Exploration adjustment by ant colonies.

Carolina Doran, Martin C Stumpe, Ana Sendova-Franks, Nigel R Franks
Author Information
  1. Carolina Doran: School of Biological Sciences, Bristol Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK; Champalimaud Neuroscience Programme, Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Avenida Brasília, Lisbon 1400-038, Portugal. ORCID
  2. Martin C Stumpe: AnTracks Computer Vision Systems , Mountain View, CA, USA. ORCID
  3. Ana Sendova-Franks: Department of Engineering Design and Mathematics, UWE Bristol , Coldharbour Lane, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK. ORCID
  4. Nigel R Franks: School of Biological Sciences, Bristol Life Sciences Building , 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK. ORCID

Abstract

How do animals in groups organize their work? Division of labour, i.e. the process by which individuals within a group choose which tasks to perform, has been extensively studied in social insects. Variability among individuals within a colony seems to underpin both the decision over which tasks to perform and the amount of effort to invest in a task. Studies have focused mainly on discrete tasks, i.e. tasks with a recognizable end. Here, we study the distribution of effort in nest seeking, in the absence of new nest sites. Hence, this task is open-ended and individuals have to decide when to stop searching, even though the task has not been completed. We show that collective search effort declines when colonies inhabit better homes, as a consequence of a reduction in the number of bouts (exploratory events). Furthermore, we show an increase in bout exploration time and a decrease in bout instantaneous speed for colonies inhabiting better homes. The effect of treatment on bout effort is very small; however, we suggest that the organization of work performed within nest searching is achieved both by a process of self-selection of the most hard-working ants and individual effort adjustment.

Keywords

References

  1. J Theor Biol. 1999 Jun 21;198(4):575-92 [PMID: 10373356]
  2. Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Dec 7;270(1532):2457-63 [PMID: 14667335]
  3. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006 Jan 29;361(1465):5-22 [PMID: 16553306]
  4. Nature. 2007 Feb 15;445(7129):715 [PMID: 17301775]
  5. PLoS Biol. 2008 Nov 18;6(11):e285 [PMID: 19018663]
  6. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Mar 27;364(1518):743-53 [PMID: 19073480]
  7. Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Dec 22;276(1677):4373-80 [PMID: 19776072]
  8. Trends Ecol Evol. 1992 Oct;7(10):346-9 [PMID: 21236060]
  9. PLoS One. 2011;6(5):e19981 [PMID: 21629645]
  10. J Exp Biol. 2011 Sep 15;214(Pt 18):3046-54 [PMID: 21865517]
  11. Biol Lett. 2013 Oct 02;9(5):20130685 [PMID: 24088565]
  12. PLoS Biol. 2014 Mar 11;12(3):e1001805 [PMID: 24618695]
  13. J R Soc Interface. 2014 Sep 6;11(98):20140641 [PMID: 25030387]
  14. Oecologia. 2001 Jan;126(1):1-9 [PMID: 28547427]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0efforttasksindividualswithintasknestcoloniesboutlabourieprocessperformsearchingshowbetterhomesexplorationadjustmentanimalsgroupsorganizework?DivisiongroupchooseextensivelystudiedsocialinsectsVariabilityamongcolonyseemsunderpindecisionamountinvestStudiesfocusedmainlydiscreterecognizableendstudydistributionseekingabsencenewsitesHenceopen-endeddecidestopeventhoughcompletedcollectivesearchdeclinesinhabitconsequencereductionnumberboutsexploratoryeventsFurthermoreincreasetimedecreaseinstantaneousspeedinhabitingeffecttreatmentsmallhoweversuggestorganizationworkperformedachievedself-selectionhard-workingantsindividualExplorationantTemnothoraxalbipennisdivisionflexibility

Similar Articles

Cited By