Skip to main content
Log in

Reproductive conflicts and egg discrimination in a socially polymorphic ant

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The ability to discriminate against competitors shapes cooperation and conflicts in all forms of social life. In insect societies, workers may detect and destroy eggs laid by other workers or by foreign queens, which can contribute to regulate reproductive conflicts among workers and queens. Variation in colony kin structure affects the magnitude of these conflicts and the diversity of cues used for discrimination, but the impact of the number of queens per colony on the ability of workers to discriminate between eggs of diverse origin has so far not been investigated. Here, we examined whether workers from the socially polymorphic ant Formica selysi distinguished eggs laid by nestmate workers from eggs laid by nestmate queens, as well as eggs laid by foreign queens from eggs laid by nestmate queens. Workers from single- and multiple-queen colonies discriminated worker-laid from queen-laid eggs, and eliminated the former. This suggests that workers collectively police each other in order to limit the colony-level costs of worker reproduction and not because of relatedness differences towards queens’ and workers’ sons. Workers from single-queen colonies discriminated eggs laid by foreign queens of the same social structure from eggs laid by nestmate queens. In contrast, workers from multiple-queen colonies did not make this distinction, possibly because cues on workers or eggs are more diverse. Overall, these data indicate that the ability of F. selysi workers to discriminate eggs is sufficient to restrain worker reproduction but does not permit discrimination between matrilines in multiple-queen colonies.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beekman M, Oldroyd BP (2005) Honeybee workers use cues other than egg viability for policing. Biol Lett 1:129–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beekman M, Oldroyd BP (2008) When workers disunite: intraspecific parasitism by eusocial bees. Annu Rev Entomol 53:19–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bourke AFG, Franks NR (1995) Social evolution in ants. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Breed MD, Bennett B (1987) Kin recognition in highly eusocial insects. In: Fletcher DJC, Michener CD (eds) Kin recognition in animals. John Wiley, pp. 243-285

  • Chapuisat M, Bocherens S, Rosset H (2004) Variable queen number in ant colonies: no impact on queen turnover, inbreeding, and population genetic differentiation in the ant Formica selysi. Evolution 58:1064–1072

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cole BJ (1986) The social-behavior of Leptothorax allardycei (Hymenoptera, Formicidae)—time budgets and the evolution of worker reproduction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:165–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier RH, Pamilo P (1996) Evolution of social insect colonies: sex allocation and kin selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra MB, Boomsma JJ (2007) The economy of worker reproduction in Acromyrmex leafcutter ants. Anim Behav 74:519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endler A, Liebig J, Schmitt T, Parker JE, Jones GR, Schreier P, Holldobler B (2004) Surface hydrocarbons of queen eggs regulate worker reproduction in a social insect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:2945–2950

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foster KR, Ratnieks FLW (2001) Paternity, reproduction and conflict in vespine wasps: a model system for testing kin selection predictions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster KR, Gulliver J, Ratnieks FLW (2002) Worker policing in the European hornet Vespa crabro. Ins Soc 49:41–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank SA (1995) Mutual policing and repression of competition in the evolution of cooperative groups. Nature 377:520–522

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gobin B, Heinze H, Stratz M, Roces F (2003) The energetic cost of reproductive conflicts in the ant Pachycondyla obscuricornis. J Ins Physio 49:747–752

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour. J Theor Biol 7:1–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond RL, Keller L (2004) Conflict over male parentage in social insects. PLoS Biol 2:1472–1482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann A, Wantia J, Torres JA, Heinze J (2003) Worker policing without genetic conflicts in a clonal ant. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:12836–12840

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Helanterä H, Ratnieks FLW (2009) Two independent mechanisms of egg recognition in worker Formica fusca ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:573–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helanterä H, Sundström L (2007a) Worker policing and nest mate recognition in the ant Formica fusca. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:1143–1149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helanterä H, Sundström L (2007b) Worker reproduction in Formica ants. Am Nat 170:E14–E25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1977) The number of queens: an important trait in ant evolution. Naturwiss 64:8–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer B, Kümmerli R, Keller L, Chapuisat M (2006) Sham nepotism as a result of intrinsic differences in brood viability in ants. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 273:2049–2052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer B, Chapuisat M, Keller L (2008a) Foreign ant queens are accepted but produce fewer offspring. Oecologia 157:717–723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer B, Meunier J, Keller L, Chapuisat M (2008b) Stay of drift? Queen acceptance in the ant Formica paralugubris. Ins Soc 55:392–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwanishi S, Hasegawa E, Ohkawara K (2003) Worker oviposition and policing behaviour in the myrmicine ant Aphaenogaster smythiesi japonica Forel. Anim Behav 66:513–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller L (1997) Indiscriminate altruism: unduly nice parents and siblings. Trends Ecol Evol 12:99–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller L, Chapuisat M (1999) Cooperation among selfish individuals in insect societies. Bioscience 49:899–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kikuchi T, Tsuji K, Ohnishi H, Le Breton J (2007) Caste-biased acceptance of non-nestmates in a polygynous ponerine ant. Anim Behav 73:559–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kutter H (1977) Formicidae-Hymenoptera. Schweizerische Entomologische Gesellschaft, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin SJ, Beekman M, Wossler TC, Ratnieks FLW (2002) Parasitic Cape honeybee workers, Apis mellifera capensis, evade policing. Nature 415:163–165

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meunier J, Chapuisat M (2009) The determinants of queen size in a socially polymorphic ant. J Evol Biol 22:1906–1913

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Michod RE, Roze D (2001) Cooperation and conflict in the evolution of multicellularity. Heredity 86:1–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pamilo P (1991) Evolution of colony characteristics in social insects. II. Number of reproductive individuals. Am Nat 138:412–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirk CWW, Neumann P, Ratnieks FLW (2003) Cape honeybees, Apis mellifera capensis, police worker-laid eggs despite the absence of relatedness benefits. Behav Ecol 14:347–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratnieks FLW (1988) Reproductive harmony via mutual policing by workers in eusocial hymenoptera. Am Nat 132:217–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratnieks FLW, Boomsma JJ (1995) Facultative sex allocation by workers and the evolution of polyandry by queens in social Hymenoptera. Am Nat 145:969–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratnieks FLW, Visscher PK (1989) Worker policing in the honeybee. Nature 342:796–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratnieks FLW, Foster KR, Wenseleers T (2006) Conflict resolution in insect societies. Ann Rev Ent 51:581–608

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reber A, Castella G, Christe P, Chapuisat M (2008) Experimentally increased group diversity improves disease resistance in an ant species. Ecol Lett 11:682–689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reber A, Meunier J, Chapuisat M (2010) Flexible colony-founding strategies in a socially polymorphic ant. Anim Behav 78:467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosset H, Chapuisat M (2006) Sex allocation conflict in ants: when the queen rules. Curr Biol 16:328–331

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosset H, Chapuisat M (2007) Alternative life-histories in a socially polymorphic ant. Evol Ecol 21:577–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosset H, Schwander T, Chapuisat M (2006) Nestmate recognition and levels of aggression are not altered by changes in genetic diversity in a socially polymorphic ant. Anim Behav 74:951–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwander T, Rosset H, Chapuisat M (2005) Division of labour and worker size polymorphism in ant colonies: the impact of social and genetic factors. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:215–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. The principles and practice of statistics in biological research, 3rd edn. Freeman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundström L (1997) Queen acceptance and nestmate recognition in monogyne and polygyne colonies of the ant Formica truncorum. Anim Behav 53:499–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szathmary E, Maynard Smith J (1995) The major evolutionary transitions. Nature 374:227–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Zweden JS, Furst MA, Heinze J, D'Ettorre P (2007) Specialization in policing behaviour among workers in the ant Pachycondyla inversa. Proc R Soc L Ser B 274:1421–1428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vander Meer RK, Morel L (1998) Nestmate recognition in ants. In: Vander Meer RK, Breed M, Winston M, Espelie KE (eds) Pheromone communication in social insects. Westview, Boulder, pp 79–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Vander Meer RK, Breed M, Winston M, Espelie KE (1998) Pheromone communication in social insects: ants, wasps, bees, and termites. Westview Press, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez GM, Silverman J (2008) Queen acceptance and the complexity of nestmate discrimination in the Argentine ant. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:537–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenseleers T, Ratnieks FLW (2006) Comparative analysis of worker reproduction and policing in eusocial hymenoptera supports relatedness theory. Am Nat 168:E163–E179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wenseleers T, Helanterä H, Hart A, Ratnieks FLW (2004) Worker reproduction and policing in insect societies: an ESS analysis. J Evol Biol 17:1035–1047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Jessica Purcell, Michiel B. Dijkstra, Christophe Eizaguirre, Serge Aron, Lotta Sundström, and one anonymous referee for constructive comments on previous versions of this manuscript. This study was supported by grants 31003A-108263 and 31003A-125306 from the Swiss National Science Foundation. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. This research was done in compliance with current Swiss laws and regulations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joël Meunier.

Additional information

Communicated by L. Sundström

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meunier, J., Delaplace, L. & Chapuisat, M. Reproductive conflicts and egg discrimination in a socially polymorphic ant. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64, 1655–1663 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-0979-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-0979-z

Keywords

Navigation