Skip to main content
Log in

Territoriality in ants revisited: iconic collective displays reflect resource, not territorial defense in meat ants Iridomyrmex purpureus

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
The Science of Nature Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Non-injurious, collective ritualized displays may have evolved in some species of ants as a means of resolving contests for key resources, without causing a drain in worker numbers through injury. Colonies of the Australian meat ant, Iridomyrmex purpureus, deploy numerous workers to engage in collective displays, which are widely understood to be involved in maintaining exclusive territories. A combination of field surveys and behavioral assays revealed that display grounds do not delimit borders that define exclusive territories. Rather, the proportion of workers from a focal colony found in a quadrat declines monotonically with distance from the nest. In addition, we documented collective displays around food trees, where workers congregated in greater densities and engaged in more aggressive behavior. These results refute the assumption that colonies of I. purpureus establish territorial boundaries by collective displays. Rather these collective displays may be related to the defense of specific resources, including food trees and nest sites. The difference in the level of aggression among displaying workers at different locations may reflect a balance between the benefits of defending a particular resource and an unappreciated cost of escalation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Adams ES (2016) Territoriality in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): a review. Myrmecol News 23:101–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan RA, Elgar MA, Capon RJ (1996) Exploitation of an ant chemical alarm signal by zodariid spider Habronestes bradleyi. Proc R Soc B 263:69–73

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blum MS (1985) Alarm pheromone. In: Kerkut GA, Gilbert LI (eds) Comprehensive insect physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology. Oxford, UK, pp. 193–224

  • Boulay R, Cerdá X, Simon T, Roldan M, Hefetz A (2007) Intraspecific competition in the ant Camponotus cruentatus: should we expect the ‘dear enemy’ effect? Anim Behav 74:985–993

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan-Weatherly AH (1953) Some aspects of the biology of the mound ant Iridomyrmex detectus (Smith). Aust J Zool 1:178–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Enquist M, Leimar O (1987) Evolution of fighting behavior: the effect of variation in resource value. J Theor Biol 127:187–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettershank G, Ettershank JA (1982) Ritualized fighting in the meat ant Iridomyrmex purpureus (Smith) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Aust Entomol Soc 21:97–102

  • Greaves T, Hughes RD (1974) The population biology of the meat ant. J Aust Entomol Soc 13:329–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenslade PJM (1975) Dispersion and history of a population of the meat ant Iridomyrmex purpureus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Aust J Zool 23:495–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy ICW, Briffa M (2013) Animal contests. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B (1976) Tournaments and slavery in a desert ant. Science 192:912–914

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B (1979) Territories of the African weaver ant (Oecophylla longinoda [Latreille]): a field study. Z Tierpsychol 51:201–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Holldobler B, Lumsden CJ (1980) Territorial strategies in ants. Science 210:732–739

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson DA (1984) Ant distribution patterns in a Cameroonian cocoa plantation: investigation of the ant mosaic hypothesis. Oecologia (Berl) 62:318–324

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kubota M (1948) Observations on the habits of Messor aciculatus Smith (in Japanese). Shin Kontyu 1:226–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Levings SC, Traneillo JFA (1982) Territoriality, nest dispersion and community structure in ants. Psyche 88:265–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Maák I, Czekes Z, Erős K, Pálfi Z, Markó B (2020) Living on the edge: changes in the foraging strategy of a territorial ant species occurring with a rival supercolony - a case study. J Insect Behav 33:59–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercier JL, Lenoir A, Dejean A (1997) Ritualized versus aggressive behaviors displayed by Polyrhachis laboriosa (F. Smith) during interspecific competition. Behav Process 41:39–50

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Orbell PA, Potter JR, Elgar MA (2020) Collective displays as signals of relative colony size: meat ants, Iridomyrmex purpureus are economical with the truth. Anim Behav 159:29–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherratt T, Mesterton-Gibbons M (2013) Models of group or multi-party contests. In: Hardy I, Briffa M (eds) Animal contests. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 33–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, M (2013) Sensory ecology, behavior, and evolution. Oxford University Press

  • Thomas ML, Parry LJ, Allan RA, Elgar MA (1999) Colony recognition in Australian meat ants Iridomyrmex purpureus. Naturwissenchaften 86:87–92

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Wilgenburg E, Elgar MA (2007) The role of food source location in colony structure of the polydomous meat ant, Iridomyrmex purpureus. Insect Soc 54:5–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Thienen W, Metzler D, Choe DH, Witte V (2014) Pheromone communication in ants: a detailed analysis of concentration-dependent decisions in three species. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:1611–1627

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Goodger JQD, Woodrow IE, Elgar MA (2016) Location-specific cuticular hydrocarbon signals in a social insect. Proc R Soc B 283:20160310

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Senior Rangers Matt Wills and Ross Williams of Parks Victoria for their support at Serendip Sanctuary; Marianne Coquilleau, Mengdi Hao, and Qike Wang for their assistance in the field; Ben Phillips for statistical advice; and Xim Cerdá for his comments on the manuscript.

Data accessibility

The data supporting this article have been uploaded as part of the supplementary material.

Funding

SH is supported by a scholarship from the China Scholarship Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaolin Han.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Communicated by: Sean O'Donnell

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 184 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Han, S., Elgar, M.A. Territoriality in ants revisited: iconic collective displays reflect resource, not territorial defense in meat ants Iridomyrmex purpureus. Sci Nat 107, 38 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-020-01693-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-020-01693-y

Keywords

Navigation