4.5 Article

Local resource competition and sex ratio in the ant Cataglyphis cursor

期刊

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY
卷 17, 期 4, 页码 569-574

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arj067

关键词

dispersal; Formicidae; relatedness; sex allocation; thelytoky

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The local resource competition (LRC) hypothesis predicts that wherever philopatric offspring compete for resources with their mothers, offspring sex ratios should be biased in favor of the dispersing sex. In ants, LRC is typically found in polygynous (multiple queen) species where foundation of new nests occurs by budding, which results in a strong population structure and a male-biased population-wide sex ratio. However, under polygyny, the effect of LRC on sex allocation is often blurred by the effect of lowered relatedness asymmetries among colony members. Moreover, environmental factors, such as the availability of resources, have also been shown to deeply influence sex ratio in ants. We investigated sex allocation in the monogynous (single queen) ant Cataglyphis cursor a species where colonies reproduce by budding and both male and female sexuals are produced through parthenogenesis, so that between-colony variations in relatedness asymmetries should be reduced. Our results show that sex allocation in C. cursor is highly male biased both at the colony and population levels. Genetic analyses indicate a significant isolation-by-distance in the study population, consistent with limited dispersal of females. As expected from asexual reproduction, only weak variations in relatedness asymmetry of workers toward sexual offspring occur across colonies, and they are not associated with colony sex ratio. Inconsistent with the predictions of the resource availability hypothesis, the male bias significantly increases with colony size, and investment in males, but not in females, is positively correlated with total investment in sexuals. Overall, our results are consistent with the predictions of the LRC hypothesis to account for sex ratio variation in this species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据