Influence of the hypogaeic army ant Dorylus (Dichthadia) laevigatus on tropical arthropod communities
Influence of the hypogaeic army ant Dorylus (Dichthadia) laevigatus on tropical arthropod communities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00442-002-1173-4
复制
发表时间：
2003-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Linsenmair, KE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Berghoff, SM;Maschwitz, U;Linsenmair, KE
大多数行军蚂蚁都虚伪地觅食。由于观察这些蚂蚁很困难，它们对下地和上地节肢动物群落的潜在影响还没有被调查。当第一只地下觅食的军蚁被详细研究时，我们吸引了多丽丝·莱维格斯来监测它们的节肢动物多样性。在这里，同样的地点第一次在一次军蚁突袭之前和之后进行了采样。此外，还记录了莱维氏蚂蚁与五种最常见的地面筑巢蚂蚁之间的相互作用，并对它们的生活史特征进行了比较，从而首次推断出它们共存的可能机制。在一个研究样地内出现的莱维虫对节肢动物类群的数量或用表层陷阱和地下陷阱收集的个体数量没有明显的影响。同样，幼年节肢动物的机动性较小，因此可能更容易成为D.laevigatus的猎物，在军蚁访问一块地块之前和之后，它们收集的节肢动物数量没有差异。然而，在莱维塔蚁进入研究样地后，用低位诱捕器捕获的蚂蚁种类明显减少，这表明莱维塔斯可能是一种捕食性蚂蚁，特别是对两种拟青蚁和一种拟青蚁的捕食。五种最常见的地面觅食蚂蚁物种展示了它们躲避、杀死甚至捕食军蚁的能力。白纹伊蚊对白纹伊蚊的反应表明，前者是一种潜在的捕食性物种，而厚鞭毛虫Pachycondyla sp.2号出现了“敌方规格”的迹象。Diversus和Odontoponera verversa积极捕食D.laevigatus，而Pheidologeton affinis与D.laevigatus争夺资源。所有种类的蚂蚁都能在棕榈油诱饵中与莱维氏拟线虫共生。除了在以前的研究中发现的莱维格斯蚂蚁和表层觅食的行军蚂蚁物种之间的差异外，这种低海拔行军蚂蚁的出现对节肢动物群落组成的破坏似乎比那些表层大规模掠夺物种的影响要小。
The majority of army ant species forage hypogaeically. Due to the difficulties in observing these ants, their potential influence on hypogaeic and epigaeic arthropod communities has not yet been investigated. As the first hypogaeically foraging army ant studied in detail, we attracted Dorylus laevigatus to areas monitored for their arthropod diversity. Here, for the first time, the same sites were sampled before and after an army ant raid. Furthermore, interactions between D. laevigatus and the five most common ground-nesting ant species were noted and their life-history traits compared, allowing first inferences on possible mechanisms of their coexistence. The occurrence of D. laevigatus within a study plot had no evident effect on the number of arthropod taxa or individuals collected with epigaeic and hypogaeic pitfall traps. Likewise, juvenile arthropods, which are less mobile and thus are potentially easier prey for D. laevigatus, showed no differences in their collected numbers before and after the army ant had visited a plot. However, significantly fewer ant species were collected with hypogaeic traps after D. laevigatus had been within the study plots, indicating a possible predation of D. laevigatus especially on two Pseudolasius and one Pheidole species. The five most common ground-foraging ant species demonstrated their ability to avoid, kill, and even prey on the army ant. The reaction of Lophomyrmex bedoti towards D. laevigatus indicated the former to be a potential prey species, while Pachycondyla sp. 2 showed signs of "enemy specification." Odontoponera diversus and O. transversa actively preyed on D. laevigatus, while Pheidologeton affinis fought with D. laevigatus over resources. All ant species could co-occur with D. laevigatus at palm oil baits. Adding to the differences detected in previous studies between D. laevigatus and epigaeically foraging army ant species, the occurrence of this hypogaeic army ant seems to have less devastating effects on arthropod community compositions than those of epigaeically mass raiding species.