Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Adams, E. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Adams, E. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology Vol. 14 No. 1: 48-53
© 2003 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

Experimental analysis of territory size in a population of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta

Eldridge S. Adams

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-3043, USA

Address correspondence to E.S. Adams. E-mail: eldridge.adams{at}uconn.edu.

Alternative models of territoriality are based on contrasting assumptions about the behavioral processes determining territory size. In a series of controlled field experiments on the fire ant Solenopsis invicta, I tested whether territory size is affected by the availability of food, as predicted by most economic models, and whether territory size is affected by fighting ability, as predicted by models of competition among neighbors. Abundant food was offered for 30–35 days to selected colonies either immediately next to the nest (experiment 1) or at peripheral sites near the territory boundary (experiment 2). These food supplements had no detectable effect on territory size. Furthermore, food placed near the periphery of the territory did not significantly alter local boundary positions. During both experiments, large colonies lost more territory than did small colonies, reflecting temporary declines in worker number due to the seasonal production of reproductives. Such losses by large colonies during the summer months create opportunities for newly founded colonies to expand territories. In a third experiment, colonies from which workers were removed lost significantly more territory than did unmanipulated controls. These results show that territory areas in S. invicta are strongly affected by the relative fighting ability of neighboring colonies but provide no evidence that colonies adjust territory area in response to short-term changes in the availability of food.

Key words: ants, food availability, social insects, Solenopsis invicta, territory size.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc R Soc BHome page
N. J.R Plowes and E. S Adams
An empirical test of Lanchester's square law: mortality during battles of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta
Proc R Soc B, September 7, 2005; 272(1574): 1809 - 1814.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.