Food and Shelter: How Resources Influence Ant Ecology

Ant Ecology ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 115-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Blüthgen ◽  
Heike Feldhaar
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin D. Hoffmann ◽  
Magen Pettit

ABSTRACTBecause different sampling techniques will provide different abundance values, it is currently difficult to compare results among many studies to form holistic understandings of how abundance influences ant ecology. Using three sampling methods in the same location we found pitfall traps best confirmed A. gracilipes presence recording the fewest zero values (9.1%), card counts were the least reliable (67.1%), and tuna lures were intermediate (30.1%). The abundance of A. gracilipes from card counts ranged from 0 to 20, in pitfall traps from 0 to 325, and the full range of tuna lure abundance scores (0-7) were sampled. We then determined the relationships between these three standard ant sampling techniques for the abundance of yellow crazy ant Anoplolepis gracilipes. Irrespective of the data transformation method, the strongest relationship was between pitfall traps and tuna lures, and the least strong was between pitfall traps and card counts. We then demonstrate the utility of this knowledge by analysing A. gracilipes abundance reported within published literature to show where the populations in those studies sit on an abundance spectrum. We also comment on insights into the relative utility of the three methods we used to determine A. gracilipes abundance among populations of varying abundance. Pitfall traps was the most reliable method to determine if the species was present at the sample level. Tuna lures were predominantly reliable for quantifying the presence of workers, but were limited by the number of workers that can gather around a spoonful of tuna. Card counts were the quickest method, but were seemingly only useful when A. gracilipes abundance is not low. Finally we discuss how environmental and biological variation needs to be accounted for in future studies to better standardise sampling protocols to help progress ecology as a precision science.


2010 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 47-6862-47-6862
Keyword(s):  

1997 ◽  
Vol 75 (10) ◽  
pp. 1671-1686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen V. Noyce ◽  
Paul B. Kannowski ◽  
Michael R. Riggs

We documented the seasonal occurrence and volume of different ant species in black bear (Ursus americanus) scats in north-central Minnesota. We determined nest densities of common ant species in strip transects and compared their use by bears with their availability. We recorded phenologic change in ant-nest characteristics and measured the nutritional composition of ant workers, ant pupae, and herbaceous spring foods of bears. Consumption of ants was higher than reported elsewhere, peaking in early July, when ants constituted 58% of scat volume and occurred in 96% of scats. Increased consumption of ants in late spring coincided with (i) increased abundance and size of ant brood in nests and (ii) decreased protein and increased fiber levels in herbaceous foods. Lasius umbratus was the principal species consumed at 1 site, whereas L. umbratus, Acanthomyops interjectus, and A. claviger dominated the diet farther south. These ants were likely preferred to other equally abundant species because of their sometimes dense concentrations inside nests, passive behavior, and distinctive odor, enabling bears to forage more efficiently than on other species. We suspect that regional differences in ant consumption are due to differences in local availability of these species. Where they are less common, bears likely select large-bodied ants, usually Camponotus and Formica species.


2010 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 347
Author(s):  
Sílvia Pérez-Espona
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document