4.3 Article

Dispersion movements in ants:: spatial structuring and density-dependent effects

Journal

BEHAVIOURAL PROCESSES
Volume 63, Issue 1, Pages 33-43

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00030-5

Keywords

ants; diffusion; dispersion movement; group size; Messor sancta

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper examines whether the characteristics of individual dispersion movements in ants are changed when workers are moving solitarily or in a group. We analyzed the trajectories of workers of the species Messor sancta moving solitarily or in groups of different size (5, 10, 15 individuals), tested for density-dependent effects on their trajectory characteristics and investigated through resampling techniques whether ants are able to spatially structure their movements through direct (e.g. contact) or indirect (pheromone deposited on the ground) interactions. In addition to group size, the effects of the nutritional state of the colony and of the state of the area on which ants were dispersing were also examined. Solitary ants moved faster and had more sinuous trajectories than ants moving in a group. We found however no significant differences in trajectory characteristics between groups of different size. Whatever the group size, ants from starved colonies moved more slowly and had more direct trajectories than their counterpart coming from fed colonies. On the other hand, the state of the area on which ants were moving had no direct significant effect on dispersion movement. Ants dispersing in a group moved independently and did not coordinate their movements through direct or indirect interactions. However, the geometry of their path was changed not only through the effect of random encounters with other workers but also through an active modification of their movement when they perceived directly or indirectly the presence of nearby workers. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available