Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:09:26.667Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Biology of Carpenter Ants in New Brunswick1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

C. J. Sanders
Affiliation:
School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Abstract

Thirty-five colonies of three species of carpenter ant were examined: 25 of Camponotus herculeanus, 9 of C. noveboracensis, and 1 of C. pennsylvanicus. Workings were examined in about 150 trees. No major differences were noticed in the biology of the first two species.

All individuals were taken from two overwintering, torpid, C. herculeanus colonies; the larger contained 6,000 workers, 550 winged forms, and 6,500 larvae. Larvae were of two sizes and it is thought that the life cycle covers two years in New Brunswick. Frequency curves of worker head widths show that there are majors and minors, the minors being more numerous, especially in small colonies.

Each colony typically occupied several trees, only one of which contained the brood; the others had less extensive workings. Entrances were underground and led to tunnels connecting the trees within each colony. Surplus wood chips were buried in the ground. Ant activity in the tunnels was continuous through the day and night; few ants were seen on the forest floor.

Woodpeckers are important enemies and had attacked one third of the brood trees.

The workings frequently assist wind breakage and damage butt logs. From the roots they extend to a height of 4-6 ft., occasionally higher. 1% of the spruce, and 2-4% of the balsam fir examined had been attacked. This may lead to loss of 10% of merchantable volume, and possibly a higher figure for eastern white cedar.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Basham, J. T., Mook, P. V., and Davidson, A. G.. 1953. New information concerning balsam fir decay in eastern North America. Canad. J. Bot. 31: 334360.Google Scholar
Brown, W. L. Jr., , and Wilson, E. O.. (unpublished). Some observations on the ranges of the carpenter ants of New England.Google Scholar
Buren, W. F. 1944. A list of Iowa ants. Iowa St. Coll. J. Sci. 18: 277312.Google Scholar
Cole, A. C. Jr., 1942. The ants of Utah. Amer. Midl. Nat. 28: 358388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, A. G. 1951. Decay in balsam fir in the Green River watershed. Canad. Dep. For. (unpublished).Google Scholar
Dennis, C. A. 1938. The distribution of ant species in Tennessee with reference to ecological factors. Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 31: 267308.Google Scholar
Eidmann, H. 1929. Zur Kenntnis der Biologie der Rossameise (Camponotus herculeanus (L.)). Z. angew. Ent. 14: 229253.Google Scholar
Friend, R. B., and Carlson, A. B.. 1937. The control of ants in telephone poles. Bull. Conn. agric. Exp. Sta. 403.Google Scholar
Goetsch, W., and Kathner, Br.. 1937. Die Koloniengründung der Formicen und ihre experimentelle Beeinflussung. Z. Morph. Ökol. Tiere 33: 201260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, S. A. 1918. The carpenter ant as a destroyer of sound wood. Minnesota State Entomologist 17th. Report. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sta.Google Scholar
Gregg, R. E. 1944. The ants of the Chicago region. Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 37: 447480.Google Scholar
Gregg, R. E. 1946. The ants of northeastern Minnesota. Amer. Midl. Nat. 35: 753.Google Scholar
Green, G. W., and Sullivan, C. R.. 1950. Ants attacking the larvae of the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria. Canad. Ent. 82: 194195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölldobler, K. 1944. Ueber die forstlich wichtigen Ameisen des nordostkarelischen Urwaldes. Teil I. Z. angew. Ent. 30: 606622.Google Scholar
Marikovskij, P. I. 1956. (Observations on the biology of the carpenter ant, Camponotus herculeanus (L.) and of the red wood ant Formica rufa (L.) inhabiting the mountain forests of Kirghiza.) [In Russian.] Trans. Inst. Zool. Parasit., Acad. Sci. Kirghiz S.S.R.Google Scholar
Pricer, J. L. 1908. The life history of the carpenter ant. Biol. Bull. 14: 177218.Google Scholar
Smith, F. 1942. Polymorphism in Camponotus, (Hymenoptera; Formicidae). Tenn. Acad. Sci. J. 17: 367373.Google Scholar
Spaulding, P., and Hansbrough, J. R.. 1944. Decay in balsam fir in New England and New York. Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. 872.Google Scholar
Talbot, M. 1934. Distribution of ant species in the Chicago region, with reference to ecological factors and physiological toleration. Ecology 15: 416439.Google Scholar
Wheeler, W. M. 1910. Ants: their structure and development. Columbia Univ. Press, N.Y.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 1953. The origin and evolution of polymorphism in ants. Quart. Rev. Biol. 28: 136156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed