Development of Incipient Formosan Subterranean Termite1 Colonies in the Field2

King, E. G.; Spink, William T.

doi:10.1093/aesa/68.2.355

Cited by 33 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…lucifugus (Buchli, 1950)], but there is little information on the relative contributions of the male versus the female. T h e male is known to assist the female in egg laying (King & Spink, 1975) and he helps keep the eggs free from fungi (Castle, 1934;Weesner, 1953 ;Nutting, 1966). In R. lucifugus, the male has primary responsibility for egg care (Buchli, 1950).…”

Section: (6) Male Care-giving Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…darwiniensis (Watson & Metcalf, unpublished data), Hodotermes mossambicus (van der Westhuizen et al, 1985), Coptotermes formosanus (King & Spink, 1975), R. lucifugus (Buchli, I 950), Cubitermes fungifaber (Han & Noirot,I 983), Macrotermes subhyalinus (Buhlmann, 1977). T h e weight loss of the queen must be due at least in part to oviposition.…”

Section: (7) Male and Female Weight Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution of Monogamy in Termites

Nalepa

Jones

1991

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the origin of lifetime monogamy in the Isoptera. The classic explanation is that (1) the male must be present to continually provide sperm for the vast number of eggs produced by the queen (Snyder, 1924: Brian, 1983). Thornhill & Alcock (1983) proposed that (2) synchrony in the availability of receptive females necessitates mate guarding; males subsequently gain if they improve the relative reproductive success of their sole partner. Our review of the literature on termite flight behaviour, courtship behaviour, and incipient colony development indicates that neither of these two hypotheses satisfactorily explains the evolution of monogamy in termites. Because incipient colonies of lower termites exhibit a very low fecundity, it is doubtful that the continued presence of the male initially was due to the need for a continuous supply of spermatozoa. It is possible, however, that sperm requirements for the fertilization of numerous eggs over an extended period of time may be a factor in the persistence of the termites' monogamous mating system. Female alates are much more dispersed in time than implied by Thornhill & Alcock (1983) and there is no evidence of mate guarding. The importance of mate assistance is, however, supported by the literature. We propose a third hypothesis that incorporates the mate assistance element of the Thornhill & Alcock hypothesis: (3) the monogamous mating system of termites was structured by ecological constraints, namely, the low quality and scattered nature of their food/nesting material and the high costs of searching for a mate.

show abstract

Section: (6) Male Care-giving Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: (7) Male and Female Weight Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Monogamy in Termites

Nalepa

Jones

1991

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subterranean termites form colonies often containing hundreds of thousands to millions of individuals (King & Spink 1975). The individuals construct underground tunnel networks to obtain their food resources (Su et al 1984).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation study to determine why only some termites are active during tunneling activity

Song

Lee

2018

Entomological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been known that some termites are responsible for tunnel excavation for foraging, while others are not involved in the excavation. The biological reason for this is that the resting termites are a backup for the termites that have used up their energy in the tunneling activity. In this study, we build an agent‐based model (ABM) wherein agents (simulated termites) follow simple rules that govern their behavior. In this model, the agents are endowed with a directional vector that has been shown to exist in real termites, but they do not communicate through pheromonal or physical marking of excavation sites. They move toward the tunnel tips, tunnel when their progress in that direction is blocked, and transport the excavated soil. Using the model, we investigated the work efficiency of termites in constructing tunnels and transporting food; the efficiency was defined as the inverse value of tunnel connectivity plus tunnel expansion speed. Biologically, the connectivity is related to the energy to be used for termites to transport food through tunnels, and the tunnel expansion speed is related to the energy required for constructing tunnels. Simulation results showed that the efficiency was maximized at an intermediate number of termites. This means that termites were better to be inactive to maintain the high efficiency when too many workers are present in the colony. We briefly discuss the strength and weakness of the ABM and the values of this study in relation to termite foraging strategy.

show abstract

“…Sometimes these tunnels, which range from tens to hundreds meters in length, connect multiple feeding sites [2]. The morphology and architecture of termite tunnels are highly diverse, with the spatial distribution, tunnel length, width, and volume differing according to the species [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coptotermes formosanusandCoptotermes gestroi(Blattodea: Rhinotermitidae) Exhibit Quantitatively Different Tunneling Patterns

Hapukotuwa¹,

Grace

2012

Psyche: A Journal of Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tunneling behavior and the spatial dispersion of tunnels constructed by the subterranean termites Coptotermes formosanus Shiraki and Coptotermes gestroi (Wasmann) (formerly known as C. vastator Light) (Blattodea: Rhinotermitidae) were examined in foraging arenas. The results indicated that these two termite species construct quantitatively different tunnel systems, supporting visual observations made in earlier studies. Coptotermes gestroi constructed thin, highly branched tunnels, while C. formosanus tended to construct wider and less branched tunnels. Tunnels of C. gestroi showed more spatial dispersion than those of C. formosanus, and this species constructed a larger number of tunnels compared to C. formosanus. The presence or absence of food (wood) within the arena did not influence the tunneling pattern of either species. Although previous observations have suggested that these two termite species exhibit different tunneling behaviors; this is the first quantification of the differences. Comparative studies of the foraging behavior of subterranean termite species contribute to our understanding of their distribution and ecology and may help to improve pest management programs, particularly those based on placement of toxic baits. Moreover, differences in tunneling patterns may reflect different foraging strategies optimized for either tropical (C. gestroi) or subtropical/temperate (C. formosanus) environments.

show abstract

Development of Incipient Formosan Subterranean Termite1 Colonies in the Field2

Cited by 33 publications

References 0 publications

Evolution of Monogamy in Termites

Evolution of Monogamy in Termites

Simulation study to determine why only some termites are active during tunneling activity

Coptotermes formosanusandCoptotermes gestroi(Blattodea: Rhinotermitidae) Exhibit Quantitatively Different Tunneling Patterns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About