Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:47:19.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytochemical arrestants for the leaf-cutting ants, Atta cephalotes (L.) and Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich), with some notes on the ants' response

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

J. M. Cherrett  and
C. E. Seaforth
J. M. Cherrett
Affiliation:
University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad, W.I.
C. E. Seaforth
Affiliation:
University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad, W.I.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Albedo (the inner, white part of the rind) of the grapefruit (Citrus parodisi) and the flowers of the garden hibiscus (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis) were analysed for the presence of chemo-stimulants for the leaf-cutting ants Atta cephalotes (L.) and Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich). Two distinct types of chemical substances in grapefruit albedo (unabsorbed sapids from a cation-exchange resin I.R. 120, and the total lipid fraction) were significant arrestants for Atta cephalotes, whilst five types of chemical substances (absorbate on the cation-exchange resin I.R. 120, unabsorbed sapids from the same resin, the total lipid fraction, absorbate on a polyamide resin, and neohesperidosides) arrested Acromyrmex octospinosus. For both ant species, the unabsorbed sapids from the polyamide resin appeared to be the most attractive of the relatively refined fractions. A preliminary analysis showed a similar situation for hibiscus flowers.

Both ant species preferred young to older grapefruit leaves. There appears to be a chemical basis for this, and in the case of A. octospinosus there was evidence of the existence of repellents in the older leaves and in grapefruit flavedo (the outer, yellow part of the rind).

Substantial heterogeneity in preferences was detected in a given nest from day to day, between different nests of the same species, and between the two species. It is suggested that this is attributable to social phenomena evolved by the ants.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 59 , Issue 4 , April 1970 , pp. 615 - 625
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bark, L. S. & Graham, R. J. T. (1967). Studies in the relationship between molecular structure and chromatographic behaviour IX. An assessment of the role of polyamide surface in the thin layer chromatography of phenols.—J. Chromat. 27, 109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. D. (1965). Resistance of plants to insects.—A. Rev. Ent. 10, 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belt, T. (1874). The naturalist in Nicaragua.—403 pp. London, E. Bumpus.Google Scholar
Burdick, E. M. & Allen, J. S. (1948). Rapid estimation of citrus peel oil—a turbimetric method.—Analyt. Chem. 20, 539–541.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. (1968). The foraging behaviour of Atta cephalotes L. (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) 1. Foraging pattern and plant species attacked in tropical rain forest.—J. Anim. Ecol. 37, 387–403.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. (1969). Baits for the control of leaf-cutting ants. I. Formulation.—Trop. Agric., Trin. 46, 81–90.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. & Sims, B. G. (1968). Some costings for leaf-cutting ant damage in Trinidad.—J. agric. Soc. Trin. 68, 313–322.Google Scholar
Clements, R. L. &, Leland, H. V. (1962). Ion-exchange study of the free amino acids in the juices of six varieties of citrus.—J. Fd Sci. 27, 20–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, H. H. (1967). Plant protection and world crop production.—PflSchutz Nachr. Baver 20, 1–524.Google Scholar
Dunlap, W. J. & Wender, S. H. (1962). Identification studies on some minor flavonoid constituents of the grapefruit.—Analyt. Biochem. 4, 110–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Echols, H. W. (1966). Texas leaf-cutting ant controlled with pelleted Mirex bait.—J. econ. Ent. 59, 628–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fennah, R. G. (1950). Parasol ants: their life history and methods for their control.—Proc. agric. Soc. Trin. 50, 312–326.Google Scholar
Folch, J., Lees, M. & Sloane, S. G. H. (1957). A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues.—J. biol. Chem. 226, 497–509.Google Scholar
Graham, K. (1967). Fungal-insect mutualism in trees and timber.—A. Rev. Ent. 12, 105–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heftmann, E.Ed. (1961). Chromatography.—780 pp. New York, Reinhold.Google Scholar
Jacobson, M. (1966). Chemical insect attractants and repellents.—A. Rev. Ent. 11, 403–422.Google Scholar
James, A. J. & Morris, L. J. (1964). New biochemical separations, pp. 323–324.—Princeton, New Jersey, Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Maier, V. P. & Metzler, D. M. (1967). Grapefruit phenolics II. Principal aglycones of endocarp and peel and their possible biosynthetic relationship.—Phytochemistry 6, 1127–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, M. M., Carman, R. M. & MacConnell, J. G. (1969). Nutrients derived from the fungus cultured by the fungus-growing ant Atta colombica tonsipes.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 62, 11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, J. C. (1967). Trails of the leafcutters.—Nat. Hist., N.Y. 76, 32–35.Google Scholar
Moser, J. C. & Silverstein, R. M. (1967). Volatility of trail marking substance of the town ant.—Nature, Lond. 215, 206–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rinderknecht, H. & Jurd, L. (1958). A novel non-enzymic browning reaction.—Nature, Lond. 181, 1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. (1956). Statistical methods applied to experiments in agriculture and biology.—5th edn, 534 pp. Ames, Iowa St. Coll. Pr.Google Scholar
Ting, S. V. & Deszyck, E. J. (1961). Carbohydrates in the peel of oranges and grapefruit.—J. Fd Sci. 26, 146–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, N. A. (1966). Fungus-growing ants.—Science, N.Y. 153 no. 3736, 587–604.Google Scholar
Zettler, F. W., Smyly, M. O. & Evans, I. R. (1969). The repellency of mature citrus leaves to probing aphids.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 62, 399–402.Google Scholar