Scouting for formicidae presence in Microcerotermes diversus galleries was conducted from March to September 2014 in 10 date palm trees located in the Omaltomire region of Khuzestan Province, Iran. Measurements and morphological observations were made of 20 ant workers. For the in vitro predation test, M. diversus nymphs (n = 10 per replicate) were placed in a petri dish. Then, live freshly field-collected worker of ants were added. After 24 h, the number termite nymphs that were fully or partially devoured was determined. Five ants, including Plagiolepis pallescens, Polyrhachis lacteipennis, Pheidole teneriffana, Crematogaster antaris, and Monomorium destructor were predators of termites in date palm orchards. P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and P. pallescens, C. antaris, and M. destructor, showed Type II and Type III functional responses, respectively. The highest predation efficiency, and the lowest handing time coupled with the highest attack rate by predators was recorded for P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and C. antaris and M. destructor, respectively. Predator ant characteristics measured include: HL-Head length; HW-head width; SL-scape length; EL-eye length; PW-pronotal width; WL-thorax length; GL-gaster length; TL-total length; FL-femur length. HL, HW, SL, EL and FL showed positive effects on the functional response parameters. Results showed that termite defense capabilities declined with increasing of ant predation efficiency.
| Published in | American Journal of Entomology (Volume 2, Issue 2) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13 |
| Page(s) | 16-22 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Ant Morphology, Date palm, Predatory Ants, Termites
| [1] | Rad B, Latifian M (2005) Identification, distribution, and importance degree of date palm injurious termites and study of the population fluctuation of dominant species in Khuzestan Province. Agricultural Scientific Information and Documentation Centre, Agricultural Research and Education Organization, Iran. http://agrisis.areo.ir/ HomePage.aspx? abID=15589&Site=agrisis.areo&Lang=en-US |
| [2] | Dauber J, Hirsch M, Simmering D, Waldhardt R, Otte A, Wolters V (2003) Landscape structure as an indicator of biodiversity: Matrix effects on species richness. Agric Ecosys Environ 98:321–329. |
| [3] | Dauber J, Purtauf T, Allspach A, Frisch J, Voigtlander K, Wolters V (2005) Local vs landscape controls on diversity: A test using surface dwelling soil macro-invertebrates of different mobility. Global Ecol Biogeogr 14:213–221. |
| [4] | Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The Ants. Belknap Press of Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge. 746pp. |
| [5] | Fujiwara-Tsujii N, Cheong CH, Maryati M, Yamaoka R (2006) Identification of a potent termite repellent from the Bornean Dolichoderine ant Dolochoderine sulcaticepus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). J Trop Biol Conserv 2(1):71–78. |
| [6] | Deligne J, Quennedey A, Blum MS (1981) The enemies and defense mechanisms of termites. pp 1–76. In HR Hermann (ed), Social Insects, vol. 2, Academic Press, New York. |
| [7] | Mill AE (1983) Behavioral and toxic effects of termite defensive secretions on ants. Physiol Entomol 8:413–418. |
| [8] | Higashi S, Ito F (1989) Defense of termitaria by termitophilous ants. Oecologia 80(2): 145–147. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/ stable/4219024 |
| [9] | Abe Y, Bignell DE, Higashi T (2014) Termites: Evolution, Sociality, Symbioses, Ecology. Springer, Aban 23, 1393 AP–Science. 466 pp. |
| [10] | Pearce MJ (1997) Termites: biology and pest management. CABI Publishing. 172p. |
| [11] | Egonyu, JP, Baguma J, Ogari I, Ahumuza G, Kyamanywa S, Kucel P, Kagezi GH, Erbaugh M, Phiri N, Ritchie BJ, Wagoire WW (2015) The formicid ant, Plagiolepis sp., as a predator of the coffee twig borer, Xylosandrus compactus. Biol Contr 91:42–46. |
| [12] | Brose U (2010) Body-mass constraints on foraging behavior determine population and food-web dynamics. Funct Ecol 24:28–34. |
| [13] | Nakazawa T, Ohba S-y, Ushio M (2013) Predator–prey body size relationships when predators can consume prey larger than themselves. Biol Letters 9(3):20121193. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2012.1193 |
| [14] | Yvon-Durocher G, Ress J, Blanchard J, Ebenman B, Perkins DM, Reuman DC, Thierry A, Woodward G, Petchey OL (2011) Across ecosystem comparisons of size structure: methods, approaches and prospects. Oikos 120:550–563. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706. 2010.18863. |
| [15] | Creighton WS (1950) Ants of North America. Bull Museum Comp Zool 104:402–410. |
| [16] | Alipanah H, Kharazi-Pakdel A, Moghadassi P (1995) Taxonomical study of Myrmicinae ants in Tehran. Proc 12th Iranian Plant Protection Congress, p. 304. [Persian with English abstract] |
| [17] | Fellowes JR (1999) Exotic ants in Asia: is the mainland at risk? The case of Hong Kong. Aliens 9:5–6. |
| [18] | Bolton, B, Alpert G, Ward PS, Naskrecki P (2006) Bolton’s Catalogue of Ants of the World: 1758-2005. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. |
| [19] | Trager JC (1984a) A revision of the genus Paratrechina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the continental United States. Sociobiol 9(2):51–162. |
| [20] | Trager JC (1984b) A revision of the genus Paratrechina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the continental United States. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ Florida. |
| [21] | Juliano SA (1993) Nonlinear curve fitting: predation and functional response curves. pp 159-182. In SM Scheiner and J Gurevitch (eds), Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments. Chapman & Hall, London. 445pp. |
| [22] | Holling CS (1966) The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Memoires Entomol Soc Canada 98(S48):5–86. doi: 10.4039/entm9848fv. |
| [23] | Angelani, L (2012) Collective predation and escape strategies. Physical review letters, 109 (11): 104-118. |
| [24] | Xiao-Lan W, Ping W, Cecilia AL, Dahlsjö D Sillam-Dussès, Šobotník J (2017) Breaking the cipher: ant eavesdropping on the variational trail pheromone of its termite prey.Proc R Soc Lond B 284(1853):20170121. |
| [25] | Noirot C, Darlington JPEC (2000) Termite nests: architecture, regulation and defense. pp 121–139. In T Abe, DE Bignell, M Higashi (eds), Termites: Evolution, Sociality, Symbioses, Ecology. Kluwer, Dortdretch, The Netherlands. |
| [26] | Gromysz-Kalkowska K, Unkiewicz-Winiarczyk A (2010) Ethological defense mechanisms in insects. I. Passive defense. Annals UMCS Biologia 65:15–27. |
| [27] | Sabelis MW (1992) Predatory arthropods. In MJ Crawley (ed), Natural Enemies: The Population Biology of Predators, Parasites and Diseases, Chapt 10. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. doi 10.1002/9781444314076.ch10. |
| [28] | Kaspari M, Weiser M (1999) The size-grain hypothesis and interspecific scaling in ants. Funct Ecol 13:530–538. |
| [29] | Traniello JFA (1989) Foraging strategies of ants. Ann Rev Entomol 34:191–210. |
| [30] | Biewener AA (2003) Animal locomotion. Oxford University Press, Oxford. |
| [31] | Mertl AL, Traniello JFA (2009) Behavioral evolution in the major worker sub-caste of twig-nesting Pheidole (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): does morphological specialization influence task plasticity? Behavioral Ecol Sociobiol 63:1411–1426. |
| [32] | Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (2009). The Superorganism: The Beauty, Elegance, and Strangeness of Insect Societies. WW Norton & Company, New York. 521pp. |
| [33] | Lach L, Parr CL, Abbott KL (2010) Ant Ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 432pp. |
APA Style
Masoud Latifian, Behzad Habibpour, Brad Kard. (2018). Predator Ants of the Date Palm Termite Microcerotermes diversus Silvestri and Effects of ant Morphometric Characteristics on ant Functional Response. American Journal of Entomology, 2(2), 16-22. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13
ACS Style
Masoud Latifian; Behzad Habibpour; Brad Kard. Predator Ants of the Date Palm Termite Microcerotermes diversus Silvestri and Effects of ant Morphometric Characteristics on ant Functional Response. Am. J. Entomol. 2018, 2(2), 16-22. doi: 10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13
AMA Style
Masoud Latifian, Behzad Habibpour, Brad Kard. Predator Ants of the Date Palm Termite Microcerotermes diversus Silvestri and Effects of ant Morphometric Characteristics on ant Functional Response. Am J Entomol. 2018;2(2):16-22. doi: 10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13,
author = {Masoud Latifian and Behzad Habibpour and Brad Kard},
title = {Predator Ants of the Date Palm Termite Microcerotermes diversus Silvestri and Effects of ant Morphometric Characteristics on ant Functional Response},
journal = {American Journal of Entomology},
volume = {2},
number = {2},
pages = {16-22},
doi = {10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.aje.20180202.13},
abstract = {Scouting for formicidae presence in Microcerotermes diversus galleries was conducted from March to September 2014 in 10 date palm trees located in the Omaltomire region of Khuzestan Province, Iran. Measurements and morphological observations were made of 20 ant workers. For the in vitro predation test, M. diversus nymphs (n = 10 per replicate) were placed in a petri dish. Then, live freshly field-collected worker of ants were added. After 24 h, the number termite nymphs that were fully or partially devoured was determined. Five ants, including Plagiolepis pallescens, Polyrhachis lacteipennis, Pheidole teneriffana, Crematogaster antaris, and Monomorium destructor were predators of termites in date palm orchards. P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and P. pallescens, C. antaris, and M. destructor, showed Type II and Type III functional responses, respectively. The highest predation efficiency, and the lowest handing time coupled with the highest attack rate by predators was recorded for P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and C. antaris and M. destructor, respectively. Predator ant characteristics measured include: HL-Head length; HW-head width; SL-scape length; EL-eye length; PW-pronotal width; WL-thorax length; GL-gaster length; TL-total length; FL-femur length. HL, HW, SL, EL and FL showed positive effects on the functional response parameters. Results showed that termite defense capabilities declined with increasing of ant predation efficiency.},
year = {2018}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Predator Ants of the Date Palm Termite Microcerotermes diversus Silvestri and Effects of ant Morphometric Characteristics on ant Functional Response AU - Masoud Latifian AU - Behzad Habibpour AU - Brad Kard Y1 - 2018/10/04 PY - 2018 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13 DO - 10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13 T2 - American Journal of Entomology JF - American Journal of Entomology JO - American Journal of Entomology SP - 16 EP - 22 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2640-0537 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aje.20180202.13 AB - Scouting for formicidae presence in Microcerotermes diversus galleries was conducted from March to September 2014 in 10 date palm trees located in the Omaltomire region of Khuzestan Province, Iran. Measurements and morphological observations were made of 20 ant workers. For the in vitro predation test, M. diversus nymphs (n = 10 per replicate) were placed in a petri dish. Then, live freshly field-collected worker of ants were added. After 24 h, the number termite nymphs that were fully or partially devoured was determined. Five ants, including Plagiolepis pallescens, Polyrhachis lacteipennis, Pheidole teneriffana, Crematogaster antaris, and Monomorium destructor were predators of termites in date palm orchards. P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and P. pallescens, C. antaris, and M. destructor, showed Type II and Type III functional responses, respectively. The highest predation efficiency, and the lowest handing time coupled with the highest attack rate by predators was recorded for P. lacteipennis and P. teneriffana, and C. antaris and M. destructor, respectively. Predator ant characteristics measured include: HL-Head length; HW-head width; SL-scape length; EL-eye length; PW-pronotal width; WL-thorax length; GL-gaster length; TL-total length; FL-femur length. HL, HW, SL, EL and FL showed positive effects on the functional response parameters. Results showed that termite defense capabilities declined with increasing of ant predation efficiency. VL - 2 IS - 2 ER -
Information
Email: