Cargando…

Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants

Rescue behavior is observed when 1 individual provides help to another individual in danger. Most reports of rescue behavior concern ants (Formicidae), in which workers rescue each other from various types of entrapment. Many of these entrapment situations can be simulated in the laboratory using an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Turza, Filip, Miler, Krzysztof
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8962746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35355949
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoab052
_version_ 1784677862509379584
author Turza, Filip
Miler, Krzysztof
author_facet Turza, Filip
Miler, Krzysztof
author_sort Turza, Filip
collection PubMed
description Rescue behavior is observed when 1 individual provides help to another individual in danger. Most reports of rescue behavior concern ants (Formicidae), in which workers rescue each other from various types of entrapment. Many of these entrapment situations can be simulated in the laboratory using an entrapment bioassay, in which ants confront a single endangered nest mate entrapped on a sandy arena by means of an artificial snare. Here, we compared numerous characteristics of rescue actions (contact between individuals, digging around the entrapped individual, pulling at its body parts, transport of the sand covering it, and biting the snare entrapping it) in Formica cinerea ants. We performed entrapment tests in the field and in the laboratory, with the latter under varying conditions in terms of the number of ants potentially engaged in rescue actions and the arena substrate (marked or unmarked by ants’ pheromones). Rescue actions were more probable and pronounced in the field than in the laboratory, regardless of the type of test. Moreover, different test types in the laboratory yielded inconsistent results and showed noteworthy variability depending on the tested characteristic of rescue. Our results illustrate the specifics of ant rescue actions elicited in the natural setting, which is especially important considering the scarcity of field data. Furthermore, our results underline the challenges related to the comparison of results from different types of entrapment tests reported in the available literature. Additionally, our study shows how animal behavior differs in differing experimental setups used to answer the same questions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8962746
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89627462022-03-29 Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants Turza, Filip Miler, Krzysztof Curr Zool Articles Rescue behavior is observed when 1 individual provides help to another individual in danger. Most reports of rescue behavior concern ants (Formicidae), in which workers rescue each other from various types of entrapment. Many of these entrapment situations can be simulated in the laboratory using an entrapment bioassay, in which ants confront a single endangered nest mate entrapped on a sandy arena by means of an artificial snare. Here, we compared numerous characteristics of rescue actions (contact between individuals, digging around the entrapped individual, pulling at its body parts, transport of the sand covering it, and biting the snare entrapping it) in Formica cinerea ants. We performed entrapment tests in the field and in the laboratory, with the latter under varying conditions in terms of the number of ants potentially engaged in rescue actions and the arena substrate (marked or unmarked by ants’ pheromones). Rescue actions were more probable and pronounced in the field than in the laboratory, regardless of the type of test. Moreover, different test types in the laboratory yielded inconsistent results and showed noteworthy variability depending on the tested characteristic of rescue. Our results illustrate the specifics of ant rescue actions elicited in the natural setting, which is especially important considering the scarcity of field data. Furthermore, our results underline the challenges related to the comparison of results from different types of entrapment tests reported in the available literature. Additionally, our study shows how animal behavior differs in differing experimental setups used to answer the same questions. Oxford University Press 2021-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8962746/ /pubmed/35355949 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoab052 Text en © The Author(s) (2021). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Editorial Office, Current Zoology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Articles
Turza, Filip
Miler, Krzysztof
Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title_full Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title_short Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
title_sort comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8962746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35355949
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoab052
work_keys_str_mv AT turzafilip comparativeanalysisofexperimentaltestingproceduresfortheelicitationofrescueactionsinants
AT milerkrzysztof comparativeanalysisofexperimentaltestingproceduresfortheelicitationofrescueactionsinants