Dissecting ant recognition systems in the age of genomics

Abstract

Hamilton is probably best known for his seminal work demonstrating the role of kin selection in social evolution. His work made it clear that, for individuals to direct their altruistic behaviours towards appropriate recipients (kin), mechanisms must exist for kin recognition. In the social insects, colonies are typically comprised of kin, and colony recognition cues are used as proxies for kinship cues. Recent years have brought rapid advances in our understanding of the genetic and molecular mechanisms that are used for this process. Here, I review some of the most notable advances, particularly the contributions from recent ant genome sequences and molecular biology.

An Alpine ant’s behavioural polymorphism: monogyny with and without internest aggression inTetramorium alpestre

“…A correlation known from other studies is one between aggressive behaviour and recognition cues (e.g. cuticular hydrocarbons, CHCs) allowing workers to discriminate nestmates from non-nestmates (Guerrieri et al 2009; Fürst et al 2012; Martin et al 2012; Tsutsui 2013; di Mauro et al 2015; Larsen et al 2016). Recognition cues are genetically and/or environmentally determined (d’Ettorre & Lenoir 2009), but nestmate recognition seems not to be influenced by the social origin (monogyny vs polygyny) of workers (Rosset et al 2007; Helanterä et al 2011; Chirino et al 2012).…”

Brood recognition and discrimination in ants

“…As such comprehensive studies of brood recognition are rare, we refer to brood recognition stimuli as cues throughout this review, with the exception of queen-borne odors on eggs (i.e., queen pheromones), which have been identified as species-specific signals that have evolved to convey information about queen fertility (Holman et al 2010;Van Oystaeyen et al 2014). , 2006van Zweden et al 2007van Zweden et al , 2009b…”

Transcriptomics and neuroanatomy of the clonal raider ant implicate an expanded clade of odorant receptors in chemical communication

“…A particularly interesting question in the field is how social signals are perceived and what sort of genetic and physiological specializations facilitate signal perception in highly social organisms (4, 5). In the most tractable sociogenomic models, the eusocial hymenopteran insects, communication is largely chemical, and the genetics and physiology of chemosensation in these species may hold the key to understanding their advanced communication (4,6, 74).Much is already known about the insect chemosensory system in general (8,9). Briefly, chemicals are detected by porous sensory hairs (sensilla) located on chemosensory organs such as the legs, wings, palps, and especially the antennae.…”

“…Communication is important to a broad range of organisms, yet relatively little is known about the genetic components of communication systems and how they evolve. A particularly interesting question in the field is how social signals are perceived and what sort of genetic and physiological specializations facilitate signal perception in highly social organisms (4,5). In the most tractable sociogenomic models, the eusocial hymenopteran insects, communication is largely chemical, and the genetics and physiology of chemosensation in these species may hold the key to understanding their advanced communication (4,6,74).…”