Unequal partitioning of reproduction and investment between cooperating queens in the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta, as revealed by microsatellites

Social insects provide ideal systems for investigating how kinship and ecological factors affect cooperation and conflict. In many ant species, unrelated queens cooperate to initiate new colonies. However, fights between queens break out after the eclosion of the first workers, leading to the death of all but one queen. Queens within associations potentially face a trade–off. On one hand, a queen should restrain her investment in brood production and care if this helps her to maintain fighting ability. On the other hand, a queen may benefit by increasing her contribution to brood production if having more daughter workers than her cofoundresses enhances her chances of taking over the colony. Increased investment is also beneficial because a large brood enhances colony survival. Using microsatellites, we determined the maternity of workers (adults and larvae) at the time of queen execution in the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. Differential mass loss by initially equal nestmates affected survival, with the queen losing less body mass being more likely to survive. Surprisingly, the queen which lost less body mass, that is the one which provided the lowest energy investment, was the one which achieved higher maternity. A control experiment indicated that interactions among queens are responsible for this differential partitioning of reproductive and investment tasks between nestmates. The finding that the queen most likely to win the fights is the one with above–average maternity may explain why workers apparently do not attempt to influence the outcome of fights.

[1]  L. Keller,et al.  Partitioning of Reproduction in Mother-Daughter Versus Sibling Associations: A Test of Optimal Skew Theory , 1995, The American Naturalist.

[2]  L. Keller,et al.  Reproductive conflicts in cooperative associations of fire ant queens (Solenopsis invicta) , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  A. Templeton Chromosome Number, Quantitative Genetics and Eusociality , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[4]  E. Adams,et al.  The dissolution of cooperative groups: mechanisms of queen mortality in incipient fire ant colonies , 1996, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[5]  B. Hölldobler,et al.  Colony founding by queen association and determinants of reduction in queen number in the ant Lasius niger , 1995, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  H. L. Collins,et al.  Colony Founding by Queens of the Red Imported Fire Ant, Solenopsis invicta , 1972 .

[7]  Bruce Waldman Mechanisms of kin recognition , 1987 .

[8]  L. Sundström Sex ratio bias, relatedness asymmetry and queen mating frequency in ants , 1994, Nature.

[9]  P. Sherman,et al.  Kin Recognition by Phenotype Matching , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[10]  A. Bourke Indiscriminate egg cannibalism and reproductive skew in a multiple-queen ant , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  F. Ratnieks The Evolution of Genetic Odor-Cue Diversity in Social Hymenoptera , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[12]  L. Keller,et al.  Reproductive Bribing And Policing As Evolutionary Mechanisms For The Suppression Of Within‐Group Selfishness , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[13]  D. Wheeler,et al.  Storage proteins in ants during development and colony founding , 1995 .

[14]  W. Hamilton The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  R. Crozier,et al.  Genetic Intrigues. (Book Reviews: Evolution of Social Insect Colonies. Sex Allocation and Kin Selection.) , 1997 .

[16]  R. Crozier Kin Recognition Using Innate Labels: A Central Role for Piggybacking? , 1988 .

[17]  A. Bourke,et al.  The Ecology of Communal Breeding: The Case of Multiple-Queen Leptothoracine Ants , 1994 .

[18]  L. Keller,et al.  Partitioning of reproduction in animal societies. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[19]  S. Rissing,et al.  Genetic relatedness among co-foundresses of two desert ants Veromessor pergandei and Acromyrmex vers , 1988 .

[20]  W. Tschinkel Brood raiding and the population dynamics of founding and incipient colonies of the fire ant, Solenopsis invicta , 1992 .

[21]  P. Hammerstein The role of asymmetries in animal contests , 1981, Animal Behaviour.

[22]  J. Evans,et al.  Relatedness threshold for the production of female sexuals in colonies of a polygynous ant, Myrmica tahoensis, as revealed by microsatellite DNA analysis. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  K. Ross,et al.  Lack of detectable nepotism in multiple-queen colonies of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) , 1997, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[24]  N. Franks,et al.  Social Evolution in Ants , 2019 .

[25]  L. Keller,et al.  Conditional Manipulation of Sex Ratios by Ant Workers: A Test of Kin Selection Theory , 1996, Science.

[26]  W. G. Holmes Kin recognition by phenotype matching in female Belding's ground squirrels , 1986, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  L. Keller Queen number and sociality in insects , 1993 .

[28]  L. Keller,et al.  Indiscriminate altruism: unduly nice parents and siblings. , 1997, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[29]  P. Sherman Insect Chromosome Numbers and Eusociality , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[30]  A. Forsyth Worker Control of Queen Density in Hymenopteran Societies , 1980, The American Naturalist.

[31]  L. Keller,et al.  Polymorphism at dinucleotide microsatellite loci in fire ant Solenopsis invicta populations , 1997 .

[32]  GENETIC ORIGIN OF MALE DIPLOIDY IN THE FIRE ANT, SOLENOPSIS INVICTA (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE), AND ITS EVOLUTIONARY SIGNIFICANCE , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.