Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNSpub

Mandibular shape variation among different size classes of the ant Camponotus sp.(Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Research Paper | March 1, 2016

| Download 4

Nur-Aynie B. Bacaraman, Mark Anthony J. Torres

Key Words:

J. Bio. Env. Sci.8( 3), 179-186, March 2016


JBES 2016 [Generate Certificate]


This study was conducted to determine shape differences in the mandibles of different size classes of the ant Camponotus sp.. To do this, landmarks taken from digital images of a total of sixty minor (30) and major worker (30) ants were subjected to the outline-based Geometric Morphometric Analsis of Elliptic Fourier Analysis (EFA). Results showed global shape differences between the two types of worker ants. However, when mandibular shape was regressed with cephalic size, results indicate the negligible role that Allometry play in the disparity between the worker ants. This result suggest that polyethism in this species of ants is not dependent on age.


Copyright © 2016
By Authors and International Network for
Natural Sciences (INNSPUB)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0

Mandibular shape variation among different size classes of the ant Camponotus sp.(Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Bolton B. 1994.Identification guide to the ant genera of the world. Harvard Universi Press, Cambridge, MA. 222 p.

Bolton B, Alpert G, Ward PS, Naskrecki P. 2006.Bolton  Catalogue  of  Ants  of  the  World:1758–2005. Harvard University Press.

Dela Cruz LM, Torres MAJ, Barrion AT, Joshi R, Sebastian LS, Demayo CG. 2011. Geometric morphometric analysis of the head, pronotum, genitalia of the rice black bug associated with selected rice types. Academic Journal of Biological Science 4(1), 21-31.

Donoso DA, Ramon G. 2009. Composition of high diversity leaf litter ant community (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) from an Ecuadorian pre-montanee rainforest. Annales de la SocieteEntomologique de France 45, 487-499.

Douglas ME, Matthews WJ. 1992. Does morphology predict ecology? Hypothesis testing within a freshwater stream Wshassemblage.Oikos 65:213–224.

Emlen DJ, Nijhout HF. 2001. Hormonal control of male horn length dimorphism in the dung beetle Onthophagustaurus (Coleoptera:Scarabaeidae) : A second critical period of sensitivity to juvenile hormone. Journal of Insect Physiology 47:1045-1054.

Felley JD. 1984. Multivariate identification of morphologicalenvironmental relationships within cyprinidae (Pisces).Copeia 1984, 442–455.

Gotwald WH. Jr. 1995. Army ants / the biology of social predation./ Cornell Univ. Press.

Gronenberg W. 1996. The trap-jaw mechanism in the dacetine ants Dacetonarmigerum and Strumigenys sp. Journal of Experimental Biology 199(9), 2021-2033.

General DM, Alpert GD. 2012. A synoptic review of the ant genera (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of the Philippines.ZooKeys 200, 1-111.

Hölldobler B, Wilson EO. 1990 The Ants. Belknap/Harvard Press, Cambridge, MA.

Jolliffe IT. 2002. Principal Component Analysis, second edition Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-0-387-95442-4.

Kaspari M, Weiser MD. 1999. The size-grain hypothesis and interspecific scaling in ants. Functional Ecology 13, 530-538.

Losos JB. 1990. The evolution of form and funaion: Morphology and locomotor performance in West Indian Anolis lizards. Evoluriw 44(1), 189- 1203.

Manting MME, Torres MAJ, Demayo CG. 2013. Describing Variability in Mandible Shapes in Selected Workers of the Ant Diacamma rugosum (LeGuillou) 1842 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Ponerinae). International Research Journal of Biological Sciences 2(6), 8-15.

Manting MME, Torres MAJ, Demayo CG. 2015. Mandibular shape variation in the three species of Odontomachus Latreille 1804 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Advances in Environmental Biology 9 (19), 104-113

McArthur AJ. 2007. A key to CamponotusMayr of Australia, pp. 290-351. In Snelling, R. R., B. L. Fisher, and P. S. Ward (eds). Advances in ant systematics (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): homage to E. O. Wilson – 50 years of contributions. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, 80.

Oster GF, Wilson EO. 1978 Caste and ecology in the social insects (Monographs in population biology, no. 12). Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Pie MR, Traniello JFA. 2007. Morphological evolution in a hyperdiverse clade: the ant genus Pheidole. Journal of Zoology 271, 99–109.

Sendova-Franks AB, Franks NR. 1999. Self-assembly, self-organization and division of labour In Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 354(1388), 1395–1405.

Shlens J. 2005. A tutorial on principal component analysis.

Shattuck SO. 2004. Review of the Camponotus aureopilus species group (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) including a second Camponotus with a metapleural gland. Zootaxa 903, 1-20.

Sirvio A. 2010. The role of factors promoting genetic diversity within social insect colonies. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis. A Scientiae Rerum Naturalium 555, 1-64.

Sudd JH, NR. Franks. 1987. The Behavioural Ecology of Ants, Chapman and Hall, New York.

Trager JC, Johnson C. 1985. A slave-making ant in Florida: Polyer with observations on the natural history of its host Formica a guslucidusrch boldi (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Florida Entomologist 68, 261-266.

Weiser MD. Kaspari M. 2006. Ecological morphospace of New World ants. Ecological Entomology 31, 131–142.

Wilson EO. 1971. The insect societies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wilson EO. 1953. The origin and evolution of polymorphism in ants. Quarterly Review of Biology 28, 136–156.

Wheeler WM. 1910. Ants – their structure, development, and behaviour. Columbia University Press, New York. 663 p.