Vol. 31 Núm. 2 (2015)
Artículos originales

Preferencias entre cinco carbohidratos en Pheidole bilimeki (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Madai Rosas-Mejía
Instituto de Ecología Aplicada, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas
Alfonso Correa-Sandoval
Instituto Tecnológico de Cd. Victoria
Crystian Sadiel Venegas-Barrera
Instituto Tecnológico de Cd. Victoria
Jorge Víctor Horta-Vega
Instituto Tecnológico de Cd. Victoria

Publicado 16-08-2015

Palabras clave

  • hormigas,
  • trehalosa,
  • feromona reclutadora,
  • melezitosa

Cómo citar

Rosas-Mejía, M., Correa-Sandoval, A., Venegas-Barrera, C. S., & Horta-Vega, J. V. (2015). Preferencias entre cinco carbohidratos en Pheidole bilimeki (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). ACTA ZOOLÓGICA MEXICANA (N.S.), 31(2), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.21829/azm.2015.312985

Resumen

Los carbohidratos comunes en fuentes naturales de energía para las hormigas son: sacarosa, fructosa, glucosa, trehalosa y melezitosa. En este estudio se establecieron preferencias entre estos cinco carbohidratos en Pheidole bilimeki Mayr a través de la conducta de reclutamiento. El orden de efectividad reclutadora de los cinco químicos fue: sacarosa > melezitosa = trehalosa > fructosa > glucosa. En todos los azúcares la respuesta fue dependiente de la concentración entre 0.1 M y 1 M. Los tiempos bebiendo fueron los mismos en todos los carbohidratos, por lo cual se descarta que distintos volúmenes de solución ingerida determinen diferentes cantidades de feromona reclutadora secretada. Se propone que diferentes niveles de interacción de los azúcares con los receptores gustativos determina la intensidad del reflejo liberador de la feromona.

Citas

  1. Ayre, G. L. 1967. The relationships between food and digestive enzymes in five species of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Canadian Entomologist, 99: 08-411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent99408-4
  2. Becker, A., Schlöder, P., Steele, J. E. & Wegener, G. 1996. The regulation of trehalose metabolism in insects. Experientia, 52: 433-439. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01919312
  3. Blüthgen, N. & Fiedler, K. 2004. Preferences for sugars and amino acids and their conditionality in a diverse nectar-feeding ant community. Journal of Animal Ecology, 73: 155-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2004.00789.x
  4. Blüthgen, N., Gottsberger, G. & Fiedler, K. 2004. Sugar and amino acid composition of ant-attended nectar and honeydew sources from an Australian rainforest. Austral Ecology, 29: 418-429. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2004.01380.x
  5. Breed, M. D., Fewell, J. H., Moore, A. J. & Williams, K. R. 1987. Graded recruitment in a ponerine ant. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 20: 407-411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302983
  6. Cammaerts, M. & Cammaerts, C. R. 1980. Food recruitment strategies of the ants Myrmica sabuleti and Myrmica ruginodis. Behavioural Processes, 5: 251-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(80)90006-6
  7. Carthy, J. D. 1950. Odour trails of Acanthomyops fuliginosus. Nature, 166: 154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/166154a0
  8. Comisión Nacional del Agua (CNA). Servicio Meteorológico Nacional, México, 2014. Recurso electrónico: http://smn.cna.gob.mx/index.php?option=com_ content&view=article&id=166&tmpl=com.
  9. Detrain, C. & Deneubourg, J. L. 1997. Scavenging by Pheidole pallidula: a key for understanding decision-making systems in ants. Animal Behavioural, 53: 537-547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0305
  10. Detrain, C. & Prieur, J. 2014. Sensitivity and feeding efficiency of the black garden ant Lasius niger to sugar resources. Journal of Insect Physiology, 64: 74-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2014.03.010
  11. Douglas, A. E. 2003. The nutritional physiology of aphids. Advances in Insect Physiology, 31: 73-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2806(03)31002-1
  12. Douglas, A. E. 2006. Phloem-sap feeding by animals: problems and solutions. Journal of Experimental Botany, 57: 747-754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj067
  13. Freeman, E. G., Wisotsky, Z. & Dahanukar, A. 2014. Detection
  14. of sweet tast ants by a conserved group of insect gustatory receptors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A, 111: 1598-1603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1311724111
  15. Friedman, S. 1985. Carbohydrate metabolism, pp. 43-76. In: L. I. Gilbert and G. A. Kerkut (Eds.). Comprehensive Insect Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
  16. Heil, M., Rattke, J. & Boland, W. 2005. Postsecretory hydrolysis of nectar sucrose and specialization in ant/plant mutualism. Science, 308: 560-563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1107536
  17. Hendrix, D. L., Wei, Y. A. & Leggett, J. E. 1992. Homopteran honeydew sugar composition is determined by both the insect and plant species. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 101: 23-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0491(92)90153-I
  18. Hölldobler, B. & Wilson, E. O. 1990. The ants. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. 732 pp.
  19. Horta-Vega, J. V., Eguía-López, B., Ruiz-Cancino, E. & Brussolo-Ceballos, R. 2010. Recruitment response to six carbohydrates in the ant Pheidole dentigula Smith, 1927 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomological News, 121: 290-297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3157/021.121.0311
  20. Josens, R. B., Farina, W. M. & Roces, F. 1998. Nectar feeding by the ant Camponotus mus: intake rate and crop filling as a function of sucrose concentration. Journal of Insect Physiology, 44: 579-585. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1910(98)00053-5
  21. Kay, A. 2004. The relative availabilities of complementary resources affect the feeding preferences of ant colonies. Behavioral Ecology, 15: 63-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arg106
  22. Kiss, A. 1981. Melezitose, aphids and ants. Oikos, 37: 382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3544132
  23. Koptur, S. & Truong, N. 1998. Nectar sugar preferences of introduced pest ant species in South Florida. Biotropica, 30: 179-189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.1998.tb00053.x
  24. Longino, J. T. & Cox, D. J. 2009. Pheidole bilimeki reconsidered (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zootaxa, 1985: 34-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1985.1.3
  25. Mailleux, A. C., Deneubourg, J. L. & Detrain, C. 2000. How do ants assess food volume?. Animal Behaviour, 59: 1061-1069. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1396
  26. Ricks, B. L. & Vinson, S. B. 1970. Feeding acceptability of certain insects and various water-soluble compounds to two varieties of the imported fire ant. Journal of Economic Entomology, 63: 145-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/63.1.145
  27. Ricks, B. L. & Vinson, S. B. 1972. Digestive enzymes of the imported fire ant, Solenopsis richteri (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomología Experimentalis et Applicata, 15: 329-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.1972.tb00217.x
  28. Roux J., Privman, E., Moretti, S., Daub, J. T., Robinson-Rechavi, M. & Keller, L. 2014. Patterns of positive selection in seven ant genomes. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 31: 1661-1685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu141
  29. Smith, C. D., Zimin, A., Holt, C., Abouheif, E., Benton, R., Cash, E., Croset, V., Currie, C. R., Elhaik, E., Elsik, C. G., Fave, M. J., Fernandes, V., Gadau, J., Gibson, J. D., Graur, D., Grubbs, K. J., Hagen, D. E., Helmkampf, M., Holley, J. A., Hu, H., Ibarraran-Viniegra, A. S., Johnson, B. R., Johnson, R. M., Khila, A., Kim, J. W., Laird, J., Mathis, K. A., Moeller, J. A., Muñoz-Torres, M. C., Murphy, M. C., Nakamura, R., Nigam, S., Overson, R. P., Placek, J. E., Rajakumar, R., Reese, J. T., Robertson, H. M., Smith, C. R., Suarez,A. V., Suen, G., Suhr,E. L., Tao, S., Torres, C. W., van Wilgenburg, E., Viljakainen, L., Walden, K. K. O., Wild, A. L., Yandell, M., Yorke, J. A. & Tsutsui,N. D. 2011. Draft genome of the globally widespread and invasive Argentine ant (Linepithema humile). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U. S. A., 108: 5673-5678. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008617108
  30. Tinti, J. M. & Nofre, C. 2001. Responses of the ant Lasius niger to various compounds perceived as sweet in humans: a structure-activity relationship study. Chemical Senses, 26: 231-237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/26.3.231
  31. Vander-Meer, R. K., Lofgren, C. S. & Seawright, J. A. 1995. Specificity of the Red Imported Fire Ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Phagostimulant Response to Carbohydrates. The Florida Entomologist, 78: 144-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3495679
  32. Vantaux, A., Van den Ende, W., Billen, J. & Wenseleers, T. 2011. Large interclone differences in melezitose secretion in the facultatively ant-tended black bean aphid Aphis fabae. Journal of Insect Physiology, 57: 1614-1621. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2011.08.014
  33. Völkl, W., Woodring, J., Fischer, M., Lorenz, M. W. & Hoffmann, K. H. 1999. Ant-aphid mutualisms: the impact of honey-dew production and honeydew sugar composition on ant preferences. Oecologia, 118: 483-491. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050751
  34. Wilson, E. O. 1959. Source and possible nature of the odor trail of fire ants. Science, 129: 643-644. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.129.3349.643
  35. Wilson, E. O. 1971. The Insect Societies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 548 pp.
  36. Wilder, S. M. & Eubanks, M. D. 2010. Extrafloral nectar content alters foraging preferences of a predatory ant. Biology Letters, 6: 177-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0736
  37. Wurm, Y., Wang, J., Riba-Grognuz, O., Corona, M., Nygaard, S., Hunt, B. G., Ingram, K. K., Falquet, L., Nipitwattanaphon, M., Gotzek, D., Dijkstra, M. B., Oettler, J., Comtesse, F., Shih, C. J., Wu, W. J., Yang, C. C., Thomas, J., Beaudoing, E., Pradervand, S., Flegel, V., Cook, E. D., Fabbretti, R., Stockinger, H., Long, L., Farmerie, W. G., Oakey, J., Boomsma, J. J., Pamilo,
  38. P., Yi, S. V., Heinze, J., Goodisman, M. A. D., Farinelli, L., Harshman, K., Hulo, N., Cerutti, L., Xenarios, I., Shoemaker, D. & Keller, L. 2011. The genome of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U. S. A., 108: 5679-5684. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1009690108