Variation between and within colonies in the termite: morphology, genomic DNA, and behaviour

Abstract

We investigate the structure between and within colonies of Schedorhinotermes lamanianus (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) at a cluster of foraging galleries in Shimba Hills National Reserve, Kenya. Three independent methods (morphometrics of minor soldiers, multilocus fingerprinting from genomic DNA of workers, and aggression tests between workers) yielded concordant results concerning number and spatial extent of colonies as well as variation between and within colonies. At least three colonies exist in our study area. Genetic data reveal that the largest colony is genetically and spatially substructured in three subsidiary nests, which may form reproductive units. These subsidiary nests were not completely isolated as we were able to document exchange of workers. Subsidiary nests may facilitate foundation of colonies by budding which may generate isolation by distance (population viscosity).

Genetic diversity and colony breeding structure in native and introduced ranges of the Formosan subterranean termite, Coptotermes formosanus

“…Budding occurs when a portion of a colony gradually splits off and becomes a separate reproductive unit. During the process of budding genetically differentiated nests may still exchange workers (Husseneder et al 1998) which results in positive F IC -values (Thorne et al 1999;Bulmer et al 2001). Thus, budding may be a viable form of colony propagation in the Hawaiian islands; although this is rare in other C. formosanus populations (Vargo and Husseneder 2009).…”

“…Thus, in contrast to fusion of unrelated Reticulitermes colonies in the introduced range, mixed C. formosanus colonies probably resulted from multiple groups of neotenic reproductives located in spatially separated reproductive centers within the colony, as would be expected if there was nest budding with interconnected daughter nests (Table 2, case C). Budding is known to occur in subterranean termites (Husseneder et al 1998); however, it is not a wide-spread strategy for invasiveness in C. formosanus. Its occurrence is rather limited to certain geographical regions, such as Hawaii, probably due to ecological factors less conducive to the foundation of independent incipient colonies, as indicated by the high rate of nestmate pairs heading simple family colonies.…”

Cuticular hydrocarbons in a termite: phenotypes and a neighbour–stranger effect

“…Aggression between workers from different colonies has been demonstrated for several termite species, whereas aggression is not found in pairings of nestmates (Reticulitermes, BagneÁ res et al, 1991;Heterotermes, Jones, 1990;Schedorhinotermes, Kaib & Brandl, 1992;Husseneder et al, 1998;M. subhyalinus, Jmhasly et al, 1998;Jmhasly & Leuthold, 1999b).…”

“…Others used behavioural observations to describe the dynamics of aggression within and between termite colonies (e.g. Adams, 1991;Kaib & Brandl, 1992;Husseneder et al, 1998). Recently, Haverty et al (1999b) paired workers from different foraging groups in Reticulitermes from North Carolina and correlated phenotypes of hydrocarbons with immediate aggression and mortality during the behavioural tests.…”

Slaves of the environment: the movement of herbivorous insects in relation to their ecology and genotype

“…Besides the work using nDNA markers on termites (Husseneder et al 1998), Aphididae (De Barro et al 1995a^c;Shufran et al 1991;Sunnucks et al 1997), Hymenoptera (honeybees, Hall 1992), Diptera (fruit £ies, Haymer et al 1992;He & Haymer 1997) and some Lepidoptera (Palo et al 1995;Saccheri et al 1998), few such markers have been employed to date in studies of population structure and dispersal in other herbivorous insects. Hence, there is much to be learnt regarding the mechanisms of gene £ow and dispersal events (Strassmann et al 1998;Villablanca et al 1998).…”