Habitat Associations of Ant Species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in a Heterogeneous Mississippi Landscape

Abstract

Community assembly and the factors that influence it have long been a topic of interest to ecologists, but theory has yet to produce unequivocal evidence that communities assemble in predictable ways. The goal of this study was to document the relationship between ant communities and environmental variation between four habitat types. To accomplish this, ant communities and 16 environmental variables were sampled across four different habitat types in the Black Belt Prairie and Flatwoods regions in Mississippi. Furthermore, ant species were placed into functional groups for an analysis of the relationship between the assembly of ecological communities and variation in ecosystem function. A total of 20,916 ants representing 68 species was collected across the four habitat types. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling and analysis of covariance analyses both revealed three distinct ant communities, which can be characterized by habitat type: pasture, prairie, and woodland. Principle components analysis (PCA) simplified the 16 environmental variables into four principle components that explained 78% of the variation among sites. Results of multiple regression using the four PCA axes as predictor variables suggest that regional variation in soil structure, land cover type, and the presence of grazing have had major influences on ant community composition. Variation in flora and habitat architecture had smaller but significant effects on ant species diversity and functional group composition. Our results imply that restoration of native ant communities in disturbed habitats must consider how current disturbance regimens likely interact with the presence of Solenopsis to lower ant biodiversity.

Ant community composition and its relationship with phytophysiognomies in a Brazilian Restinga

“…Other studies also show changes in ant species composition among different habitat types (Lassau and Hochuli, 2004;Lassau et al, 2005;Hill et al, 2008;Barrow and Parr, 2008). Although these authors reported that the differences may be an outcome of interactions, mainly resource competition, we think that competition may not be the only factor to explain our results.…”

“…The response of the ant species to particular habitat types has been demonstrated to be related to vegetation complexity, both negatively (Lassau and Hochuli, 2004) and positively (Lassau et al, 2005;Hill et al, 2008). However, the relationship between local-community diversity and assemblage composition may be influenced by factors acting at other scales.…”

“…However, few studies have attempted to examine shifts in species composition between local habitats types within a particular ecosystem (Hill et al, 2008). Nevertheless, studies on plant species composition are found in the literature for Restinga (Castellani et al, 1995;Pereira et al, 2001;Assis et al, 2004;Scherer et al, 2005;Martins et al, 2008), although studies about its fauna are very scarce (Silva, 2005).…”

Habitat and Grazing Influence on Terrestrial Ants in Subtropical Grasslands and Savannas of Argentina

“…We also investigated the response of the invasive S. invicta to grazing to conÞrm whether or not this Þre ant is more abundant in disturbed (grazed) habitats in its native range, as has been reported for its introduced range, mainly in North America Tschinkel 2006, 2008;Hill et al 2008). …”

Relations between the design and management of Senegalese orchards and ant diversity and community composition

“…The orchard label is composed of letters indicating the localities in which the orchard is located (T = Thiès, P = Pout, N = Notto, Nd = Ndoyenne), followed by a number standing for the orchard type according to the typology based on orchard design and management practices: (1) 'no-input mango diversified orchards', (2) 'low-input mango orchards, (3) 'medium-input citrus-predominant orchards' and (4) 'medium-input large mango-or citrus-predominant orchards'. (Ribas et al, 2003;Hill et al, 2008;Pacheco and Vasconcelos, 2012;De la Mora et al, 2013) and their decline in landscapes subject to high management intensity (Ribas and Schoereder, 2007;House et al, 2012). The greatest tree richness and coefficient of variation for the local planting density observed in the type (3) orchards created microenvironmental diversity generated by the existence of empty spaces and plant-mosaic portions in those orchards.…”