No abstract

Coordinated movement in animal groups (flocks, schools, herds, etc.) is a classic and well-studied form of collective behaviour. Most theoretical studies consider agents in unobstructed spaces; however, many animals move in often complicated environments and must navigate around and through obstacles. Here we consider simulated agents behaving according to typical flocking rules, with the addition of repulsion from obstacles, and study their collective behaviour in environments with concave obstacles (dead ends). We find that groups of such agents heading for a goal can spontaneously escape dead ends without wall-following or other specialized behaviours, in what we term ‘flocking escapes’. The mechanism arises when agents align with one another while heading away from the goal, forming a self-stable cluster that persists long enough to exit the obstacle and avoids becoming trapped again when turning back towards the goal. Solitary agents under the same conditions are never observed to escape. We show that alignment with neighbours reduces the effective turning speed of the group while letting individuals maintain high manoeuvrability when needed. The relative robustness of flocking escapes in our studies suggests that this emergent behaviour may be relevant for a variety of animal species.

The idea that ants communicate when meeting on a trail is beguiling, but evidence for this is scarce. Physical communication in ants has been demonstrated to play a role as a modulator of behaviours such as alarm and recruitment. Honeybees can communicate the location of a resource using an advanced motor display the waggle dance. However, no equivalent of the waggle dance has been described for any ant species, and it is widely believed that ants cannot communicate the location of resources using motor displays. One group of researchers report several demonstrations of such communication in Formica ants; however, these results have been largely ignored. More recently some evidence arose that Lasius niger foragers returning from a food source can communicate to outgoing foragers the direction that should be taken at the next bifurcation by means of physical contact on the trail. Here, we make a concerted effort to replicate these results. Although initial results seemed to indicate physical communication, once stringent controls to eliminate pheromone cues were put in place, no evidence for physical communication of food location could be found. This null result was replicated independently by a different research group on a closely related species, L. neglectus. We conclude that neither L. niger nor L. neglectus foragers communicate resource location using physical contact. Our results increase the burden of proof required for other claims of physical communication of direction in ants, but do not completely rule out this possibility.

No abstract