 21:303-308.
3. Boomsma JJ, Nielsen J, Sundström L, Oldham NJ, Tentschert J, Petersen HC, Morgan ED. Informational constraints on optimal sex allocation in ants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100:8799-8804.
4. Breed MD, Perry S, Bjostad LB. Testing the blank slate hypothesis: why honey bee colonies accept young bees. Insectes Soc. 2004, 51:12-16.
5. Christensen JH, Tomasi G. Practical aspects of chemometrics for oil spill fingerprinting. J. Chromatogr. A 2007, 1169:1-22.
6. Christensen JH, Hansen AB, Karlson U, Mortensen J, Andersen O. Multivariate statistical methods for evaluating biodegradation of mineral oil. J. Chromatogr. A 2005, 1090:133-145.
7. Crozier RH, Dix MW. Analysis of two genetic models for the innate components of colony odor in social Hymenoptera. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1979, 4:217-224.
8. Dahbi A, Cerda X, Lenoir A. Ontogeny of colonial hydrocarbon label in callow workers of the ant Cataglyphis iberica. C. R. Acad. Sci. III, Sci. Vie 1998, 321:395-402.
9. Dani FR, Jones GR, Destri S, Spencer SH, Turillazzi S. Deciphering the recognition signature within the cuticular chemical profile of paper wasps. Anim. Behav. 2001, 62:165-171.
10. Dani FR, Jones GR, Corsi S, Beard R, Pradella D, Turillazzi S. Nestmate recognition cues in the honey bee: differential importance of cuticular alkanes and alkenes. Chem. Senses 2005, 30:477-489.
11. Downs SG, Ratnieks FLW. Recognition of conspecifics by honeybee guards uses nonheritable cues acquired in the adult stage. Anim. Behav. 1999, 58:643-648.
12. Errard C, Hefetz A. Label familiarity and discriminatory ability of ants reared in mixed groups. Insectes Soc. 1997, 44:189-198.
13. Errard C, Hefetz A, Jaisson P. Social discrimination tuning in ants: template formation and chemical similarity. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2006, 59:353-363.
14. Gamboa GJ, Reeve HK, Pfennig DW. The evolution and ontogeny of nestmate recognition in social wasps. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1986, 31:431-454.
15. Greenberg LES. Genetic component of bee odor in kin recognition. Science 1979, 206:1095-1097.
16. Greene MJ, Gordon DM. Cuticular hydrocarbons inform task decisions. Nature 2003, 423:32.
17. Greene MJ, Gordon DM. Structural complexity of chemical recognition cues affects the perception of group membership in the ants Linepithema humile and Aphaenogaster cockerelli. J. Exp. Biol. 2007, 210:897-905.
18. Guerrieri FJ, Nehring V, Jørgensen CG, Nielsen J, Galizia CG, d'Ettorre P. Ants recognize foes and not friends. Proc. R. Soc. B 2009, 276:2461-2468.
19. Hannonen M, Sundström L. Worker nepotism among polygynous ants. Nature 2003, 421:910.
20. Heinze J, Foitzik S, Hippert A, Hölldobler B. Apparent dear-enemy phenomenon and environment-based recognition cues in the ant Leptothorax nylanderi. Ethology 1996, 102:510-522.
21. Hölldobler B, Michener CD. Mechanisms of identification and discrimination in social Hymenoptera. Evolution of Social Behavior: Hypotheses and Empirical Tests 1980, 35-58. Markl H, ed, VC, Weinheim
22. Holzer B, Kümmerli R, Keller L, Chapuisat M. Sham nepotism as a result of intrinsic differences in brood viability in ants. Proc. R. Soc. B 2006, 273:2049-2052.
23. Kalmus H, Ribbands CR. The origin of the odours by which honeybees distinguish their companions. Proc. R. Soc. B 1952, 140:50-59.
24. Keller L. Indiscriminate altruism: unduly nice parents and siblings. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1997, 12:99-103.
25. Keller L. Levels of Selection in Evolution 1999, ed, Princeton University Press, Princeton
26. Lahav S, Soroker V, Hefetz A, Vander Meer RK. Direct behavioral evidence for hydrocarbons as ant recognition discriminators. Naturwissenschaften 1999, 86:246-249.
27. Lenoir A, Fresneau D, Errard C, Hefetz A. Individuality and colonial identity in ants: the emergence of the social representation concept. Information Processing in Social Insects 1999, 219-237. Detrain C, Deneubourg J-L, Pasteels JM, eds, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel
28. Liang D, Silverman J. " You are what you eat": diet modifies cuticular hydrocarbons and nestmate recognition in the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile. Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87:412-416.
29. Liebig J. Hydrocarbon profiles indicate fertility and dominance status in ant, bee, and wasp colonies. Insect Hydrocarbons: Biology, Biochemistry, and Chemical Ecology 2010, 282-324. Blomquist GJBagnères A-G. eds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
30. Linksvayer TA. Direct, maternal, and sibsocial genetic effects on individual and colony traits in an ant. Evolution 2006, 60:2552-2561.
31. Lynch M, Walsh B. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits 1998, Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MA
32. Martin S, Helanterä H, Drijfhout F. Colony-specific hydrocarbons identify nest mates in two species of Formica ant. J. Chem. Ecol. 2008a, 34:1072-1080.
33. Martin SJ, Vitikainen E, Helanterä H, Drijfhout FP. Chemical basis of nest-mate discrimination in the ant Formica exsecta. Proc. R. Soc. B 2008b, 275:1271-1278.
34. Monnin T. Chemical recognition of reproductive status in social insects. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 2006, 43:531-549.
35. Nowbahari E, Lenoir A, Clément JL, Lange C, Bagneres AG, Joulie C. Individual, geographical and experimental variation of cuticular hydrocarbons of the ant cataglyphis cursor (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): their use in nest and subspecies recognition. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1990, 18:63-73.
36. Ozaki M, Wada-Katsumata A, Fujikawa K, Iwasaki M, Yokohari F, Satoji Y, Nisimura T, Yamaoka R. Ant nestmate and non-nestmate discrimination by a chemosensory sensillum. Science 2005, 309:311-314.
37. Page RE, Breed MD. Kin recognition in social bees. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1987, 2:272-275.
38. Queller DC, Hughes CR, Strassman JE. Wasps fail to make distinctions. Nature 1990, 344:388.
39. Smith AA, Hölldober B, Liebig J. Cuticular hydrocarbons reliably identify cheaters and allow enforcement of altruism in a social insect. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:78-81.
40. Soroker V, Vienne C, Hefetz A. Hydrocarbon dynamics within and between nestmates in Cataglyphis niger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21:365-378.
41. Stuart RJ. Collective cues as a basis for nestmate recognition in polygynous leptothoracine ants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 1988, 85:4572-4575.
42. Sundström L. Sex ratio bias, relatedness asymmetry and queen mating frequency in ants. Nature 1994, 367:266-268.
43. Sundström L, Chapuisat M, Keller L. Conditional manipulation of sex ratios by ant workers: a test of kin selection theory. Science 1996, 274:993-995.
44. Vander Meer RK, Morel L. Nestmate recognition in ants. Pheromone Communication in Social Insects 1998, 79-103. Vander Meer RK, Breed MDWinston MLEspelie KE. eds, Westview Press, Boulder, CO
45. Wagner D, Tissot M, Cuevas W, Gordon DM. Harvester ants utilize cuticular hydrocarbons in nestmate recognition. J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26:2245-2257.
46. Wagner D, Tissot M, Gordon D. Task-related environment alters the cuticular hydrocarbon composition of harvester ants. J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27:1805-1819.
47. van Zweden JS, d'Ettorre P. Nestmate recognition in social insects and the role of hydrocarbons. Insect Hydrocarbons: Biology, Biochemistry, and Chemical Ecology 2010, 222-243. Blomquist GJ, Bagnères A-G. eds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge