Do non-native conifer plantations provide benefits for a native forest specialist, the wood ant Formica lugubris?

Procter, Duncan; Cottrell, Joan; Watts, Kevin; Robinson, Elva J. H.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.07.034

Cited by 20 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another potentially confounding factor when analysing clustering in space is environmental heterogeneity. For example, edge specialist species will tend to be found grouped together along the outside of a habitat, confounding the assessment of clustering (Sudd et al 1977 ; Procter et al 2015 ). A detailed understanding of species ecology is necessary to separate the linked effects of environment, optimal territorial strategy and dispersion (Hölldobler and Lumsden 1980 ; Levings and Traniello 1981 ).…”

Section: Sharing Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

Inferring polydomy: a review of functional, spatial and genetic methods for identifying colony boundaries

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying the boundaries of a social insect colony is vital for properly understanding its ecological function and evolution. Many species of ants are polydomous: colonies inhabit multiple, spatially separated, nests. Ascertaining which nests are parts of the same colony is an important consideration when studying polydomous populations. In this paper, we review the methods that are used to identify which nests are parts of the same polydomous colony and to determine the boundaries of colonies. Specifically, we define and discuss three broad categories of approach: identifying nests sharing resources, identifying nests sharing space, and identifying nests sharing genes. For each of these approaches, we review the theoretical basis, the limitations of the approach and the methods that can be used to implement it. We argue that all three broad approaches have merits and weaknesses, and provide a methodological comparison to help researchers select the tool appropriate for the biological question they are investigating.

show abstract

Section: Sharing Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

Inferring polydomy: a review of functional, spatial and genetic methods for identifying colony boundaries

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, an increase in the structural heterogeneity and/or complexity of a forest ecosystem due to the introduction of an alien species may have a positive affect on species richness (Haysom and Murphy , Dodet and Collet ). Alien trees that are planted close to or within existing forests may be inhabited by local insects, fungi and plants (Ariyanti et al , Brockerhoff et al , Quine and Humphrey , Procter et al ). Some studies have shown that plantations of alien species have been colonised by native species even more effectively than plantations of native trees (Rodriguez ).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Assemblages of native bryophytes in secondary forests with introducedQuercus rubra

Woziwoda

Staniaszek‐Kik

Stefańska‐Krzaczek

2016

Nordic Journal of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have studied the diversity of bryophytes in planted Polish post-agricultural forests dominated by the native Scots pine Pinus sylvestris and the alien (North American) red oak Quercus rubra. The planted sites would be suitable for a mesic coniferous forest (abbreviation: CFS) or mesic broadleaved forest (abbreviation: BFS). We analysed the structure and composition of the bryophyte assemblages in relation to forest site and substrate availability. Special attention was paid to the introduced Q. rubra as a host species for native bryophytes.A total of 54 bryophyte species (9 liverworts and 45 mosses) were found in the 90 plots (  phytosociological relevés, 10  10 m in area; 45 at each forest site) studied. DCA analysis showed that the bryophyte assemblages of the P. sylvestris-Q. rubra secondary forest community differed significantly between CFS and BFS sites; the similarity of the composition of bryophyte species was 36.8%. The substrate preferences (epigeic, epixylic, epiphytic), as well as the growth form and life form of the recorded bryophytes, also differed between CFS and BFS, while the proportion of bryophytes that had a particular life strategy was very similar.The introduced Q. rubra was inhabited by 28 bryophyte species, including two liverworts. This tree hosted 64% of the CFS and 47% of BFS bryophyte flora and as a host for epiphytes the species successfully fulfilled the functional role of the native oaks (Q. robur and Q. petraea). Thus, the introduction of Q. rubra may contribute to the restoration of post-agricultural forests and to the conservation of epiphytic bryophyte species. On the other hand, the negative impact of Q. rubra observed on the ground flora (including bryophytes) puts the benefits of Q. rubra for the conservation of native biodiversity in general in question.

show abstract

“…The study landscape is dominated by commercial forests, which are both recently planted and highly dynamic in comparison with natural woodland. The addition of these commercial forests has benefitted the wood ants, allowing large population expansions (Procter et al., ). Due to these recent population expansions, we cannot expect the ant populations to be at equilibrium.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study population is located in the southern half of the North York Moors National Park, in the northeast of England, UK (Long/Lat 54.289, −1.059, Figure ). This landscape has undergone large increases in forest cover in the last 160 years, which has allowed concomitant expansions of the wood ant populations (Procter, Cottrell, Watts, & Robinson, ). The investigated population of F. lugubris contains approximately 3,000 nests, across an area of 10.4 km 2 (Procter et al., ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This landscape has undergone large increases in forest cover in the last 160 years, which has allowed concomitant expansions of the wood ant populations (Procter, Cottrell, Watts, & Robinson, ). The investigated population of F. lugubris contains approximately 3,000 nests, across an area of 10.4 km 2 (Procter et al., ). This population was chosen for this study because prior knowledge of its extent and the location of nests allowed the selection of randomly distributed sampling points throughout the population, with sufficient spacing that any given polydomous colony, defined by social connections between spatially separate nests, did not span multiple sample points.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does cooperation mean kinship between spatially discrete ant nests?

Procter

Cottrell

Watts

et al. 2016

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eusociality is one of the most complex forms of social organization, characterized by cooperative and reproductive units termed colonies. Altruistic behavior of workers within colonies is explained by inclusive fitness, with indirect fitness benefits accrued by helping kin. Members of a social insect colony are expected to be more closely related to one another than they are to other conspecifics. In many social insects, the colony can extend to multiple socially connected but spatially separate nests (polydomy). Social connections, such as trails between nests, promote cooperation and resource exchange, and we predict that workers from socially connected nests will have higher internest relatedness than those from socially unconnected, and noncooperating, nests. We measure social connections, resource exchange, and internest genetic relatedness in the polydomous wood ant Formica lugubris to test whether (1) socially connected but spatially separate nests cooperate, and (2) high internest relatedness is the underlying driver of this cooperation. Our results show that socially connected nests exhibit movement of workers and resources, which suggests they do cooperate, whereas unconnected nests do not. However, we find no difference in internest genetic relatedness between socially connected and unconnected nest pairs, both show high kinship. Our results suggest that neighboring pairs of connected nests show a social and cooperative distinction, but no genetic distinction. We hypothesize that the loss of a social connection may initiate ecological divergence within colonies. Genetic divergence between neighboring nests may build up only later, as a consequence rather than a cause of colony separation.

show abstract

Do non-native conifer plantations provide benefits for a native forest specialist, the wood ant Formica lugubris?

Cited by 20 publications

References 47 publications

Inferring polydomy: a review of functional, spatial and genetic methods for identifying colony boundaries

Inferring polydomy: a review of functional, spatial and genetic methods for identifying colony boundaries

Assemblages of native bryophytes in secondary forests with introducedQuercus rubra

Does cooperation mean kinship between spatially discrete ant nests?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About