Comparative analysis of experimental testing procedures for the elicitation of rescue actions in ants. Issue 2 (1st July 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Turza, Filip; Miler, Krzysztof
• Editors: Jia, Zhi-Yun
• Is Part Of: Current zoology. Volume 68:Issue 2(2022)
• Page Start: 159
• Page End: 168
• Publication Date: 2021-07-01
• Subjects: ants -- animal behavior -- entrapment bioassay, Formica cinerea -- rescue behavior; Zoology -- Periodicals; Zoology -- China -- Periodicals; 590.5
• DOI: 10.1093/cz/zoab052
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1674-5507

Abstract

Abstract: Rescue behavior is observed when 1 individual provides help to another individual in danger. Most reports of rescue behavior concern ants (Formicidae), in which workers rescue each other from various types of entrapment. Many of these entrapment situations can be simulated in the laboratory using an entrapment bioassay, in which ants confront a single endangered nest mate entrapped on a sandy arena by means of an artificial snare. Here, we compared numerous characteristics of rescue actions (contact between individuals, digging around the entrapped individual, pulling at its body parts, transport of the sand covering it, and biting the snare entrapping it) in Formica cinerea ants. We performed entrapment tests in the field and in the laboratory, with the latter under varying conditions in terms of the number of ants potentially engaged in rescue actions and the arena substrate (marked or unmarked by ants' pheromones). Rescue actions were more probable and pronounced in the field than in the laboratory, regardless of the type of test. Moreover, different test types in the laboratory yielded inconsistent results and showed noteworthy variability depending on the tested characteristic of rescue. Our results illustrate the specifics of ant rescue actions elicited in the natural setting, which is especially important considering the scarcity of field data. Furthermore, our results underline the challenges related to the comparison of results from different types of entrapment tests reported in the available literature. Additionally, our study shows how animal behavior differs in differing experimental setups used to answer the same questions.