Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation?
Strong effects of predator chemical cues on prey are common in aquatic and marine ecosystems, but are thought to be rare in terrestrial systems and specifically for arthropods. For ants, herbivores are hypothesized to eavesdrop on ant chemical communication and thereby avoid predation or confrontati...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2012-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3250387?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-a2b69750c2754dfcb87202cc14515e17 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a2b69750c2754dfcb87202cc14515e172020-11-25T00:53:55ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032012-01-0171e2870310.1371/journal.pone.0028703Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation?David J GonthierStrong effects of predator chemical cues on prey are common in aquatic and marine ecosystems, but are thought to be rare in terrestrial systems and specifically for arthropods. For ants, herbivores are hypothesized to eavesdrop on ant chemical communication and thereby avoid predation or confrontation. Here I tested the effect of ant chemical cues on herbivore choice and herbivory. Using Margaridisa sp. flea beetles and leaves from the host tree (Conostegia xalapensis), I performed paired-leaf choice feeding experiments. Coating leaves with crushed ant liquids (Azteca instabilis), exposing leaves to ant patrolling prior to choice tests (A. instabilis and Camponotus textor) and comparing leaves from trees with and without A. instabilis nests resulted in more herbivores and herbivory on control (no ant-treatment) relative to ant-treatment leaves. In contrast to A. instabilis and C. textor, leaves previously patrolled by Solenopsis geminata had no difference in beetle number and damage compared to control leaves. Altering the time A. instabilis patrolled treatment leaves prior to choice tests (0-, 5-, 30-, 90-, 180-min.) revealed treatment effects were only statistically significant after 90- and 180-min. of prior leaf exposure. This study suggests, for two ecologically important and taxonomically diverse genera (Azteca and Camponotus), ant chemical cues have important effects on herbivores and that these effects may be widespread across the ant family. It suggests that the effect of chemical cues on herbivores may only appear after substantial previous ant activity has occurred on plant tissues. Furthermore, it supports the hypothesis that herbivores use ant chemical communication to avoid predation or confrontation with ants.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3250387?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
David J Gonthier |
spellingShingle |
David J Gonthier Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
David J Gonthier |
author_sort |
David J Gonthier |
title |
Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
title_short |
Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
title_full |
Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
title_fullStr |
Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
title_sort |
do herbivores eavesdrop on ant chemical communication to avoid predation? |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2012-01-01 |
description |
Strong effects of predator chemical cues on prey are common in aquatic and marine ecosystems, but are thought to be rare in terrestrial systems and specifically for arthropods. For ants, herbivores are hypothesized to eavesdrop on ant chemical communication and thereby avoid predation or confrontation. Here I tested the effect of ant chemical cues on herbivore choice and herbivory. Using Margaridisa sp. flea beetles and leaves from the host tree (Conostegia xalapensis), I performed paired-leaf choice feeding experiments. Coating leaves with crushed ant liquids (Azteca instabilis), exposing leaves to ant patrolling prior to choice tests (A. instabilis and Camponotus textor) and comparing leaves from trees with and without A. instabilis nests resulted in more herbivores and herbivory on control (no ant-treatment) relative to ant-treatment leaves. In contrast to A. instabilis and C. textor, leaves previously patrolled by Solenopsis geminata had no difference in beetle number and damage compared to control leaves. Altering the time A. instabilis patrolled treatment leaves prior to choice tests (0-, 5-, 30-, 90-, 180-min.) revealed treatment effects were only statistically significant after 90- and 180-min. of prior leaf exposure. This study suggests, for two ecologically important and taxonomically diverse genera (Azteca and Camponotus), ant chemical cues have important effects on herbivores and that these effects may be widespread across the ant family. It suggests that the effect of chemical cues on herbivores may only appear after substantial previous ant activity has occurred on plant tissues. Furthermore, it supports the hypothesis that herbivores use ant chemical communication to avoid predation or confrontation with ants. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3250387?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT davidjgonthier doherbivoreseavesdroponantchemicalcommunicationtoavoidpredation |
_version_ |
1725235903228542976 |