ArticlePloS one2009
Ant queen egg-marking signals: matching deceptive laboratory simplicity with natural complexity.
Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innate and learned components of egg recognition in the antRoyal Society open science · 2024Article
- Chemical signatures of egg maternity and Dufour's gland in Vespine wasps.Die Naturwissenschaften · 2023Article
- Reproduction and signals regulating worker policing under identical hormonal control in social wasps.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Longer life span is associated with elevated immune activity in a seasonally polyphenic butterfly.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2019Article
- Queen Control or Queen Signal in Ants: What Remains of the Controversy 25 Years After Keller and Nonacs' Seminal Paper?Journal of chemical ecology · 2018Review
- Decoding ants' olfactory system sheds light on the evolution of social communication.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Hydrocarbon signatures of egg maternity, caste membership and reproductive status in the common wasp.Journal of chemical ecology · 2012Article
- Kinship, greenbeards, and runaway social selection in the evolution of social insect cooperation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2011Article
- Queen pheromones in Temnothorax ants: control or honest signal?BMC evolutionary biology · 2011Article
- Identification of an ant queen pheromone regulating worker sterility.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2010Article
- Queen pheromones: The chemical crown governing insect social life.Communicative & integrative biology · 2010Article
- Mechanisms of social regulation change across colony development in an ant.BMC evolutionary biology · 2010Article
- Colony fusion and worker reproduction after queen loss in army ants.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2010Article
- The evolution of honest queen pheromones in insect societies.Communicative & integrative biology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExperiments under controlled laboratory conditions can produce decisive evidence for testing biological hypotheses, provided they are representative of the more complex natural conditions. However, whether this requirement is fulfilled is seldom tested explicitly. Here we provide a lab/field comparison to investigate the identity of an egg-marking signal of ant queens. Our study was based on ant workers resolving conflict over male production by destroying each other's eggs, but leaving queen eggs unharmed. For this, the workers need a proximate cue to discriminate between the two egg types. Earlier correlative evidence indicated that, in the ant Pachycondyla inversa, the hydrocarbon 3,11-dimethylheptacosane (3,11-diMeC(27)) is more abundant on the surface of queen-laid eggs. METHODOLOGY: We first tested the hypothesis that 3,11-diMeC(27) functions as a queen egg-marking pheromone using laboratory-maintained colonies. We treated worker-laid eggs with synthetic 3,11-diMeC(27) and found that they were significantly more accepted than sham-treated worker-laid eggs. However, we repeated the experiment with freshly collected field colonies and observed no effect of treating worker-laid eggs with 3,11-diMeC(27), showing that this compound by itself is not the natural queen egg-marking pheromone. We subsequently investigated the overall differences of entire chemical profiles of eggs, and found that queen-laid eggs in field colonies are more distinct from worker-laid eggs than in lab colonies, have more variation in profiles, and have an excess of longer-chain hydrocarbons.
conclusionsOur results suggest that queen egg-marking signals are significantly affected by transfer to the laboratory, and that this change is possibly connected to reduced queen fertility as predicted by honest signaling theory. This change is reflected in the worker egg policing response under field and laboratory conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.