How does habitat complexity affect ant foraging success? A test using functional measures on three continents

Oecologia

Volumn 164, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1061-1073

  Gibb, H ^a,b,c   Parr, C L ^d  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b CSIRO   (Australia)

^c SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Community structure; Discovery; Experiment; Microhabitat; Monopolisation

Indexed keywords

ANT; BAIT; BODY SIZE; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; COMPLEXITY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; HABITAT STRUCTURE; MICROHABITAT; MORPHOLOGY; PHYLOGENETICS;

ANIMAL; ANT; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; BODY SIZE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ECOSYSTEM; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; PHYSIOLOGY; SOUTH AFRICA; SWEDEN;

ANIMALS; ANTS; AUSTRALIA; BODY SIZE; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ECOSYSTEM; PHYLOGENY; SOUTH AFRICA; SWEDEN;

AUSTRALIA; SOUTH AFRICA; SWEDEN;

FORMICIDAE;

EID: 78449237755     PISSN: 00298549     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-010-1703-4     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Andersen AN (2000) A global ecology of rainforest ants: functional groups in relation to environmental stress and disturbance. In: Agosti D, Majer JD, Alonso LE, Schultz TR (eds) Ants: standard methods for measuring and monitoring biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp 25-34.
2. Andruskiw M, Fryxell JM, Thompson ID, Baker JA (2008) Habitat-mediated variation in predation risk by the American marten. Ecology 89: 2273-2280.
3. Aviron S, Burel F, Baudry J, Schermann N (2005) Carabid assemblages in agricultural landscapes: impacts of habitat features, landscape context at different spatial scales and farming intensity. Agric Ecosyst Environ 108: 205-217.
4. Barton P, Manning AD, Gibb H, Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham SA (2009) Conserving ground-dwelling beetles in an endangered woodland community: multi-scale habitat effects on assemblage diversity. Biol Cons 142: 1701-1709.
5. Blüthgen N, Fiedler K (2004) Competition for composition: lessons from nectar-feeding ant communities. Ecology 85: 1479-1485.
6. Carroll CR, Janzen DH (1973) Ecology of foraging by ants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4: 231-251.
7. Cerdá X, Retana J, Manzaneda A (1998) The role of competition by dominants and temperature in the foraging of subordinate species in Mediterranean ant communities. Oecologia 117: 404-412.
8. Farji-Brener AG, Barrantes G, Ruggiero A (2004) Environmental rugosity, body size and access to food: a test of the size-grain hypothesis in tropical litter ants. Oikos 104: 165-171.
9. Fewell JH (1988) Energetic and time costs of foraging in harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex occidentalis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22: 401-408.
10. Finke DL, Denno RF (2002) Intraguild predation diminished in complex-structured vegetation: implications for prey suppression. Ecology 83: 643-652.
11. Gibb H (2005) The effect of a dominant ant, Iridomyrmex purpureus, on resource use by ant assemblages depends on microhabitat and resource type. Aust Ecol 30: 856-867.
12. Gibb H, Hochuli DF (2004) Removal experiment reveals limited effects of a behaviourally dominant species on ant assemblages. Ecology 85: 648-657.
13. Gibb H, Hilszczański J, Hjältén J, Danell K, Ball JP, Pettersson RB, Atlegrim O (2008) Responses of parasitoids to saproxylic hosts and habitat: a multi-scale study using experimental logs. Oecologia 155: 63-74.
14. Gols R, Bukovinszky T, Hemerik L, Harvey JA, van Lenteren JC, Vet LEM (2005) Reduced foraging efficiency of a parasitoid under habitat complexity: implications for population stability and species coexistence. J Anim Ecol 74: 1059-1068.
15. Gray SJ, Jensen SP, Hurst JL (2000) Structural complexity of territories: preference, use of space and defence in commensal house mice, Mus domesticus. Anim Behav 60: 765-772.
16. Hampton SE (2004) Habitat overlap of enemies: temporal patterns and the role of spatial complexity. Oecologia 138: 475-484.
17. Hasegawa K, Maekawa K (2008) Potential of habitat complexity for mitigating interference competition between native and non-native salmonid species. Can J Zool 86: 386-393.
18. Hojesjo J, Johnsson J, Bohlin T (2004) Habitat complexity reduced the growth of aggressive and dominant brown trout Salmo trutta relative to subordinates. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56: 286-289.
19. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Belknap, Cambridge, MA.
20. Hurlbert AH, Ballantyne F, Powell S (2008) Shaking a leg and hot to trot: the effects of body size and temperature on running speed in ants. Ecol Entomol 33: 144-154.
21. Institute SAS (2007) JMP version 7. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
22. Kaspari M (1993) Removal of seeds from neotropical frugivore droppings ant responses to seed number. Oecologia 95: 81-88.
23. Kaspari M, Weiser MD (1999) The size-grain hypothesis and interspecific scaling in ants. Funct Ecol 13: 530-538.
24. Lassau SA, Hochuli DF (2004) Effects of habitat complexity on ant assemblages. Ecography 27: 157-164.
25. LeBrun EG (2005) Who is the top dog in ant communities? Resources, parasitoids, and multiple competitive hierarchies. Oecologia 142: 643-652.
26. Mandelbrot B (1983) The fractal geometry of nature. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.
27. Morrison LW (1999) Indirect effects of phorid fly parasitoids on the mechanisms of interspecific competition among ants. Oecologia 121: 113-122.
28. Morse D, Lawton J, Dodson M, Williamson M (1985) Fractal dimension of vegetation and the distribution of arthropod body lengths. Nature 314: 731-733.
29. Palmer T (2003) Spatial habitat heterogeneity influences competition and coexistence in an African acacia ant guild. Ecology 84: 2843-2855.
30. Parr CL (2008) Dominant ants can control assemblage species richness in a South African savanna. J Anim Ecol 77: 1191-1198.
31. Parr ZJE, Parr CL, Chown SL (2003) The size-grain hypothesis: a phylogenetic and field test. Ecol Entomol 28: 475-481.
32. Parr CL, Andersen AN, Chastagnol C, Duffaud C (2007) Savanna fires increase rates and distances of seed dispersal by ants. Oecologia 151: 33-41.
33. Patterson HD, Thompson R (1974) Maximum likelihood estimation of components of variance. Proceedings of eighth international biochemistry conference, pp 197-209.
34. Petren K, Case TJ (1998) Habitat structure determines competition intensity and invasion success in gecko lizards. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 11739-11744.
35. Pontin AJ (1969) Experimental transplantation of nest-mounds of the ant Lasius flavus F in a habitat containing also L niger L and Myrmica scabrinodis Nyl. J Anim Ecol 38: 747-754.
36. Sanders NJ, Gordon DM (2003) Resource-dependent interactions and the organization of desert ant communities. Ecology 84: 1024-1031.
37. Sarty M, Abbott KL, Lester PJ (2006) Habitat complexity facilitates coexistence in a tropical ant community. Oecologia 149: 465-473.
38. Savolainen R, Vepsalainen K (1988) A competition hierarchy among boreal ants impact on resource partitioning and community structure. Oikos 51: 135-155.
39. Savolainen R, Vepsäläinen K, Wuorenrinne H (1989) Ant assemblages in the taiga biome: testing the role of territorial wood ants. Oecologia 81: 481-486.
40. Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE (1992) Variance components. Wiley, New York.
41. Srivastava DS (2006) Habitat structure, trophic structure and ecosystem function: interactive effects in a bromeliad-insect community. Oecologia 149: 493-504.
42. Thomas ML, Holway DA (2005) Condition-specific competition between invasive Argentine ants and Australian Iridomyrmex. J Anim Ecol 74: 532-542.
43. Wilkinson EB, Feener DH (2007) Habitat complexity modifies ant-parasitoid interactions: implications for community dynamics and the role of disturbance. Oecologia 152: 151-161.
44. Williams SE, Marsh H, Winter J (2002) Spatial scale, species diversity and habitat structure: small mammals in Australian tropical rainforest. Ecology 83: 1317-1329.
45. Wolfinger R, Tobias R, Sall J (1994) Computing Gaussian likelihoods and their derivatives for general linear mixed models. SIAM J Sci Comput 15: 1294-1310.
46. Yanoviak SP, Kaspari M (2000) Community structure and the habitat templet: ants in the tropical forest canopy and litter. Oikos 89: 259-266.