Establishment and Social Impacts of the Red Imported Fire Ant, Solenopsis invicta, (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Taiwan

Abstract

The first report of the red imported fire ant (RIFA), Solenopsis invicta Buren, in Taiwan was in the city of Taoyuan in 2003. The government has made great efforts to bring RIFA-infested areas under control. RIFA has gradually spread outward since its discovery, but it is still confined in northern Taiwan, in part due to the control efforts. RIFA is well established in densely populated environments (i.e., urban areas), causing damage to public utilities and significantly affects the inhabitants of Taiwan. Out of 10,127 human encounters with RIFA reported by the Plant Pest Information Management System in the Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan, 3819 (37.71%) persons were stung, with 834 (21.8%) persons exhibiting wheal-and-flare reaction (swelling and redness of the skin). Among the victims, 288 (7.5%) sought medical care, and about 21 (0.6%) developed severe cellulitis and urticaria. Unexpectedly, 2.8% (106) of the victims exhibited anaphylactic shock, which was higher than previously reported cases (1%). The high anaphylactic shock percentage was probably because most victims were elderly farmers or because Asian people have higher sensitivity to the RIFA sting. RIFA is well adapted to the environmental conditions in Taiwan, which makes it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to eradicate. The management of RIFA in the future should focus on lowering the speed of spread to mitigate possible dangers to the inhabitants. Six major challenges of RIFA management in Taiwan are also discussed.

The Human Health Impacts of the Red Imported Fire Ant in the Western Pacific Region Context: A Narrative Review

“…There is a significant variation in the reported rates of RIFA stings in the United States, with some estimates suggesting that 50–89% of people residing in an infested area will be stung each year [ 9 , 23 ], whereas other more conservative estimates put the figures at between 30 and 60% [ 24 ]. In 2018, more than 60,000 hectares of land were occupied by RIFA in Taiwan [ 25 ], and of the 10,127 Taiwanese residents who encountered RIFA, 3819 were stung by RIFA (equates to an annual sting rate of 37.71%) [ 22 ]. Additionally, RIFA were also detected in over 390 counties of 15 provinces in China [ 25 ].…”

Warming promotes non‐native invasive ants while inhibiting native ant communities

“…Overall non-native ant abundance was highest in the high warming plots (+5 C; 8.7 ± 1.9 ants plot À1 ) and similarly lower in the control (+0 C; 5.2 ± 0.6 plot À1 ) and medium warming (+3 C; 4.2 ± 0.7 plot À1 ) plots (Figure 2a Solenopsis invicta imposes widespread negative environmental, economic and social impacts in its invaded range (Gruber et al, 2022;Gutrich et al, 2007;Liu et al, 2021), but it does not appear that S. invicta harms native ant species as much as it prefers habitat unsuitable for native species (King & Tschinkel, 2008;Stuble et al, 2013). Solenopsis invicta's tropical origins and micro-and macrohabitat distributions in its novel range strongly suggest strong thermophilic tendencies (Bertelsmeier et al, 2015;Korzukhin et al, 2001;Tschinkel, 2006).…”

The dark side of nature experience: Typology, dynamics and implications of negative sensory interactions with nature

“…For example, in the case of invasive alien species potentially harmful to humans (e.g. fire ants, snapping turtles, redback spider or spear thistle), the establishment of these organisms in an ecosystem can result in loss of many native species but it may increase negative direct human–nature interactions (Liu et al, 2021; Shackleton et al, 2017; Vink et al, 2011). Likewise, it might be possible that loss of some predator species due to anthropogenic activities can result in the increase in the abundance, and activity level, of wildlife that can cause negative health impacts for humans (Enari, 2021).…”