@phdthesis{Schmitt2004,
  author    = {Schmitt, Thomas},
  title     = {Communication in the hymenoptera : chemistry, ecology and evolution},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-11267},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {Insects exhibit complex systems of communication with chemical signalling being the most important mode. Although there are many studies on chemical communication in insects, the evolution of chemical signals is not well understood. Due to the conflict of interests between individuals, different selective pressures might act on sender and receiver. In this thesis I investigate different types of communication where either the sender, the receiver or both parties yield benefits. These studies were conducted with one digger wasp species, honeybees, one chrysidid wasp, and three ant species. Senders might benefit by exploiting existing preferences of receivers. Such sensory exploitation might influence the evolution of male signals that are designed to attract females. The sex pheromone of male European beewolves Philanthus triangulum (Hymenoptera, Crabronidae) might have evolved according to the sensory exploitation hypothesis. A three-step scenario is supported by our studies. First, a major component of the honeybee alarm pheromone, (Z)-11-eicosen-1-ol, is also found on the cuticles and in the air surrounding foraging honeybees. Second, it could be shown, that (Z)-11- eicosen-1-ol plays a crucial role as kairomone for prey identification of honeybees by beewolf females. Third, a reanalysis of the beewolf male sex pheromone shows a remarkable similarity of compounds between the pheromone and the honeybee cuticle, besides the co-occurrence of (Z)-11-eisosen-ol. The majority of the cuticular hydrocarbons of honeybees occur also in the headspace of foraging workers. These results strongly support the hypothesis that beewolf males evolved a pheromone that exploits the females' pre-existing sensory sensitivity. In addition, the male sex pheromone shows a significantly higher similarity among brothers than among non-related individuals, which might enable beewolf females to discriminate against brothers and avoid detrimental effects of breeding. Together with the studies on the possible sensory exploitation this result shows that both, male and female beewolves probably gain more benefits than costs from the pheromone communication and, thus, the communication system as a whole can be regarded as cooperative. To maintain the reproductive division of labour in eusocial colonies, queens have to signal their presence and fecundity. In the ant Camponotus floridanus (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) queens mark their own eggs with a distinctive pattern of cuticular hydrocarbons. Two different hypotheses have been developed. One suggests a form of worker manipulation by the queen. The alternative hypothesis assumes a cooperative signal that provides information on the condition of the queen. The results of our investigation clearly favour the latter hypothesis. Chemical mimicry is a form of non-cooperative communication that benefits predominantly the sender. We provided conclusive evidence that the cockoo wasp, Hedychrum rutilans (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae), the primary brood parasitoid of Philanthus triangulum, evades recognition by beewolf females most probably by chemical mimicry of the odour of its host. Furthermore, the adaptation of the chemical signature in the social ant parasite Protomognathus americanus (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) to its Leptothorax (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) hosts was investigated. Although this parasite is principally adapted to its hosts' cuticular hydrocarbon profile, there are still pronounced differences between the profiles of parasites and hosts. This might be explained by the trade-off, which the parasites faces when confronted locally with two host species with different cuticular hydrocarbon profiles. Non-cooperative communication in the sense that only receivers benefit was discovered in the exploitation of honeybees volatile cuticular hydrocarbons by beewolf females. By using emitted (Z)-11-eicosen-1-ol as a kairomone, the receiver, the beewolf female, yields the benefits and the sender, the honeybee prey, bears all the costs. The results of these studies contribute to the understanding of the evolution of cooperative and non-cooperative communication with chemical signals taking into account differential benefits for sender and/or receiver.},
  subject      = {Hautfl{\"u}gler},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Herzner2004,
  author    = {Herzner, Gudrun},
  title     = {Evolution of the pheromone communication system in the European Beewolf Philanthus triangulum F. (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae)},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-11651},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {Darwin's theory of sexual selection explains the evolution of flamboyant male traits through female choice. It does not, however, address the question why males typically court and females choose. This asymmetry is now thought to be the result of the dichotomy in reproductive expenditures: Females invest primarily in parental care and males invest predominantly in mate attraction or competition. Based on this view, several hypotheses for the origin and maintenance of female preferences have been proposed. They include the classical sexual selection models, i.e. female choice for direct and indirect benefits as well as the more recent concepts of female choice for genetic compatibility and receiver bias models. The complementary choice scenario assumes that females choose mates with regard to genetic compatibility. The receiver bias concept views male traits and female preferences within the framework of communication theory and encompasses various more or less distinct models, two of which are sensory exploitation and sensory trap. Both models postulate that male signals evolved in response to pre-existing perceptual biases of females. The sensory trap hypothesis additionally emphasizes that pre-existing female preferences for certain cues evolved in non-sexual contexts, like e.g. foraging. Males that mimic these cues and elicit a favourable out-of-context response by females may increase their reproductive success. This thesis examines the evolution of the pheromone communication in the European Beewolf Philanthus triangulum. Beewolf females are specialized hunters of honeybees and provision their progeny with paralyzed prey. Male beewolves establish and scent mark territories with a pheromone from a head gland to court females. The concordant occurrence of the otherwise rare alcohol (Z)-11-eicosen-1-ol in the male pheromone and in the alarm pheromone of honeybees, the exclusive prey of the females, suggests a sensory trap process as an explanation for the evolution of the male pheromone in P. triangulum. According to this hypothesis, we tested three predictions: First, foraging honeybees should emit eicosenol. Via chemical analysis we could show that honeybee workers in fact smell of eicosenol during foraging. The occurrence of eicosenol on the cuticle and in the headspace of honeybees is a new finding. Second, beewolf females should use eicosenol as a cue for prey detection or identification. Using behavioural assays, we demonstrated that prey recognition in beewolf females is accomplished by olfactory cues and that eicosenol is an essential cue in this process. The sensory sensitivity of beewolf females to eicosenol must be extremely high, since they perceive the trace amounts present in the head space of honeybees. This sensitivity may be due to specialized olfactory receptors on the antennae of beewolf females. An inventory of the flagellar sensilla of both sexes showed that females carry one type of sensillum that is missing in males, the large sensillum basiconicum. This chemo-sensitive sensillum most likely plays a role in prey recognition. The third prediction is that beewolf males incorporate bee-like substances, including eicosenol, into their pheromone, and possibly catch females in a sensory trap. A reanalysis of the male pheromone revealed, among others, eicosenol and several alkanes and alkenes as pheromonal compounds. Our own analyses of the chemical profiles of honeybee workers and beewolf pheromone disclosed a surprisingly strong resemblance between the two. Eight of the eleven substances of the male pheromone are also present on the cuticle and in the headspace of honeybees. Notwithstanding this similarity, the male pheromone does not function as a sensory trap for females. Nevertheless, the extensive congruence between the odour bouquets of the females' prey and the male pheromone strongly suggests that the male signal evolved to exploit a pre-existing female sensory bias towards bee odour, and, thus represents a case of sensory exploitation. In addition to the above described scenario concerning mostly the 'design' of the male pheromone, we addressed possible indirect benefits female beewolves may gain by basing their mating decisions on signal 'content'. We show that the pheromone of male beewolves varies between families and may, thus, contain information about the degree of relatedness between the female and a potential mate. Females could use this information to choose genetically complementary males to avoid inbreeding and the production of infertile diploid sons. Collectively, our results provide strong evidence for a receiver bias process in the evolution of the male pheromone of P. triangulum. They further indicate that the pheromone composition may subsequently have been influenced by other natural or sexual selection pressures, like e.g. complementary female choice.},
  subject      = {Philantus},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Menzel2009,
  author    = {Menzel, Florian},
  title     = {Mechanisms and adaptive significance of interspecific associations between tropical ant species},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-37251},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2009},
  abstract  = {Aggression between ants from different colonies or species is ubiquitous. Exceptions to this rule exist in the form of supercolonies (within a species) and interspecific associations (between species). Probably the most intimate interspecific association is the parabiosis, where two ant species live together in a common nest. They keep their brood separate but jointly use trails and often share food resources. Parabioses are restricted to few species pairings and occur in South American and Southeast Asian rainforests. While the South American parabioses have been studied, albeit poorly, almost nothing is known about their Southeast Asian counterparts. My PhD project focuses on Southeast Asian parabioses between the myrmicine Crematogaster modiglianii Emery 1900 and the considerably larger formicine Camponotus rufifemur Emery 1900. The two species frequently nest together in hollow trees in the tropical lowland rainforest of Borneo. The basic question of my PhD project is why these two species live together. I investigated both proximate and ultimate aspects of this question. For comparative purposes, I included studies on a trail-sharing association in the same habitat. On the proximate level, I investigated which mechanisms facilitate tolerance towards hetero-spe¬ci¬fic nestmates. Ants generally discriminate nestmates from non-nestmates via cuticular hydro¬carbons that function as colony recognition cues. I studied the specificity of nestmate recognition within and between the two parabiotic species. Using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), I analyzed the cuticular substances in both ant species to find potential differences to non-parabiotic species, and to estimate the substance overlap among the two species. A high substance overlap would e.g. suggest that interspecific tolerance is caused by chemical mimicry. Finally, bioassays were conducted to evaluate the function of different cuticular compounds. Interspecific tolerance in the two parabiotic species was species-specific but not colony-specific. Ca. rufifemur tolerated all Cr. modiglianii individuals, even those from foreign colonies, but strongly attacked workers of other Crematogaster species. Cr. modiglianii, in turn, tolerated Ca. rufifemur workers of certain foreign colonies but attacked those of others. Chemical analyses revealed two sympatric, chemically distinct Ca. rufifemur varieties ('red' and 'black') with almost no hydrocarbon overlap. Cr. modiglianii only tolerated foreign Ca. rufifemur workers if they belonged to the same chemical variety as their own Ca. rufifemur partner. It also attacked other, non-parabiotic Camponotus species. Thus, reciprocal interspecific tolerance was restricted to the species Cr. modiglianii and Ca. rufifemur. Ca. rufifemur frequently tolerated conspecific non-nestmates of the same chemical variety. Minor workers were more often tolerated than majors, possibly because they possess two to three times lower hydrocarbon quantities per body surface than majors. In contrast, Cr. modiglianii nearly always attacked conspecific non-nestmates. Both species possessed hydrocarbons with considerably higher chain lengths than congeneric, non-parabiotic ant species. Long-chain hydrocarbons are less volatile than shorter ones and thus harder to perceive. They may thus considerably facilitate interspecific tolerance. Moreover, up to 98\% of the cuticular hydrocarbons in Ca. rufifemur were methylbranched alkenes, which are highly unusual among insect cuticular hydrocarbons. Cr. modiglianii and Ca. rufifemur had almost no hydrocarbons in common, refuting chemical mimicry as a possible cause of interspecific tolerance. The only hydrocarbons common to both species were two methylbranched alkenes, which constituted 89\% of the 'red' Ca. rufifemur hydrocarbon profile and also occurred in those Cr. modiglianii colonies that lived together with this Ca. rufifemur variety. Cr. modiglianii presumably acquired these two compounds from its red Ca. rufifemur partner. Cr. modiglianii was significantly less aggressive towards foreign Cr. modiglianii workers that were associated with the same Ca. rufifemur variety than to those associated with the respective other one. Hence, this species seemed to use recognition cues acquired from its parabiotic partner. Apart from hydrocarbons, both species possessed a set of hitherto unknown substances on their cuticle. The quantitative composition of the unknown compounds varied between parabiotic nests but was similar among the two species of a nest. They are probably produced in the Dufour glanf of Cr. modiglianii and transferred to their Ca. rufifemur partner. Possible transfer mechanisms include interspecific trophallaxis and 'mounting behaviour', where Cr. modiglianii climbed onto Ca. rufifemur workers without being displaced. Although the composition of the unknown compounds greatly varied between nests, they did not function as nestmate recognition cues since both species used hydrocarbons for nestmate recognition. However, the unknown compounds significantly reduced aggression in Ca. rufifemur. The ultimate, i.e. ecological and evolutionary aspects of my PhD research deal with potential costs and benefits that Cr. modiglianii and Ca. rufifemur may derive from the parabiotic association, their interactions with other species, and population genetic analyses. Additional studies on a trail-sharing association between three other ant species deal with two possible mechanisms that may cause or facilitate trail-sharing. Whether parabioses are parasitic, commensalistic, or mutualistic, is largely unknown and depends on the costs and benefits each party derives from the association. I therefore investigated food competition (as one of the most probable costs), differentiation of foraging niches (which can reduce competition), and several potential benefits of the parabiotic way of life. Besides, I studied interactions between the ant species and the hemiepiphyte Poikilospermum cordifolium. The foraging niches of the two species differed regarding foraging range, daily activity pattern, and food preferences. None of the two species aggressively displaced its partner species from baits. Thus, interference competition for food seemed to be low or absent. For both ant species, a number of benefits from the parabiotic lifestyle seem possible. They include interspecific trail-following, joint nest defence, provision of nest space by the partner species, food exchange via trophallaxis, and mutual brood care. If an ant species follows another species' pheromone trails, it can reach food resources found by the other species. As shown by artificial extract trails, Ca. rufifemur workers indeed followed trails of Cr. modiglianii but not vice versa. Thus, Ca. rufifemur benefited from Cr. modiglianii's knowledge on food sources (informational parasitism). In turn, Cr. modiglianii seemed to profit from nest defence by Ca. rufifemur. Ca. rufifemur majors are substantially larger than Cr. modiglianii workers. Although Cr. modiglianii often effectively defended the nest as well, it seemed likely that this species derived a benefit from its partner's defensive abilities. In neotropical parabioses (ant-gardens), mutualistic epiphytes play an important role in providing nest space. The neotropical Camponotus benefits its Crematogaster partner by planting epiphyte seeds, for which Crematogaster is too small. Similarly, the Bornean parabioses often were inhabited by the hemiepiphyte Poikilospermum cordifolium (Barg.-Petr.) Merr (Cecropiaceae). P. cordifolium seedlings, saplings and sometimes larger indivi¬duals abundantly grew at the entrances of parabiotic nests. However, P. cordifolium provides no additional nest space and, apart from nutritive elaiosomes, perianths, and extrafloral nectar probably plays a less important role for the ants than the neotropical epiphytes. In conclusion, the parabiosis is probably beneficial to both species. The main benefits seem to be nest defence (for Cr. modiglianii) and interspecific trail-following (for Ca. rufifemur). However, Ca. rufifemur seems to be more dependent on its partner than vice versa. For both parabiotic species, I analyzed mitochondrial DNA of ants from different regions in Borneo. My data suggest that there are four genetically and chemically distinct, but closely related varieties of Camponotus rufifemur. In contrast, Crematogaster modiglianii showed high genetic differentiation between distant populations but was not differentiated into genetic or chemical varieties. This argues against variety-specific cocladogenesis between Cr. modiglianii and Ca. rufifemur, although a less specific coevolution of the two species is highly likely. In Bornean rainforests, trail-sharing associations of Polyrhachis (Polyrhachis) ypsilon Emery 1887 and Camponotus (Colobopsis) saundersi Emery 1889 are common and often include further species such as Dolichoderus cuspidatus Smith 1857. I investigated a trail-sharing association between these three species and studied two mechanisms that may cause or facilitate these associations: interspecific trail-following, i.e. workers following another species' pheromone trail, and differential inter¬specific aggression. In trail-following assays, D. cuspidatus regularly followed extract trails of the other two species, thus probably parasitizing on their information on food sources. In contrast, only few P. ypsilon and Ca. saundersi workers followed hetero¬speci¬fic extract trails. Hence, the association between P. ypsilon and Ca. saundersi cannot be ex¬plained by foragers following heterospecific trails. In this case, trail-sharing may originate from few scout ants that do follow heterospecific pheromone trails and then lay their own trails. Interspecific aggression among P. ypsilon, Ca. saundersi and D. cuspidatus was strongly asymmetric, Ca. saundersi being submissive to the other two species. All three species discriminated between heterospecific workers from the same and a distant trail-sharing site. Thus, it seems likely that the species of a given trail-sharing site habituate to one another. Differential tolerance by dominant ant species may be mediated by selective habituation towards submissive species, and thereby influence the assembly of trail-sharing associations.},
  subject      = {Ameisen},
  language  = {en}
}