Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants

Insect societies have developed sanitary strategies, one of which is the avoidance of infectious food resources as a primary line of defence. Using binary choices, we investigated whether Myrmica rubra ants can identify prey that has been artificially infected with the entomopathogenic fungus, Metar...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hugo Pereira, Claire Detrain
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The Royal Society 2020-02-01
Series:Royal Society Open Science
Subjects:
Online Access:https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.191705
id doaj-56314be92d034fac873d278fd0110f7e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-56314be92d034fac873d278fd0110f7e2020-11-25T03:44:04ZengThe Royal SocietyRoyal Society Open Science2054-57032020-02-017210.1098/rsos.191705191705Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in antsHugo PereiraClaire DetrainInsect societies have developed sanitary strategies, one of which is the avoidance of infectious food resources as a primary line of defence. Using binary choices, we investigated whether Myrmica rubra ants can identify prey that has been artificially infected with the entomopathogenic fungus, Metarhizium brunneum. We compared the ants' foraging behaviour towards infected prey at three different stages of fungus development: (i) prey covered with fungal conidia, (ii) prey freshly killed by the fungus and (iii) sporulating prey. Most foragers retrieved a corpse covered with a high number of spores but they consistently avoided a sporulating prey and collected less prey that had recently died from fungal infection. Furthermore, ant responses were highly variable, with some individuals retrieving the first prey they encountered while others inspected both available prey before making a decision. Workers were not repelled by the simple presence of fungal conidia but nevertheless, they avoided retrieving cadavers at later stages of fungal infection. We discuss how these different avoidance responses could be related to: differences in the ants’ perceptive abilities; physico-chemical cues characterizing fungus-infected prey or in the existence of physiological or behavioural defences that limit sanitary risks associated with potentially contaminated resources.https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.191705avoidancescavengingentomopathogenic fungiantssanitary strategies
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Hugo Pereira
Claire Detrain
spellingShingle Hugo Pereira
Claire Detrain
Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
Royal Society Open Science
avoidance
scavenging
entomopathogenic fungi
ants
sanitary strategies
author_facet Hugo Pereira
Claire Detrain
author_sort Hugo Pereira
title Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
title_short Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
title_full Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
title_fullStr Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
title_full_unstemmed Pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
title_sort pathogen avoidance and prey discrimination in ants
publisher The Royal Society
series Royal Society Open Science
issn 2054-5703
publishDate 2020-02-01
description Insect societies have developed sanitary strategies, one of which is the avoidance of infectious food resources as a primary line of defence. Using binary choices, we investigated whether Myrmica rubra ants can identify prey that has been artificially infected with the entomopathogenic fungus, Metarhizium brunneum. We compared the ants' foraging behaviour towards infected prey at three different stages of fungus development: (i) prey covered with fungal conidia, (ii) prey freshly killed by the fungus and (iii) sporulating prey. Most foragers retrieved a corpse covered with a high number of spores but they consistently avoided a sporulating prey and collected less prey that had recently died from fungal infection. Furthermore, ant responses were highly variable, with some individuals retrieving the first prey they encountered while others inspected both available prey before making a decision. Workers were not repelled by the simple presence of fungal conidia but nevertheless, they avoided retrieving cadavers at later stages of fungal infection. We discuss how these different avoidance responses could be related to: differences in the ants’ perceptive abilities; physico-chemical cues characterizing fungus-infected prey or in the existence of physiological or behavioural defences that limit sanitary risks associated with potentially contaminated resources.
topic avoidance
scavenging
entomopathogenic fungi
ants
sanitary strategies
url https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.191705
work_keys_str_mv AT hugopereira pathogenavoidanceandpreydiscriminationinants
AT clairedetrain pathogenavoidanceandpreydiscriminationinants
_version_ 1724516409237569536