Foraging ants trade off further for faster: use of natural bridges and trunk trail permanency in carpenter ants

Trail-making ants lay pheromones on the substrate to define paths between foraging areas and the nest. Combined with the chemistry of these pheromone trails and the physics of evaporation, trail-laying and trail-following behaviours provide ant colonies with the quickest routes to food. In relatively uniform environments, such as that provided in many laboratory studies of trail-making ants, the quickest route is also often the shortest route. Here, we show that carpenter ants (Camponotus rufipes), in natural conditions, are able to make use of apparent obstacles in their environment to assist in finding the fastest routes to food. These ants make extensive use of fallen branches, twigs and lianas as bridges to build their trails. These bridges make trails significantly longer than their straight line equivalents across the forest floor, but we estimate that ants spend less than half the time to reach the same point, due to increased carriage speed across the bridges. We also found that these trails, mainly composed of bridges, are maintained for months, so they can be characterized as trunk trails. We suggest that pheromone-based foraging trail networks in field conditions are likely to be structured by a range of potentially complex factors but that even then, speed remains the most important consideration.

[1]  J. Deneubourg,et al.  Collective decision making through food recruitment , 1990, Insectes Sociaux.

[2]  K. Jaffe,et al.  Comportamiento alimentario y sistema de reclutamiento en la hormiga camponotus rufipes (hymenoptera : formicidae) , 1984 .

[3]  J. Deneubourg,et al.  Self-organized shortcuts in the Argentine ant , 1989, Naturwissenschaften.

[4]  D. Sumpter,et al.  Shape and efficiency of wood ant foraging networks , 2008, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[5]  D. Hughes,et al.  The Life of a Dead Ant: The Expression of an Adaptive Extended Phenotype , 2009, The American Naturalist.

[6]  Vincent Fourcassié,et al.  Does substrate coarseness matter for foraging ants? An experiment with Lasius niger (Hymenoptera; Formicidae). , 2008, Journal of insect physiology.

[7]  Kai Zhang,et al.  An improved ant colony optimization for communication network routing problem , 2009, 2009 Fourth International on Conference on Bio-Inspired Computing.

[8]  E. Wilson Chemical communication among workers of the fire ant Solenopsis saevissima (Fr. Smith) 2. An information analysis of the odour trail , 1962 .

[9]  Duncan E. Jackson,et al.  Minor workers have a major role in the maintenance of leafcutter ant pheromone trails , 2008, Animal Behaviour.

[10]  Guy Theraulaz,et al.  Path selection and foraging efficiency in Argentine ant transport networks , 2009, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[11]  K. Del‐Claro,et al.  Conditional outcomes in a neotropical treehopper-ant association: temporal and species-specific variation in ant protection and homopteran fecundity , 2000, Oecologia.

[12]  D. Hughes,et al.  Disease Dynamics in a Specialized Parasite of Ant Societies , 2012, PloS one.

[13]  S. D. Eneubourg Pheromone trail decay rates on different substrates in the Pharaoh’s ant, Monomorium pharaonis , 2003 .

[14]  H. Vasconcelos Foraging activity of two species of leaf-cutting ants (Atta) in a primary forest of the Central Amazon , 1990, Insectes Sociaux.

[15]  A. Farji-Brener,et al.  Fallen Branches as Part of Leaf‐Cutting Ant Trails: Their Role in Resource Discovery and Leaf Transport Rates in Atta cephalotes , 2007 .

[16]  Hsin-Yun Lee Optimizing schedule for improving the traffic impact of work zone on roads , 2009 .

[17]  K. Del‐Claro,et al.  Ecology and behaviour of the weaver ant Camponotus (Myrmobrachys) senex , 2009 .

[18]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Optimal traffic organization in ants under crowded conditions , 2004, Nature.

[19]  A. Hart,et al.  Density-dependent prophylactic immunity reconsidered in the light of host group living and social behavior. , 2010, Ecology.

[20]  F. Ratnieks,et al.  Trail geometry gives polarity to ant foraging networks , 2004, Nature.

[21]  K. Del‐Claro,et al.  Natural history and foraging behavior of the carpenter ant Camponotus sericeiventris Guérin, 1838 (Formicinae, Campotonini) in the Brazilian tropical savanna , 2008, acta ethologica.

[22]  D. Sumpter,et al.  Optimisation in a natural system: Argentine ants solve the Towers of Hanoi , 2011, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[23]  B. Peco,et al.  Spatial patterns of seed predation by harvester ants (Messor Forel) in Mediterranean grassland and scrubland , 2003, Insectes Sociaux.

[24]  E. Wilson Chemical communication among workers of the fire ant Solenopsis saevissima (Fr. Smith) 1. The Organization of Mass-Foraging , 1962 .

[25]  A. Ellison,et al.  Counting Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): Biodiversity Sampling and Statistical Analysis for Myrmecologists , 2011 .

[26]  Michael J. Crawley,et al.  The R book , 2022 .

[27]  Guy Theraulaz,et al.  Path efficiency of ant foraging trails in an artificial network. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[28]  G. Gottsberger,et al.  Effects of fragmentation on forest structure and litter dynamics in Atlantic rainforest in Pernambuco, Brazil , 2008 .

[29]  H. P. Veloso,et al.  Classificação da vegetação brasileira, adaptada a um sistema universal , 1991 .

[30]  M. Breed,et al.  Effects of habitat disturbance on ant community composition and seed dispersal by ants in a tropical dry forest in Costa Rica , 2008, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[31]  Jochen Zeil,et al.  Different effects of temperature on foraging activity schedules in sympatric Myrmecia ants , 2011, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[32]  X. Cerdá,et al.  The role of competition by dominants and temperature in the foraging of subordinate species in Mediterranean ant communities , 1998, Oecologia.