Behaviour of Odontomachus chelifer (Latreille) (Formicidae: Ponerinae) Feeding on Sugary Liquids

Núñez, Jorge; Naya, Marlene; Calcagno-Pissarelli, Maria Pia; Otero, Luis Daniel

doi:10.1007/s10905-010-9249-1

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Theoretical models on feeding dynamics predict a decrement in intake rates with increasing sugar concentration due to the exponential increment in viscosity (Kingsolver & Daniel, 1979, 1995; Harder, 1986; Kim et al , 2011). Our results are in agreement with this concept and also aligned with studies on individual food intake in which other ant species ingested solutions at different rates according to sucrose concentration (Josens et al , 1998; Paul & Roces, 2003; Ávila Núñez et al , 2011).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This linear pattern of increment differs from that observed in other ant species in which ingestion time increased exponentially ( C. mus : Josens et al , 1998; Falibene et al , 2009; Lasius niger : Bonser et al , 1998; Detrain & Prieur, 2014), coinciding with the increment of viscosity with concentration (Wolf et al , 1984). In the case of the ant Odontomachus chelifer , longer ingestion times were reported for medium and low concentrations (5–30%) compared with those observed for high concentrations (50–60%) (Ávila Núñez et al , 2011); this could have been a consequence of their feeding habits, because they are predominantly predators even though they can have an opportunistic diet (Raimundo et al , 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feeding behavior and social interactions of the Argentine ant Linepithema humile change with sucrose concentration

Solá

Josens

2016

Bull. Entomol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liquid sugar baits are well accepted by the Argentine ant Linepithema humile and are suitable for the chemical control of this invasive species. We evaluated how sugar concentrations affect the foraging behavior of L. humile individuals. We quantified feeding variables for individual foragers (ingested load, feeding time and solution intake rate) when feeding on sucrose solutions of different concentrations, as well as post-feeding interactions with nestmates. Solutions of intermediate sucrose concentrations (10–30%) were the most consumed and had the highest intake rates, whereas solutions of high sucrose concentrations (60 and 70%) resulted in extended feeding times, low intake rates and ants having smaller crop loads. In terms of post-feeding interactions, individuals fed solutions of intermediate sucrose concentrations (20%) had the highest probability of conducting trophallaxis and the smallest latency to drop exposure (i.e. lowest time delay). Trophallaxis duration increased with increasing sucrose concentrations. Behavioral motor displays, including contacts with head jerking and walking with a gaster waggle, were lowest for individuals that ingested the more dilute sucrose solution (5%). These behaviors have been previously suggested to act as a communication channel for the activation and/or recruitment of nestmates. We show here that sucrose concentration affects feeding dynamics and modulates decision making related to individual behavior and social interactions of foragers. Our results indicate that intermediate sucrose concentrations (ca. 20%), appear to be most appropriate for toxic baits because they promote rapid foraging cycles, a high crop load per individual, and a high degree of stimulation for recruitment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding behavior and social interactions of the Argentine ant Linepithema humile change with sucrose concentration

Solá

Josens

2016

Bull. Entomol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Preferential consumption of certain sugar solutions (figures 4 – 8 ) is the result of behavioural choices made by foraging ants that are dependent upon characteristics of the specific sugar solution (sugar type and concentration). In response to the sugar solution they encountered, individual ants decide how much to carry back in their crop to the nest [ 95 – 97 ], how many return trips to the resource to make [ 6 ], and how much (if any) trail pheromone to deposit [ 35 , 98 – 100 ]. More ants are recruited by strongly marked trails, ultimately leading to collective choices by ants for the most appealing resource [ 7 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Solutions with higher fructose concentrations may have prompted foraging ants to take up larger crop loads, make more return trips to these resources, or to recruit more nest-mates to them. The sugar concentration of resources does affect crop load of ants, but it is not necessarily the highest sugar concentration that elicits uptake of the largest crop load, as shown with the carpenter ant, Camponotus mus , the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile , and the ponerine ant, Odontomachus chelifer [ 95 – 97 ]. Ants mark trails more intensely in response to more concentrated sugar solutions [ 98 , 99 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

All sugars ain't sweet: selection of particular mono-, di- and trisaccharides by western carpenter ants and European fire ants

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ants select sustained carbohydrate resources, such as aphid honeydew, based on many factors including sugar type, volume and concentration. We tested the hypotheses (H1–H3) that western carpenter ants, Camponotus modoc, seek honeydew excretions from Cinara splendens aphids based solely on the presence of sugar constituents (H1), prefer sugar solutions containing aphid-specific sugars (H2) and preferentially seek sugar solutions with higher sugar content (H3). We further tested the hypothesis (H4) that workers of both Ca. modoc and European fire ants, Myrmica rubra , selectively consume particular mono-, di- and trisaccharides. In choice bioassays with entire ant colonies, sugar constituents in honeydew (but not aphid-specific sugar) as well as sugar concentration affected foraging decisions by Ca. modoc . Both Ca. modoc and M. rubra foragers preferred fructose to other monosaccharides (xylose, glucose) and sucrose to other disaccharides (maltose, melibiose, trehalose). Conversely, when offered a choice between the aphid-specific trisaccharides raffinose and melezitose, Ca. modoc and M. rubra favoured raffinose and melezitose, respectively. Testing the favourite mono-, di- and trisaccharide head-to-head, both ant species favoured sucrose. While both sugar type and sugar concentration are the ultimate cause for consumption by foraging ants, strong recruitment of nest-mates to superior sources is probably the major proximate cause.

show abstract

“…All ponerines have a sting to help them subdue prey. However, many utilise liquid food sources, and several species are known to collect nectar, seeds, and fruits (Evans & Leston, ; Christianini et al ., ; Ávila Núñez et al ., ). Additionally, Bottcher et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Intra‐ and interspecific variation in trophic ecology of ‘predatory’ ants in the subfamily Ponerinae

Hanisch

Drager

Yang

et al. 2019

Ecological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The characterisation of energy flow through communities is a primary goal of ecology. Furthermore, predator-prey interactions can influence both species abundance and community composition. The ant subfamily Ponerinae includes many predatory species that range from generalist insectivores to highly specialised hunters that target a single prey type. Given their high diversity and ubiquity in tropical ecosystems, measuring intra-and interspecific variation in their trophic ecology is essential for understanding the role of ants as predators of insect communities.2. The stable isotopic composition of nitrogen of 22 species from the ant subfamily Ponerinae was measured, relative to plants and other predatory and herbivorous insects at two Atlantic Forest sites in Argentina. The study tested the general assumption that ponerine ants are all predatory, and examined intra-and interspecific variation in trophic ecology relative to habitat, body size and cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 sequences (DNA barcoding).3. Stable isotope analysis revealed that most ponerines occupy high trophic levels (primary and secondary predators), but some species overlapped with known insect herbivores. Species residing at low trophic levels were primarily arboreal and may rely heavily on nectar or other plant-based resources in their diet. In addition, larger species tend to occupy lower trophic positions than smaller species.4. Although some of the species were divided into two or more genetic clusters by DNA barcoding analysis, these clusters did not correspond to intraspecific variation in trophic position; therefore, colony dietary flexibility most probably explains species that inhabit more than one trophic level.

show abstract

Behaviour of Odontomachus chelifer (Latreille) (Formicidae: Ponerinae) Feeding on Sugary Liquids

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

Feeding behavior and social interactions of the Argentine ant Linepithema humile change with sucrose concentration

Feeding behavior and social interactions of the Argentine ant Linepithema humile change with sucrose concentration

All sugars ain't sweet: selection of particular mono-, di- and trisaccharides by western carpenter ants and European fire ants

Intra‐ and interspecific variation in trophic ecology of ‘predatory’ ants in the subfamily Ponerinae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About