Book review: “660 Photographs of Termites and Their Control” by David Mora del Pozo

Review by Thomas Chouvenc

 

When you see someone passionate about a topic, it can humble you. Especially if this topic happens to be the one that you are also passionate about. Let me explain.

Recently, 660 Photographs of Termites and Their Control, by David Mora del Poso, was released, and I was fortunate enough to receive a physical copy of it. As I opened the book and gently flipped through the pages, my mind was immediately blown away by its beauty, its inherent poesy, and its deep dive into termite biology and complexity.

Picture1

One thing that will be quickly apparent to you is that this book is not your usual lengthy textbook about the biology of a given bug. It is instead a fascinating compilation of photos that David took over decades during his time addressing termite pest problems around the world.  Each picture published in this book tells us a fantastic story about the biology of termites, their inherent beauty, and their abilities. However, the storytelling is not performed through a dry academic approach; instead, it immerses you within live termite colonies using remarkable macro shots. It also opens your eyes to the rather difficult relationships that termite societies and human societies sometimes have.

Picture1

For a 425-page book that weighs a little bit more than 2 kg, it sure is a heavyweight. However, the 400 first pages are a compilation of (amazing) pictures with reference numbers. On the last 25 pages, you will find a text corresponding to each of the 660 images found in the first 400 pages providing an explanation of what you see. The text is provided both in English and Spanish, which is a remarkable effort from David to reach a wider audience, as his proficiency in English is limited.

As you open the book randomly, you will be glued to the first page you see, then flip back and forth, until you realize you just spent 15 minutes doing so. This book does this to you. In the process, you are immersed in the biology of various termite species, primarily with infamous pest species within Coptotermes, Reticulitermes, Cryptotermes, Nasutitermes, Heterotermes, and a few other genera that David encountered during his work.

Screen Shot 2019-11-15 at 2.37.41 PM

Macro shots will take you through the journey of the molting process of a worker, the complexity of the hatching process from an egg, the wing bud development and sclerotization of an alate, the transformation of a pre-soldier. Wider shots will show you the incredible complexity of nest structures, the intensity of swarming events, and the potential damage termites can do to structures and precious historical human artifacts.

Screen Shot 2019-11-15 at 2.38.35 PM

This book also provides a unique insight into the world of termite control – not always the most visible or respected in the world of academia. With $40+ billion in yearly damage worldwide, termites are usually unaccepted in someone’s house, which is an attitude you cannot ignore as a termite researcher. The impact of termites on people is beautifully portrayed in David’s book. It reflects what can happen if some of the termite pest species interact with human societies.

David has spent more than 25 years dealing with termite pest problems around the world, and he has been instrumental in accomplishing something that no one else has accomplished. Since the advent of Chitin Synthesis Inhibitor Baits for subterranean termite pest species in 1995, there has been a fundamental change in the philosophy for termite control around the world. Instead of spraying a large amount of pesticides around structures and hoping for the best, baits now aim at eliminating the whole colony after termites feed on a ridiculously small amount of a termite-specific formulated baits. Beyond this cultural shift, area-wide baiting programs were proposed to create large termite-free zones. Such programs have been implemented in various places around the world, with mixed results, primarily because of logistical difficulties that are inherent to cultural hurdles of human political landscapes. The problem is often not the termite pest – it is how people are handling them and how conflicts of interest may defeat the attempt.

Screen Shot 2019-11-15 at 2.39.50 PM

David is an exception. He successfully implemented a city-wide termite control program in several cities across Spain. Some of these cities have not seen termite damage since their implementation. This is quite remarkable, but what is even more impressive is that David documented the extensive implementation of these programs and provided a large chunk of these data in his book. Yes, there is a section that is dedicated to how he implemented area-wide termite control. To be honest, the work he documented leaves an amazing roadmap of how termite control should be done, with the utmost respect for the environment.

Screen Shot 2019-11-15 at 2.40.47 PM

David Mora Del Pozo may not be well known from social insect research groups. Yet, with this book, David is leaving a unique legacy to inspire many future budding entomologists. On top of this, 660 Photographs of Termites and their Control has all the attributes you need for a proper display on a coffee table or as an entomo-gift for the holidays.

Picture1

More about 660 Photographs of Termites and their Control at http://phototermes.com/.

Interview with a social insect scientist: Giselle Martins Lourenço

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

GL: My name is Giselle M Lourenço, and I recently finished my Ph.D. in Ecology at the University of Campinas (Brazil). Currently, I am a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Ecological Synthesis and Conservation at the University of Minas Gerais (Brazil). My research aims to understand the distribution and movement of insects in space and time and how environmental filters and climate change influence them. During my master’s degree in ecology at the University of Ouro Preto (Brazil), I studied the distribution of herbivorous insects and ants in the canopy. It was at this moment that the opportunity arose to develop, with my dear friend Fabíola Keesen (Ph.D. student at the University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), an experiment to evaluate the recruitment of the ant Dorymyrmex thoracicus and a computer model for the trail formation. We reported this study in a recent paper at Insectes SociauxRecruitment and entropy decrease during trail formation by foraging ants (Lourenço GM, Keesen F, Fagundes R, Luna P, Silva AC, Ribeiro SP, Arashiro E, 2019).

Picture1

Me and my friend Fabiola Keesen conducting an experiment with the ant species Dorymyrmex thoracicus (Dolichoderinae) (Brazilian Atlantic Forest). Image: Reisla Oliveira

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

GL: I developed an interest in ecology and insects during my undergraduate degree, but I started studying ants during my master’s. My friend Fabíola Keesen studied biological modeling, so we decided to integrate our knowledge to work together. The idea of our recent paper at Insectes Sociaux was to integrate our field experiments with computer modeling, which allowed us to extrapolate and understand ant foraging. Further, we invited our advisors (Dr. Sérvio P Ribeiro and Dr. Everaldo Arashiro, respectively) and other expert collaborators on these studies (Roberth Fagundes, Pedro Luna and Alcides C Silva). It was very productive to work in an interdisciplinary way, allowing new experiences for all co-authors.

Picture1

Ant species Dorymyrmex thoracicus Gallardo (1916) as a study organism for investigating the recruitment and entropy decrease during trail formation (our recent paper at Insectes Sociaux). Image: Reisla Oliveira

IS: What is your favorite social insect and why?

GL: Ants are my favorite social insect. It is incredible that they can organize themselves to perform different activities throughout the day, balancing the costs and benefits for the entire colony with each decision.

IS: What is the best moment/discovery in your research so far? What made it so memorable?

GL: My Ph.D. defense! It was a fantastic moment, a closure of four years very well lived! Among all the challenges I experienced during the doctorate, I had the opportunity to learn a lot, make great friends, and visit amazing places. Finishing this step was hard because I did not want it to end! However, it was great to share this achievement with friends and my lovely family!

IS: Do you teach or do outreach/science communication? How do you incorporate your research into these areas?

GL: Whenever I talk about insects and their behavior, especially ants, I try to show how small organisms can be very organized and ready to act in different situations. The examples associated with foraging, colony defense, and recruitment strategies arouse curiosities in everyone, from biology students to non-specialists in the field. I try to participate in events for the general public, bringing curiosities about insects and their role in our daily lives.

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

GL: I would think that it is important to connect field experiments with computer modeling. These methods can help to demonstrate that the organization of complex systems is also a quality of ant colonies. Employing this complex systems approach, we can explain collective behavior that cannot be detected by studying individual and isolated ants.

IS: What research questions generate the biggest debate in social insect research at the moment?

GL: Questions related to the effect of climate change on social insect behavior. Also, the discussion about the threat to insect ecosystem services due to intensive pesticide use has been growing and drawing the attention of the general population.

IS: What is the last book you read? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?

GL: Lab Girl, by Hope Jahren. I got this book from some friends after my doctorate defense and was a very special read for the moment I am currently living. Hope narrates her story from the beginning of her career and talks a lot about the challenges of young PhDs who seek the dream of growing up and establishing themselves as a teacher and researcher. I highly recommend it, especially for young women scientists!

IS: Outside of science, what are your favorite activities, hobbies or sports?

GL: I like to dance the samba, travel, be with my family, and practice yoga.

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

GL: First, I need to take a deep breath. I like to relax, practicing yoga, sleeping, and meeting my friends and family. The next day I wake up and remember that I am here doing what I like best, and even though I have hard days, I do not want to change course!

IS: If you were to go live on an uninhabited island and could only bring three things, what would you bring? Why?

GL: Wow, a very difficult question. As I can only choose three things: 1) drinking water because without it, nothing would be possible; 2) pocketknife to open seeds, fruits, and whatever else is needed; 3) tent to be safe and to sleep peacefully. If one more item was allowed: lighter to ensure I can have a bonfire! And I hope this island has a lot of food!

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

GL: My doctoral advisor Dr. Sérvio P Ribeiro. He aroused my passion for interaction studies among species and their environments, in search of patterns and their possible explanations. I also have to mention my doctoral co-advisor, Dr. André VL Freitas. He inspired me to dive into butterfly studies, even long before I met him in person. 

Picture1

Me and my advisors Dr. Sérvio P Ribeiro and Dr. André VL Freitas after my Ph.D. defense (30 November 2018, Unicamp, Brazil)

IS: What advice would you give to someone hoping to be a social insect researcher in the future?

GL: Be aware of the details; field observations are essential for interpreting and discussing the results found! Keep your field notebook well-guarded; it is always useful even after many years.

IS: What is your favorite place science has taken you?

GL: Mexico! During my doctorate, I had the opportunity to spend six months at the Instituto de Ecología – INECOL, working together with Dr. Wesley Dáttilo and his students. For this, I had the support of the University of Campinas and a financing agency in Brazil (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – CAPES, Finance Code 001). It was an unforgettable professional and personal experience. Lots of studying, dedication, and tacos!

In a cannibalistic society, it’s not about survival – it’s all about recycling

A blog post highlighting the article by Chouvenc in Insectes Sociaux.

By Thomas Chouvenc

In this spooky time of the year, there are many examples we could draw from insect societies to give the heebie-jeebies to the non-entomophile. One to usually make it to the news cycle is, of course, the case of zombie-ants. It’s a classic dive into Z-culture while exploring the amazing biology of a host-manipulating fungal parasite. It’s hard to beat as click-bait because it’s just so good. Next in line would be parasitoid wasps, as their gruesome life cycle rips through the host’s organs from the inside while keeping it alive the entire time. Hollywood and manga artists have extensively dug into this concept to bring to life your favorite monster movies and books. Less known, but still a favorite for many of us: the Nicrophorus burying beetle. These Silphidae lay eggs on a decomposing carcass and display extensive parental behavior to their growing larvae as they chew through the putrid flesh of the roadkill. Gruesome, yet full of love: it’s the pinnacle of cute.

So, yes, Halloween could definitely use insects within the spectrum of sociality as core material for horrific displays in our front yards.  With all the classic anatomic fails of course, but this is another horror story. By the way, I was very disappointed when nothing came up from a “parasitoid wasp Halloween display” google search (someone should do something about this, please).

In my opinion, one example that has been either ignored or largely misrepresented in pop culture is insect cannibalistic societies. I will pass on the terrible cliché of old B movies on so-called “cannibal tribes”, but instead bring your attention to termites. Yes, the mostly-ignored or largely-misrepresented group of social insects (wink).  Termites have evolved along with the rise of angiosperms for ~150 Myr, eating a unique niche of untapped dry matter stored in tree trunks that is inaccessible by most plant-feeding animals. Eventually, termites evolved away from their Cryptocercus-like wood roach ancestor and reached the highest level of social organization. They were able to grow large colonies over time while optimizing their ecological success. However, while they enjoyed their pseudo-monopoly on woody material exploitation, their biology was constrained by a significant dietary restriction: wood is carbon-rich but notably nitrogen-poor.

Picture1

Young and happy termite colony with a healthy king and queen, egg mass, brood, and workforce.

As a consequence, in basal termite taxa, colony metabolism is relatively slow. These taxa rely on their gut microbiota to do the hard work of cellulose degradation. Additionally, they take “forever” to grow, owing to limited nitrogen availability. This whole dilemma has been recognized as fundamentally important for the initial rise of eusociality and subsequent radiation of termites (Nalepa 1984). Termites could obtain all the carbon they needed to fuel the colony by feeding on ubiquitous wood. However, they had to optimize their entire metabolic engine toward nitrogen acquisition, and even more critical: nitrogen conservation. Termites have, therefore, perfected a recycling strategy toward nitrogen conservation over evolutionary time: cannibalism.

Picture1

Not-so-happy termite colony (Coptotermes gestroi) about to run out of food.

To my knowledge, all termite species perform a colony-wide process of cannibalizing their sick, moribund, and dead individuals. This behavior has received extensive scrutiny by termite researchers around the world because it is so common and evident in termites that one can’t ignore it. Fun fact: when you study the survival of a group of termites in an experiment, you have to count the live termites, not the dead ones, simply because there is rarely a dead body lying around. It is usually cannibalized by nestmates very rapidly.  The concept of “refuse pile”, which can be rather crucial in ants, is mostly useless in termites, as everything goes through someone’s gut, eventually. Cannibalism in termite is, therefore, an essential part of the cycle of nutrients within the colony. It allows precious resources like nitrogen to be reused by the society. This behavior also has attained secondary functions such as sanitation and reducing the risk of diseases within the social group (Chouvenc et al. 2009).

The relationship between cannibalistic behavior and starvation in termites has also previously received some attention. It was suggested that cannibalism can have an essential role in helping a group of termites survive a period of starvation. As soldiers are nutritionally-dependent on workers, they would be eaten in priority. This cannibalism would alleviate their trophic burden to the group and recycle very precious resources toward the rest of the group. Also, the termite group would suppress the production of new soldiers so that only workers would remain, in the hope of restarting the metabolic engine of the group and reducing the trophic burden even further (Su and Lafage 1986). This strategy would, therefore, reduce the metabolic footprint of a colony with finite resources, and aid in more prolonged colony survival.  Soylent green, allons-y!

In a study published online this month in Insectes Sociaux (Chouvenc 2019), I revisited this concept, but this time, I took the “whole colony” approach. Previously, researchers had subjected a small group of foraging termites collected from the field to starvation. To improve upon this method, I subjected 10 whole young termite colonies (Coptotermes gestroi) to starvation. I wanted to take the investigation to a more biologically-relevant scale, with ~3,000 termites per colony, a healthy brood, overlapping generations of workers and soldiers, and of course, the king and queen. The effects of starvation on larger termite groups, the brood, or the primary reproductive were never before investigated.

Recently, I have started revisiting some old questions but scaling things up to the colony level. It can be challenging not to be disappointed in seeing a somewhat different outcome than the one initially expected. To make a long story short: termites are terrible in their survival strategy during starvation events because, in fact, they don’t really have a strategy. Unlike honeybees that store months-worth of honey, termites have a carpe-diem approach to food safety, as they have no internal reserves. Instead, subterranean termites such as C. gestroi will relentlessly (and most of the time successfully) forage for new food sites to prevent food shortage in the first place. But if starvation of the termite colony actually occurs, then the colony just doesn’t have much of a survival strategy. Give it about 30 days.

As the metabolism of the colony is progressively running out of fuel, nutritionally stressed individuals start accumulating in the colony. Unfortunately for termite larvae and workers, who are hemimetabolous insects stuck in a permanent juvenile molting cycle, the time to molt eventually comes, and the younger the instar, the faster the molting cycle. Have you ever tried molting while completely starving?  I would not advise. In my study, this resulted in a failed attempt to molt, death, and subsequent cannibalism from nestmates.

Therefore, the brood and young workers were the first ones to be eaten, not as survival rations for the group, but because they were the first ones to die during their molting process. Then soldiers started running out of juice faster than some of the older workers (who have yet to attempt molting), as they are fed secondhand from workers. Indeed, the remaining workers had to maintain their own metabolism and had nothing left to share with the soldiers, resulting in moribund soldiers, and inherent subsequent cannibalism. In addition, it’s not that the starving colony suppresses the production of new soldiers. It is just that presoldiers that are starving also failed to molt into functional soldiers, and therefore died and were eaten, resulting in an apparent absence of soldier replacement.

Finally, toward the end, a handful of workers remained, with the king and queen being the last ones to die, inevitably.  So, if termites actually have a survival strategy during starvation, it is this: “keep the king and queen alive as long as you can”. Any remaining available energetic resources were eventually funneled to them.

In the end, I found that, contrary to a previous perception, termites don’t reduce the trophic burden of the colony by cannibalizing the dependent castes. Mortality was not cannibalism-driven; instead, cannibalism was mortality-driven.  Termites just do what they always do: if a dead or moribund individual shows up in the group, it is cannibalized to recycle the nitrogen. This is an inherent behavior that was reinforced over millions of years of a nitrogen-deficient diet. The fact is, cannibalizing an energy-depleted individual may not provide much energy to the group, as you can’t recycle ATP that does not exist.

The excessive mortality resulting from starvation triggered a massive cannibalism wave, which ended up with an accumulation of old workers with staggering levels of uric acid building up in their fat body. Such an observation is typical of termite colony collapse, as there is a sudden excess of available nitrogen through cannibalism, something termite metabolism never evolved toward.  By 20 days after the starvation was in effect, the colony started shutting down, and cannibalism was no longer observed. Dead bodies began accumulating in the colony and were not taken care of by the surviving workers, which were focusing only on the king and queen. In the end, the king and queen eventually starved to death too. So much for an efficient survival strategy in termites.

In this study, despite the amount of work it took to investigate a question at the colony-level and provide detailed observation, it was, in my opinion, absolutely worth it. Experimenting on various aspects of termite biology in small groups in a Petri dish can provide valuable initial information. However, scaling it up to a colony-wide observation can drastically change our understanding of a social group.  For example, if you have a termite infestation in your house, you can now actually say “my house is being attacked by a horde of cannibals.” It would be almost accurate. Happy Halloween.

Picture1

Although this paper discussed how cannibalism can go wrong in a starving termite colony, this picture reveals a case of cannibalism gone (very) weird – if one can make any sense out of it. It depicts a worker in the process of cannibalizing a nestmate, but his head is stuck inside the terminal abdominal segments of the dead one. Photo courtesy from David Mora Del Pozo.

Thomas Chouvenc is an Assist. Professor in urban entomology at the University of Florida, UF/IFAS.

Twitter: @ChouvencL

References

Chouvenc T (2019) Limited survival strategy in starving subterranean termite colonies. Insectes Sociaux.

Chouvenc T, Su NY, Robert A (2009) Inhibition of Metarhizium anisopliae in the alimentary tract of the eastern subterranean termite Reticulitermes flavipes. J Invertebr Pathol 101: 130-136

Nalepa CA (1994) Nourishment and the origin of termite eusociality. Nourishment and Evolution in Insect Societies (ed. by: J.H. Hunt & C.A. Nalepa), pp. 57-104. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado

Su NY, La Fage JP (1986) Effects of starvation on survival and maintenance of soldier proportion in laboratory groups of the Formosan subterranean termite, Coptotermes formosanus (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 79: 312-316

Interview with a social insect scientist: Claire Morandin

Claire1

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

CM: My name is Claire Morandin, and I am a postdoctoral researcher on an EMBO fellowship at the University of Lausanne, but currently on maternity leave – my second daughter was born in July. When I am not taking care of her, I am mainly spending my time conducting research that focuses on social insect genomics. In general, I am interested in understanding how complex phenotypic traits arise and evolve across species. And more specifically, I study the evolution and maintenance of the female castes in ants. Recently I started working on honey bees, too, trying to answer similar questions in the evolution of female castes. I got hooked on bioinformatics during the work for my Ph.D. thesis, and I use genomics tools such as RNA sequencing, comparative genomics, evolutionary analysis, gene co-expression networks, and methylation to understand these complex mechanisms.

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

CM: After finishing my bachelor’s degree, I took a year off and volunteered with the CNRS to work in Zimbabwe, basically being a field assistant helping scientists with their experiments. Having had this experience, I discovered my passion for research and decided that I also wanted to conduct my own research experiments and become a scientist myself. This decision led me to continue with a master’s at Uppsala University in Sweden and a Ph.D. degree at the University of Helsinki in Finland. It took me a few more years of studying and meeting the right mentors to discover the exciting world of social insect research.

IS: What is your favorite social insect and why?

CM: Before last year I would have definitely answered ants, probably Formica ants. However, honey bees are cool too and way easier to study. They can develop from eggs to adults in the lab, and I am fully taking advantage of this feature at the moment. So, I would go for honey bees being my favorite social insects now. Also, as a side product of keeping bees, you get plenty of honey!

IS: What is the best moment/discovery in your research so far? What made it so memorable?

CM: The best moment was my Ph.D. defence; it was challenging but also a lot of fun to wrap up four years of hard work and present what I had accomplished during these years. This process makes you realize all the smaller puzzle pieces coming together and revealing new bigger conclusions. I also had a great discussion with my opponent, Dr. Seirian Sumner. You do not know how enjoyable a defence is before you get the chance to have such a long and stimulating discussion with a great opponent. Also, having all my family and friends and people who encouraged me through the years together in one room to celebrate with me made this day so very special (and well, the party afterwards was pretty great too!).

IS: Do you teach or do outreach/science communication? How do you incorporate your research into these areas?

CM: I sadly do not do much outreach, besides communicating my own and research I find generally interesting and exciting over social media. However, I occasionally teach bioinformatics and try to spread my enthusiasm for this field to the students. I have also recently gained an interest in gender studies. With a colleague, Dr. Luke Hollman, we recently published a paper showing that researchers tend to collaborate with same-gendered colleagues leading to further discrepancies between genders in life science. I think this is an important and very relevant topic in science, although not related to my actual research. With such insight, we can raise awareness of the gender gap in research, which eventually may contribute to making this gap smaller and hopefully disappear in the decades to come.

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

CM: There is so much we still do not understand about social insects, and that makes my work very exciting. Despite plenty of social insect genomes out there, we are still trying to put pieces together to determine whether common mechanisms are behind caste differences across all social insects. More comparative genomics work will be essential to shed light on such important evolutionary questions.

IS: What research questions generate the biggest debate in social insect research at the moment?

CM: I would think that some of the biggest questions are the ones related to the origin and evolution of eusociality across the phylogeny tree. However, from my current work point of view, I would say that the role of methylation in caste differentiation also generates lots of debates that I like to fuel up with more data and findings from my work.

IS: Outside of science, what are your favorite activities, hobbies or sports?

CM: I love running and baking, and recently took a significant interest in sewing – it helps me calm down when everything else around me spins so fast.

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

CM: When things get tough, I like to go outside for long walks or runs with very loud music to forget about everything. And then I come home to two happy daughters who only want to play and laugh, and I quickly forget about the tough things because making them happy is what matters most. Having a life outside of science – a place to go when things get tough – helps me go through the stress and the hardship of a scientist’s life.

IS: If you were to go live on an uninhabited island and could only bring three things, what would you bring? Why?

CM: A machete, a water bottle and a book (would finally have time to read a grown-up book, and not just children’s books).

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

CM: My collaborator and mentor Sasha (Dr. Mikheyev) has had the most considerable influence on my science career. He made me go from qPCR to RNAseq, and I never looked back. Because of him, I got hooked on bioinformatics.

IS: What advice would you give to someone hoping to be a social insect researcher in the future?

CM: Be patient – very patient – and do not forget that science is fantastic but that it is not everything in life, so when it gets tough, you always need something else that can make you happy. That was more general advice for being a scientist, I guess. For social insects, there is not much to say. They are fantastic, go for it!

IS: What is your favorite place science has taken you?

CM: Japan, I have had the chance to visit Sasha’s lab at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology (OIST) eight times already, and I love going back there every year. Okinawa is so beautiful!

Interview with a social insect scientist: Edith Invernizzi

IS

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

My name is Edith Invernizzi, and I am a Ph.D. student in the School of Biology at the University of St Andrews (Scotland), studying collective behaviour and self-organisation. I am a theoretical modeller, mainly, but I believe that all models should be built in a constant feedback loop with real data. I try to integrate laboratory and field experiments in my work as much as possible.

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

Since I started working on models for an undergraduate project, I have been interested in the evolutionary dynamics of behaviour. It’s this that ultimately led me to collective behaviour and ants in my Ph.D.

IS: What is your favorite social insect and why?

Ants, because of the immense ecological range this genus has been able to colonise. They are a perfect case study for different species that can independently evolve similar collective behaviour mechanisms when the environmental context is different.

IS: What is the best moment/discovery in your research so far? What made it so memorable?

I’m very early on in my research, so I have a limited range of experiences to draw from. But I do know what the best moment has been. When I started looking at social insect collective nest building, I came to the hypothesis that self-organised activity could be seen as continuous assessment of the environment, a homeostatic mechanism in response to constant fluctuations. I then discovered the body of literature that proposes precisely that frame of interpretation. I felt that I was learning how to understand behavioural data and, most of all, that my way of understanding was meaningful to other scientists.

IS: Do you teach or do outreach/science communication? How do you incorporate your research into these areas?

I personally do not do much outreach, but I try focusing on how social insects make collective decisions whenever asked about my research by a non-scientist. I think decision making is a fascinating behaviour that every human can relate to, but that is often considered only from an individual perspective. I try to use this example to give a different point of view.

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

The importance of individual-level variation when we think of colonies and eusocial species. There are suggestions that behavioural variation within a colony causes different individuals to exploit different resources. Similarly, in behaviours such as collective building, workers with varying levels of susceptibility to different cues might initiate changes in the structure that are important for short-term adaptation. I suspect that understanding the role of within-group variation is not only crucial for helping disentangle environmental adaptation but also has potential applications in fields such as robotics and engineering – for instance, in Ant Colony Optimisation (ACO) algorithms.

From a ‘genetics versus plasticity’ perspective, it is interesting to study how much of this variation derives from allelic genetic differences, in poly-mated queen or multiple-queen colonies, and how much from epigenetic factors. For intra-colony competition, the question becomes evolutionary: is there an ‘optimal’ level of inter-individual variation that maximises colony fitness? How might mating systems, genetic and epigenetic mechanisms have evolved under selection to reach and maintain such level?

To start scratching the surface of these questions, we need more tools that facilitate individual identification and individual behaviour records. Developing more advanced movement and ethological tracking methods (the latter automatically tracking behavioural events in a video recording), for example, is essential if we want to obtain a large amount of data with reliable sample sizes and make this fine level of individual detail in group behaviour studies the norm. More behavioural studies done in the field are also necessary to match the observed variation to the multiple factors that it might respond to, in a complex environmental context.

IS: What research questions generate the biggest debate in social insect research at the moment?

Probably the questions about cognition. How advanced are insect cognitive capacities? Are we underestimating them or overestimating them? What is the relationship between individual cognition and collective cognition at eusocial colony-level?

IS: What is the last book you read? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?

A Time for Everything, by K.O. Knausgaard. If you are into rational psychological analysis and minute behavioural details but still like to find an overarching narrative when you look at life experiences, then Knausgaard is the author for you.

IS: Outside of science, what are your favorite activities, hobbies or sports?

I practice martial arts, read contemporary literature, and enjoy planning exciting activities. I prefer a good stand-up comedy show, live or on TV, over a holiday trip anytime.

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

When nothing seems to work, I remind myself that science and my Ph.D. are only one aspect of my life, and I try to put more energy into others. If I meet a wall in my research, then I create something else or break down a barrier elsewhere. Working on other projects just remind me that I can produce an output I am enthusiastic about and renew my creativity.

In tough times, it is focusing on what I find exciting about the work, the goal, or the challenge that keeps me going. But I must schedule some fun activities throughout the week that break the tension and give me fresh energy; a good climb or stand-up comedy always do the job.

IS: If you were to go live on an uninhabited island and could only bring three things, what would you bring? Why?

A Swiss knife, a water flask, and a diary with a pen attached to it. The first two for surviving and the third one to keep my sanity. I enjoy spending time alone, and if I have the time, I might as well keep track of my thoughts.

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

Definitely my undergraduate supervisor and master’s co-supervisor, R.T. Gilman. He has given me a passion for dissecting dynamics, and he is the one who introduced me to modelling.

IS: What advice would you give to someone hoping to be a social insect researcher in the future?

Be patient. Be passionate. And always work with a behavioural scientist if you are a theoretician. They bring you down from your matrices into the real world.

IS: What is your favorite place science has taken you?

I did my Master of Philosophy fieldwork in the area around Lugu Lake, in South Western China. It is close to the most beautiful place I have ever been to, and I hope that its landscape and culture have remained unspoiled.

Interview with a social insect scientist: Graham Birch

IMG_20181026_181932835

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

GB: My name’s Graham. I’m a master’s graduate from the University of Exeter, coming to the end of a year working as a volunteer research assistant in South Africa for the Kalahari Meerkat Project. I’ll be starting a Ph.D. back at Exeter in September on Banded Mongooses.

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

GB: I’ve always been interested in sociality and how it’s evolved, and ants specifically can form such huge and complex groups, with multiple distinct castes. Many species are intensely territorial, with group size and make-up largely determining success; therefore, conflict may have been a significant driver in the evolution of ant societies. But the threat of competition is not necessarily ever-present and being ready for battle all the time may be wasteful, so an intriguing question is whether coordination and behaviour of these complex groups can plastically respond to the level of threat in the local environment in response to cues, which is the subject of our paper.

IS: What is your favourite social insect and why?

GB: Termites moult multiple times before reaching their adult forms, but some primitive species can moult backward in time to a younger form! They’re therefore able to plastically change their development in response to the colony running out of resources. They can also switch development between different castes if they like to a certain extent, which I just find super cool.

IS: What is the best moment/discovery in your research so far? What made it so memorable?

GB: I haven’t done too much of my own research so far, but I (but mostly my dad) did start a meme where scientists left Amazon reviews for items they used in their research (but not based on the intended purpose). Started when we had the idea of using tea strainers to protect ants we introduced into another colony, and my dad left a review about how great a capsule for ants these tea strainers were (anything to get his ranking up!), which the tea drinking public found a bit odd/hilarious. It became the top review, started a twitter trend of other scientists leaving similar reviews, which got picked up by The Washington Post (easy to find on Google!). I even did a couple of phone interviews. It was all very surreal but definitely memorable!

IS: Do you teach or do outreach/science communication? How do you incorporate your research into these areas?

GB: Again it’s a bit early in my career to answer this question, but I have lead turtle conservation tours in North Cyprus, and Meerkat research tours in the Kalahari, which did involve communicating the science of what we were doing to the public. I hope to do some demonstrating and maybe teaching during my Ph.D.

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

GB: Broadly the big issue, not just for social insects, is climate change. Does the level of sociality mean these species are more able to shift their ranges or, if they can’t, can they deal with new competitors or enemies that can (as well as changes in temperature itself), over other less social species?

IS: What research questions generate the biggest debate in social insect research at the moment?

GB: I fear I may be a bit naive at my career stage and may not have enough experience on social insect research generally (beyond group conflict) to comment on this. However, what I have found to be controversial is the definition of eusocial when looking at non-insect taxa. For example, there was a lot of buzz about naked mole rats being the first eusocial mammal due to their large groups and division of labour among reproductives and workers, but recently many have turned against this. You could even say the same for humans where, even though we don’t have fixed caste determination, we have orders of magnitude larger and more complex societies then eusocial insects in terms of numbers and the division of labour we see in the variety of jobs we can pursue. Maybe it’s just unhelpful to use the term for non-insects.

IS: What is the last book you read? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?

GB: Ultrasociety. Phenomenal book looking at how human societies have changed and evolved from egalitarian hunter-gathers to incredibly unequal archaic societies led by God kings, to how religion and war shape these into the relatively more equal modern societies we see today.

IS: Outside of science, what are your favourite activities, hobbies or sports?

GB: Badminton, swimming, diving, and travelling.

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

GB: Try to not have your research as the only focus taking up all of your time. Get involved in a sport, volunteer, or just something to focus on that isn’t science / your degree, so when you do get stuck you have something else to work on that refreshes you for when you come back to your science.

IS: If you were to go live on an uninhabited island and could only bring three things, what would you bring? Why?

GB: Anyone at the Kalahari Meerkat project, or who went with me on my expedition to Madagascar over a year ago, can vouch for me when I say I’ve almost already done this, but on the island of an isolated research base (days of travelling away from the nearest major town with no communication with the outside world in the case of Madagascar). Anyways, I’d bring a Kindle with a vast library of books so I can read to pass the time, a snorkel and fins (since I’m on an island I might as well enjoy the marine life), and a Camelback so that I don’t have to carry a water bottle around in my hands.

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

GB: Again, I’m very early into my career, BUT I would have picked a Natural Science degree rather than Zoology at Exeter if I hadn’t read the Selfish Gene and Extended Phenotype during the summer before year 11. This made me incredibly passionate about evolution, especially of behavioural strategies. I am so thankful I made that decision, so for that alone, Richard Dawkins.

IS: What advice would you give to a young person hoping to be a social insect researcher in the future?

GB: Well, I’m not exactly old myself… but just read some books about behavioural ecology/evolution and see if you get hooked. If you do and find yourself on a zoology or similar degree, read up on the profiles/publications of all of the lecturers at your university and seek the ones that share your interests / get involved! Do this early, and you may be working with them on your thesis later on and perhaps beyond.

Interview with a social insect scientist: Anindita Brahma

Anindita Brahma (2)

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

AB: I am Anindita Brahma, recently completed Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, and currently I am a Marie Sklodowska-Curie postdoctoral fellow at Queen Mary University of London. My primary research interest is understanding the proximate and ultimate causes of the evolution of social behaviour.

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

AB: I developed a general liking for animal behaviour during my college days as a bachelor’s student. During my master’s studies at the University of Calcutta, my mentor gifted me a book named ‘Survival Strategies’ by Raghavendra Gadagkar. This book changed my perspective about studying animal behaviour, especially social behaviour, and it deterred me from almost plunging into immunology. I became curious about the author and his works, and a few months down the line I ended up joining his lab as a Ph.D. student. 

IS: What is your favourite social insect and why?

AB: Well, although recently I have started working on ants, wasps were my first love. They are such a fascinating combination of beauty and danger (because their sting is excruciating!), and I find their social behaviour intriguing, especially that of the non-temperate primitively eusocial ones. Also, my Ph.D. thesis revolved around a primitively eusocial wasp (Ropalidia marginata), and maybe because of this, wasps will always have a soft spot in my heart. However, I am now venturing into the world of ants, and I am looking forward to investigating and learning many exciting and awe-inspiring things about them.

IS: What is the best moment/discovery in your research so far? What made it so memorable?

AB: My entire Ph.D. was quite eventful. However, by far, the best moment has been the time when I was running an experiment to understand the dynamics of gaining direct fitness through natural nest foundation by workers of the Ropalidia marginata. One beautiful day during my daily behavioural observations, I saw that some workers had aggregated outside the nest and involved in aggressive interactions, after which they returned to their nests and behaved “normally”. Soon, a few of the aggregating wasps left their nest and initiated a new nest together. That was a ‘eureka moment’ for me as before this we had no idea that worker wasps interact and plan to leave the nest way before they actually leave it. Moreover, now I can proudly say that such shrewd planning would put any politician to shame!

IS: Do you teach or do outreach/science communication? How do you incorporate your research into these areas?

AB: During my Ph.D., I taught animal behaviour to undergraduate students, and I used love answering all the interesting queries they had about the ways of life in the animal kingdom. I also love to explain my research to my friends, acquaintances, school and college students, many of whom do not have the faintest idea about animal behaviour and evolutionary biology. I find it essential to use simple language without any technical jargon and provide analogies and relatable examples from day-to-day life to make research ideas more accessible.

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

AB: I think the current important questions in social insect research are related to understanding the evolution of eusociality. The transition from solitary ancestors to a social form and the successful maintenance of this derived social form still has many mysteries that are yet to be unfolded. For this, we need to have a holistic approach, and I think that it can be achieved by combining carefully-designed behavioural experiments with molecular tools and computational techniques.

IS: What research questions generate the biggest debate in social insect research at the moment?

AB: I think one of the biggest debates in social insect research is still the one started by Martin Nowak, Corina Tarnita, and E.O. Wilson with their paper on the evolution of eusociality (Nowak, M.A, Tarnita, C.E and Wilson E.O. 2010. The evolution of eusociality. Nature. 466 pp 1057-106). The authors of this particular paper claimed that the haplodiploidy hypothesis (which has been the basis for sociobiology research for decades) has failed and that the focus has been given to the relatedness (r) part of the r>b/c inequality compared to the benefit and cost parts. They go on to claim that the kin selection theory is not a general one, doesn’t provide much biological insight, and that standard and much simpler natural selection models are adequate to explain altruistic behaviour. Following the publication of this article, there have been vigorous debates among the social insect researchers on the question of the importance and necessity of W.D. Hamilton’s theory of inclusive fitness. As a matter of fact, there has been a series of interesting commentaries (links to these commentaries are provided at the end of this post) on this issue portraying that Nowak et al.has indeed provoked social insect researchers everywhere.

IS: What is the last book you read? Would you recommend it? Why or why not?

AB: I recently finished reading ‘Gene Machine: The Race to Decipher the Secrets of the Ribosome’ by the Nobel Laureate, Venki Ramakrishnan. This book is a memoir of his research life and his contribution to unravelling the structure of the ribosome, and he describes what does it mean to “do scientific research”. I found this book fascinating as it takes you through the journey of a researcher’s life, which is no less than a roller-coaster ride. The book describes the frustrations and struggles in the life of a researcher as well as the little joys and the rare ‘eureka moments’ that motivate a researcher to strive on and dig deeper to try and understand a phenomenon. Moreover, his informal and witty writing style is something that makes this book relatable. I would strongly recommend that everyone read this book and take a moment to ponder the nature of science and scientific research.

IS: Outside of science, what are your favourite activities, hobbies or sports?

AB: I love to read all kinds of fiction and non-fiction books, and my idea of a perfect lazy day is a book and a hot cup to tea. Another passion of mine is music. I have been trained in Hindustani classical music since childhood, and I love listening to a wide variety of music and sing whenever I find the time. 

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

AB: When things get tough (which is quite a common scenario in research life), I think about the little moments of joy and laughter, a few incidents that motivates me not to give up, and try to calm down and focus. Also, if these do not work out, then I have always found that speaking my heart out to a friend and/or a mentor helps me to a great extent! 

IS: If you were to go live on an uninhabited island and could only bring three things, what would you bring? Why?

AB: 1) Drinking water, 2) a tent, and 3) books (lots and lots!). Drinking water because I would not survive without that, tent for shelter, and books because there cannot be a better way to spend time when one gets to stay away from civilisation.

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

AB: This person is undoubtedly my Ph.D. supervisor, Prof Raghavendra Gadagkar. He has been an inspiration throughout, and I could not have asked for a better mentor. Not only did I learn the basics and ethics of scientific research from him but also that research is not about costly equipment, but the logic behind framing a question and the elegant and detailed design of an experiment.

IS: What advice would you give to a young person hoping to be a social insect researcher in the future?

AB: Social insects are elegant and unusual. Some of them may not look “cute” in the first instance but believe me, once you start knowing them, they will reveal a whole new world of intelligence in front of you and will amaze you every step of the way. Working with social insects requires much patience, but at the end of the day when you observe them or even maintain them and care for them, it gives you an immense sense of satisfaction.

Links to the Commentaries

Sociobiology in turmoil again

Inclusive fitness theory and eusociality

Kin selection and eusociality

Only full-sibling families evolved eusociality

Inclusive fitness in evolution

In defense of inclusive fitness theory

Nowak et al. reply

Interview with a social insect scientist: Nathan Lecocq de Pletincx

IMG_2125

IS: Who are you and what do you do?

NLP: My name is Nathan Lecocq de Pletincx. I am a Ph.D. student in the Evolutionary Biology and Ecology unit of the ULB (Université Libre de Bruxelles). I am working in the group of Serge Aron on the evolution of reproductive strategies in ants. More specifically, my research focuses on population and colony genetic structure in connection with the hymenopteran sex determination system.

 

Ocymyrmex_robustior1

Two Ocymyrmex robustior workers interacting outside the nest.

 

IS: How did you develop an interest in your research?

NLP: I have always been interested in the origin and evolution of sociality. Watching documentaries on a great diversity of social animals, I discovered how fascinating their behaviour is. Later, I developed a keen interest in reproductive strategies after learning the existence of original primary modes of reproduction (queen thelytoky, hybridogenesis, etc.) in several ant species. As Hymenoptera combines sociality and a great diversity of reproductive strategies, I decided to work on this biological model for my Ph.D.

Ocy_Queen_Dev

Ovaries of a non-mated ergatoid queen, showing active ovaries with ovules, yellow bodies, and an empty but swollen spermatheca.

 

IS: What is your favorite social insect and why?

NLP: Ants are fascinating models to study the causes and consequences of sociality and reproductive strategies. In fact, social structure, dispersal strategy, mode of reproduction, ecology, and mode of sex determination are so many characteristics that can interact directly or indirectly and vary significantly between species. Further, studying the causes and consequences of all these features is facilitated by the ease to rear and manipulate ants in the lab.

Ocymyrmex_robustior2

A worker of Ocymyrmex robustiorat the entrance of the nest.

 

IS: What do you think are some of the important current questions in social insect research and what’s essential for future research?

NLP: I think the evolution of cooperation and of its most complex form, eusociality, has yet to be better understood. Numerous ‘mathematical’ models detailing the mechanisms at the origin of cooperation and eusociality have been proposed. In my opinion, it would be interesting to test these hypotheses ‘on the biological side’. Finding species matching our needs is essential to future research. On the other hand, the consequences and correlates of cooperation and eusociality have been better studied. However, there is still a lot to do, especially in the field of molecular genetics. Pursuing the development of molecular techniques and tools to analyse big data sets is crucial for future research.

IS: Outside of science, what are your favourite activities, hobbies or sports?

NLP: I practice athletics a lot and bike regularly. I also like to read and learn new things about training methodology in sport. Spending time with my family is also of great importance to me.

IS: How do you keep going when things get tough?

NLP: For me, the best way to pass through difficult periods is by doing sport. There is no better way to relax than to train hard and go home with the feeling of having had a good session.

IS: Who do you think has had the most considerable influence on your science career?

NLP: I think teachers are of great importance because the way they teach influences and helps shaping our vision of the different topics we study. The animal behaviour, genetics, and molecular and cell biology courses I have taken have had a great impact on my way of thinking.

Accessing the file drawer of experienced researchers: joint interviews with Bert Hölldobler and Robert Page

Every day, thousands of papers in various research fields are published. Some of them receive lots of attention, while others remain unnoticed. Simultaneously, thousands of studies are not even submitted to journals because the results are insignificant or the authors think the work does not add sufficient new knowledge to their research field. In these joint interviews by Insectes Sociaux and Myrmecological News, Bert Hölldobler and Robert E. Page Jr. share some interesting insight about their own research and why some studies did not result in papers. Here, you will read the interview with Dr. Robert Page. Also, check out the corresponding interview with Dr. Bert Hölldobler!

Founders Day-Robert Page

IS: Dr. Page, as you look back on (and are still proceeding with) a fantastic career in social insect research, roughly how many papers have you published so far?

RP: I have published about 250 papers so far, including reviews and book chapters.

IS: Which of your papers received the most widespread attention? Did you expect this?

RP: The honey bee genome sequence paper in Nature in 2006 is by far the most cited, but I was one of a million authors, and it is basically a resource paper. I expected it to be the most cited.   Next is the Cell paper I published with Martin Beye in 2003.  I also expected it to be cited a lot because it is probably the most important paper I’ve been a part of.  It also represents a long hard struggle in my lab and Martin’s spanning about 7 years, and a question I actually started working on in 1980.  My 4thmost cited paper is one I published in Experimental Gerontology with Christine Peng in 2001.  It was a review article on a subject I knew little about but was picked up and has been cited 300 times.  I never would have figured that.

IS: Have you published any papers that you think received insufficient attention from the scientific community? If so, can you give us an example?

RP: I have several, but I know why they didn’t receive the attention I thought they should.  I tend to undersell my work.  I don’t go for high impact journals, just because they are high impact.  I try to publish in the journal that is appropriate for the audience I am trying to reach.  Often that is an audience of specialists.  I also tend to publish places that let me present all of the data and methods.  In the long run, the ability to repeat someone else’s work is the hallmark of science, and you need to provide your data.  And, hypotheses and current trends in what is perceived as exciting science come and go, but bad data stand forever.  So, I try to present all of the data as best I can so they can stand whether my ideas do or not.

IS: What do you think is the main reason well-designed studies go unnoticed by the scientific community?

RP: Science today is like a collection of infomercials.  If you don’t package it right and sell it in the right venue, it goes unnoticed.  I guess I am an old fogey about this, but I believe it.

IS: Have you completed studies of which you have not published the results even though you consider them relevant? To how many projects or datasets does this apply over your career, approximately?

RP: Yes of course. I don’t believe in “do an experiment, write a paper.”  The objective of science in my mind is to contribute to an understanding of something. Sometimes experimental results obfuscate our understanding, not improve it.  Usually, more experimentation will fit the pieces together and lead to an understanding, but sometimes you don’t get back to it, so it sits in the filing cabinet, or in an electronic file on your computer desktop.  I have many incomplete studies sitting there.

IS: Do your unpublished datasets have anything in common? Why did you not publish them? Was it ever due to a lack of statistical significance?

RP: As I said in the previous question, it is usually because I can’t figure out how the results fit into a bigger understanding.

IS: Does the field of social insect research generally suffer from gaps due to data not being published?

RP: No, I think too much is published too soon.  We would be better off with fewer papers that actually resolve something.

IS: What do you think is the general trend over time concerning the amount of unpublished data? Stable, decreasing, increasing?

RP: I really don’t know about other people.  I think mine increased over time because as I got older and had more of a focus on specific questions that I wanted to answer, I became more demanding that each paper contributed to an understanding.

IS: Would you be willing to share any or all of these unpublished data so that others could learn from them or profit in any other way? If so, what might be a good platform for this? Do you think that, for example, a database could be set up for such data?

RP: That is a difficult question.  My idea about bad data lasting forever actually came from Darwin.  Often there are reasons data don’t get published, often it is a lack of confidence in them.  Something peculiar in the methods, or an environmental anomaly when the experiment was conducted.  I don’t think any data should be shared on a public platform that isn’t completely reliable and carefully screened.  If you do that, you should write the paper.

Book Review: The Ants of Central and North Europe

By Heike Feldhaar (University of Bayreuth, Germany)

Seifert Ants of Central and North Europe

Many people are fascinated by ants and their behaviour. Even children will often recognize these little busy-bodies that always seem to be determined to pursue their work. Ants have captured the attention of many hobby entomologists. At least in temperate regions of the world, they are an attractive and manageable group in terms of species number. However, species identification of ants is often difficult; in comparison to other insects, ants have seemingly fewer characters for easy identification, such as colour patterns of butterflies or bumblebees. Several ant genera, such as the Holarctic Lasius, Myrmica, or Formica, contain species that even professional myrmecologists have trouble identifying. Only a few very conspicuous ant species, such as Dolichoderus quadripunctatus or Lasius fuliginosus can be identified easily without magnifying glasses; many require some type of optical equipment. In the field, notes on the structure of nests or habitat features help to narrow down species identity.

A good guidebook should, therefore, include a workable key for species identification as well as an informative natural history section with detailed pictures. Bernhard Seifert’s The Ants of Central and North Europe (2018) provides precisely that. The book is divided into two major parts: a “General Part“ with an overview of ant natural history and ecology, and a “Special Part” with a key to all 180 species (for gynes and workers) occurring outdoors in Central and Northern Europe (and a few more that may expand their range into the region) and detailed natural history information for every species. Here, I describe the contents of these two parts in more detail.

The “General Part” (translated into English by Elva Robinson) comprises short chapters on the general morphology of ants, ecological aspects such as their habitats and nests, colony foundation and life cycles of colonies, social parasitism, natural enemies of ants, and feeding strategies. These feeding strategies include interactions of ants with trophobionts for honeydew consumption and seed dispersal by ants. This general part may be skipped by professional myrmecologists that are familiar with the general biology of ants and the corresponding terminology. For beginners, it lays the foundation for understanding the “Special Part” in which Seifert provides natural history details for every species.

The “Special Part” begins with a short introduction to ant determination and mounting, a list of the covered ant species (with a focus on Germany, Switzerland, Austria and South Tyrolia), a checklist of German ants with information on their distribution within Germany (occurrence in federal states, vulnerability and broad ecological niche), and an overview of their ecological preferences and tolerances. This table covers ~ 90 of the 180 ant species and is based on over 200 plots studied by Seifert in Central Europe during the years 1979–2015. It provides detailed information on temperature and humidity preferences and occurrence patterns with respect to plant cover. Thus, the three tables focus on the area where Seifert was most active himself, and less information is available on other areas of the geographic range covered in the book, such as Fennoscandia, Great Britain or Northern France. However, Seifert lists occurrences and ecology of species in these areas in the detailed species accounts. This part is followed by three short chapters where Seifert discusses methods of taxonomic delimitation of species (morphology vs. genetics), justifies the method used by him, numeric morphology-based alpha-taxonomy (NUMOBAT), and defends Linnean binomial nomenclature. These three chapters are part of an ongoing debate among taxonomists, and amateur myrmecologists will most likely skip these four pages.

Seifert then provides an identification key from subfamily to species level (for gynes and workers) for the 180 ant species with outdoor occurrence and nine Mediterranean species that will likely expand their range into Central and Northern Europe due to climate warming. Tramp species are also included, which are mostly found in warm buildings such as larger greenhouses. The key is illustrated with line drawings for many characters that allow for easy comparison of different character states. These drawings might be challenging for beginners, such as the detailed drawings of antennal scapes viewed from different angles of Myrmica workers, but once the reader has grasped the concept, these drawings are very helpful and allow identification to species level. The key works well for slightly advanced ant enthusiasts for the majority of species. For a few species, optical equipment with a micrometer is required; this will not be available to most amateurs, but this is a hurdle in all insect groups and not a failing of this book.

The key is followed by a detailed description of the life histories and profiles of all ant species covered in the book. Bernhard Seifert provides detailed information on the geographic range, habitat and ecology, abundance and nest structure, colony demography and population structure, as well as nutrition and behavior of all species (if known!). These natural history notes are beneficial to beginners and professionals alike. They contain most of the basic information known for each species and are referenced very well, which allows an interested reader to quickly find more details for each species (the reference section contains more than 1,000 references!). Thus, the book is a great starting point for myrmecologists who want to know about the natural history of a particular ant species. The life history and reference sections are substantially extended in comparison to the German book Die Ameisen Mittel- und Nordeuropas, which appeared in 2007 (Lutra Verlags- und Vertriebsgesellschaft), making it not a mere translation of the former.

Students, amateur myrmecologists, and specialists will appreciate Bernhard Seifert’s The Ants of Central and North Europe. The “General Part” provides an excellent overview of general ant ecology and natural history to enthuse amateur myrmecologists, whereas the keys might be challenging for beginners but are very helpful for specialists as they allow the identification of most ant species occurring in Central and North Europe. The extensive information on each ant species makes it an essential reference about ants in this geographic region for all interested readers – from beginners wanting to know more about ants to professional myrmecologists.

 

SAMSUNG CSC

Heike Feldhaar

 

Reference

Seifert, B. 2018. The Ants of Central and North Europe. – lutra Verlags – und Vertriebsgesellschaft, Tauer, Germany, 408 pp; ISBN 9783936412079 (hardcover), EU € 64.00.