Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:38:23.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tree size but not forest basal area influences ant colony response to disturbance in a neotropical ant–plant association

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2012

Thomas S. Davis ,
Nathaniel E. Foote  and
Kevin C. Grady
Thomas S. Davis*
Affiliation:
USDA Agricultural Research Service, Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory, 5230 Konnowac Pass Road, Wapato, WA98951, USA
Nathaniel E. Foote
Affiliation:
USDA Agricultural Research Service, Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory, 5230 Konnowac Pass Road, Wapato, WA98951, USA
Kevin C. Grady
Affiliation:
USDA Agricultural Research Service, Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory, 5230 Konnowac Pass Road, Wapato, WA98951, USA
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Ant–acacia mutualisms are conspicuous biotic associations in Savannah and neotropical ecosystems; however, the effects of tree size and forest structure on ant behaviour and tree traits are rarely examined. We tested two hypotheses related to these effects: (1) ant responses to disturbance are influenced by tree size and forest basal area; and (2) tree traits important to ants are predictable by tree size and forest basal area. We investigated these hypotheses in a dry tropical forest (Ometepe Island, Nicaragua) with the myrmecophytic Collins acacia (Vachellia collinsii Saff.) and the ant Pseudomyrmex spinicola (Emery 1890). We measured trees from three size classes and three basal area classes and quantified resources that are important for ants, including food resources (nectaries and Beltian bodies) and domiciles (thorns), as well as a measure of potential tree reproductive fitness (seedpods). We also evaluated ant responses to experimental disturbances. Three important findings emerged: (1) on average, 1140–1173% more ants responded to experimental disturbances of large trees than small- or intermediate-sized trees, respectively; (2) forest basal area did not affect ant responses to disturbance; and (3) neither tree size nor forest basal area was correlated with branch-level mean numbers of nectaries, food bodies or thorns. Our studies support the hypothesis that tree size is an important factor regarding ant behavioural responses to disturbance, but not forest basal area. Our work suggests that future studies of ant behaviour on myrmecophytes should consider tree size.

Keywords

acaciaantsbasal areafunctional traitsmutualismmyrmecophytePseudomyrmex spinicolaVachellia collinsii (Acacia)
Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 116 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2012

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

Agrawal, A. A. (1998) Leaf damage and associated cues induce aggressive ant recruitment in a neotropical ant–plant. Ecology 79, 2100–2112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agyeman, V. K. (1994) Environmental influences on tropical tree seedling growth. PhD thesis. University of Aberdeen, UK. 224 pp.Google Scholar
Barton, A. M. (1986) Spatial variation in the effect of ants on an extrafloral nectary plant. Ecology 67, 495–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, A. J. (1985) The Evolutionary Ecology of Ant–Plant Mutualisms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 196 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bella, I. E. (1971) A new competition model for individual trees. Forest Science 17, 364–372.Google Scholar
Belt, T. (1874) The Naturalist in Nicaragua. E. Bumpas, London. 403 pp.Google Scholar
Bergh, J., Linder, S., Lundmark, T. and Elfving, B. (1999) The effect of water and nutrient availability on the productivity of Norway spruce in northern and southern Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management 119, 51–62.Google Scholar
Bronstein, J. (1998) The contribution of ant–plant protection studies to our understanding of mutualism. Biotropica 30, 150–161.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. W. and Fisher, B. L. (1991) Symbiosis of ants with Cecropia as a function of light regime, pp. 289–309. In Ant–plant Interactions (edited by Huxley, C. R. and Cutler, D. F.). Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. W., Snelling, R. R. and Longino, J. T. (1989) Competition among ants for myrmecophytes and the significance of plant trichomes. Biotropica 21, 64–73.Google Scholar
D'Souza, L. E., Reiter, M., Six, L. J. and Bilby, R. E. (2011) Response of vegetation, shade, and stream temperature to debris torrents in two western Oregon watersheds. Forest Ecology and Management 261, 2157–2167.Google Scholar
Fonseca, C. R. (1993) Nesting space limits colony size of the plant–ant Pseudomyrmex concolor. Oikos 67, 473–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaume, L. and McKey, D. (1999) An ant–plant mutualism and its host-specific parasite: activity rhythms, young leaf patrolling, and effects on herbivores of two specialist plant–ants inhabiting the same myrmecophyte. Oikos 84, 130–144.Google Scholar
Ghazoul, J. (2001) Can floral repellants pre-empt potential ant–plant conflicts? Ecology Letters 4, 295–299.Google Scholar
Heil, M. and McKey, D. (2003) Protective ant–plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 34, 425–453.Google Scholar
Janzen, D. H. (1966) Coevolution of mutualism between ants and acacias in Central America. Evolution 20, 249–275.Google Scholar
Janzen, D. H. (1973) Dissolution of mutualism between Cecropia and its Azteca ants. Biotropica 5, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kautz, S., Pauls, S. U., Ballhorn, D. J., Lumbsch, H. T. and Heil, M. (2009) Polygynous supercolonies of the acacia-ant Pseudomyrmex peperi, an inferior colony founder. Molecular Ecology 18, 5180–5194.Google Scholar
Martins, D. J. (2010) Not all ants are equal: obligate acacia ants provide different levels of protection against mega-herbivores. African Journal of Ecology 48, 1115–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, R. A. and Chazdon, R. L. (2001) Forest structure, canopy architecture, and light transmittance in tropical wet forests. Ecology 82, 2707–2718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, T. M. (2003) Spatial habitat heterogeneity influences competition and coexistence in an African ant-acacia guild. Ecology 84, 2843–2855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, T. M. (2004) Wars of attrition: colony size determines competitive outcomes in a guild of African acacia ants. Animal Behavior 68, 993–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, T. M. and Brody, A. K. (2007) Mutualism as reciprocal exploitation: African plant–ants defend foliar but not reproductive structures. Ecology 88, 3004–3011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, T. M., Stanton, M. L., Young, T. P., Goheen, J. R., Pringle, R. M. and Karban, R. (2008) Breakdown of an ant–plant mutualism follows the loss of large herbivores from an African savanna. Science 319, 192–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, O. L., Malhi, Y., Higuchi, N., Laurance, W. F., Núñez, P. V., Vásquez, R. M., Laurance, S. G., Ferreira, L. V., Stern, M., Brown, S. and Grace, J. (1998) Changes in the carbon balance of tropical forests: evidence from long-term plots. Science 282, 439–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poorter, L. (1999) Growth responses of 15 rain-forest tree species to a light gradient: the relative importance of morphological and physiological traits. Functional Ecology 13, 396–410.Google Scholar
Rico-Gray, V., Garcia-Franco, J. G., Palacios-Rios, M., Diaz-Castelazo, M., Parra-Tabla, V. and Navarro, J. A. (1998) Geographical and seasonal variation in the richness of ant–plant interactions in Mexico. Biotropica 30, 190–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosati, A., Esparza, G., DeJong, T. M. and Pearcy, R. W. (1999) Influence of canopy light environment and nitrogen availability on leaf photosynthetic characteristics and photosynthetic nitrogen use efficiency of field grown nectarine trees. Tree Physiology 19, 173–180.Google Scholar
Ward, P. S. (1993) Systematic studies on Pseudomyrmex acacia ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Pseudomyrmecinae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 2, 117–168.Google Scholar
Willmer, P. G. and Stone, G. N. (1997) How aggressive ant-guards assist seed-set in Acacia flowers. Nature 388, 165–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar