Humans and scavenging raptors facilitate Argentine ant invasion in Doñana National Park: no counter-effect of biotic resistance

  • Sara Castro-Cobo
  • Soledad Carpintero
  • Joaquín L. Reyes-López
  • Fabrizio Sergio
  • Elena AnguloEmail author
Original Paper


Biotic resistance by native communities could have a role in the spread of invasive species. This seems to be the case in the invasion of the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile, but only when the environment is unfavorable for the survival of the invader. We studied the progress of Argentine ant invasion through favorable and unfavorable habitats of Doñana National Park across three temporal snapshots covering three decades (1992, 2000, 2016). We assessed biotic resistance of the native community using species richness, as well as dominance and community structure. We also explored the role of abiotic factors (quality of surrounding habitat and spatial variables) and of potential vectors of Argentine ant dispersal across unfavorable areas. We found no evidence of biotic resistance after examining native ant species richness, proportion of native dominant ants, or community structure. On the contrary, invasion proceeded from trees with higher ant species richness, probably because those trees are larger and provide more resources and better protection from aridity. Furthermore, we found evidence that the invasion of new trees across a matrix of unfavorable habitat could be influenced not only by humans, but also by scavenging avian predators, which could act as vectors of ant dispersal through transport of carrion also exploited by the ants. Such leapfrog expansion through mobile predators could represent an overlooked mechanism that would enrich our understanding of invasion dynamics and provide potential opportunities for management of invasive species.


Biotic resistance Dominance hierarchies Community structure Dispersal by mobile predators Linepithema humile Raptors 



We thanks X. Cerdá, the ant ecology group (, and Luis Santamaría for their scientific input; C. Ramo and the LAST-EBD for their help with the geographic location of trees, NDVI index and GIS data; C. Nell, J.M. Vidal-Cordero, and P. Alvarez-Blanco, for their help with statistical issues; and J. Rainbow for editing the manuscript. Fieldwork facilities were provided by ICTS-RBD. This study was founded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and FEDER (CGL2013-43660-P to E.A.; CGL2015-69445-P to F.S.), the Ph.D. fellowship program (to S.C., BES-2014-067627) and the Ramón y Cajal Program (to E.A., RYC-2010-06663).

Supplementary material

10530_2019_1971_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (282 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 282 kb)


  1. Abril S, Oliveras J, Gomez C (2007) Foraging activity and dietary spectrum of the argentine ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in invaded natural areas of the Northeast Iberian Peninsula. Environ Entomol 36(5):1166–1173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarez-Blanco P et al (2017) Native predators living in invaded areas: responses of terrestrial amphibian species to an Argentine ant invasion. Oecologia 85(1):95–106Google Scholar
  3. Amor F, Ortega P (2014) Cataglyphis tartessica sp.n., a new ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in south-western Spain. Myrmecol News 19:125–132Google Scholar
  4. Angulo E, Caut S, Cerdá X (2011) Scavenging in Mediterranean ecosystems: effect of the invasive Argentine ant. Biol Invasions 13(5):1183–1194Google Scholar
  5. Arnan X, Cerdá X, Retana J (2012) Distinctive life traits and distribution along environmental gradients of dominant and subordinate Mediterranean ant species. Oecologia 170(2):489–500PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Arnan X, Cerdá X, Retana J (2017) Relationships among taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic ant diversity across the biogeographic regions of Europe. Ecography 40(3):448–457Google Scholar
  7. Arnan X, Gaucherel C, Andersen AN (2011) Dominance and species co-occurrence in highly diverse ant communities: a test of the interstitial hypothesis and discovery of a competition cascade. Oecologia 166(3):783–794PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertelsmeier C et al (2015) Different behavioural strategies among seven highly invasive ant species. Biol Invasions 17(8):2491–2503Google Scholar
  9. Bertelsmeier C et al (2017) Recent human history governs global ant invasion dynamics. Nat Ecol Evol 1:0184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Blackburn TM et al (2011) A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 26(7):333–339PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Blight O et al (2010) A native ant armed to limit the spread of the Argentine ant. Biol Invasions 12(11):3785–3793Google Scholar
  12. Blight O et al (2014) Competitive dominance in the organisation of Mediterranean ant communities. Ecol Entomol 39(5):595–602Google Scholar
  13. Boser CL et al (2017) Protocols for Argentine ant eradication in conservation areas. J Appl Entomol 141:540–550Google Scholar
  14. Calcaterra L, Cabrera S, Briano J (2016) Local co-occurrence of several highly invasive ants in their native range: are they all ecologically dominant species? Insectes Soc 63(3):407–419Google Scholar
  15. Carpintero S, Reyes-López J (2008) The role of competitive dominance in the invasive ability of the Argentine ant (Linepithema humile). Biol Invasions 10(1):25–35Google Scholar
  16. Carpintero S, Reyes-López J, de Reyna LA (2004) Impact of human dwellings on the distribution of the exotic Argentine ant: a case study in the Doñana National Park, Spain. Biol Conserv 115(2):279–289Google Scholar
  17. Carpintero S, Reyes-López J, de Reyna LA (2005) Impact of Argentine ants (Linepithema humile) on an arboreal ant community in Doñana National Park, Spain. Biodivers Conserv 14(1):151–163Google Scholar
  18. Catford JA, Jansson R, Nilsson C (2009) Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework. Divers Distrib 15:22–40Google Scholar
  19. Cerdá X, Arnan X, Retana J (2013) Is competition a significant hallmark of ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) ecology? Myrmecol News 18:131–147Google Scholar
  20. Cooling M, Hartley S, Sim DA, Lester PJ (2012) The widespread collapse of an invasive species: Argentine ants (Linepithema humile) in New Zealand. Biol Lett 8(3):430–433PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Donoso DA (2017) Tropical ant communities are in long-term equilibrium. Ecol Ind 83:515–523Google Scholar
  22. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animal and plants. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Giraud T, Pedersen JS, Keller L (2002) Evolution of supercolonies: the Argentine ants of southern Europe. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99(9):6075–6079PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Gove AD, Majer JD, Rico-Gray V (2009) Ant assemblages in isolated trees are more sensitive to species loss and replacement than their woodland counterparts. Basic Appl Ecol 10(2):187–195Google Scholar
  25. Heger T, Jeschke JM (2014) The enemy release hypothesis as a hierarchy of hypotheses. Oikos 123:741–750Google Scholar
  26. Helford S (2012) Biotic resistance of ants in urban and natural environments. Eukaryon 8:80–84Google Scholar
  27. Heller NE et al (2008) Nest connectivity and colony structure in unicolonial Argentine ants. Insect Soc 55(4):397–403Google Scholar
  28. Heredia B, Alonso JC, Hiraldo F (1991) Space and habitat use by Red Kites Milvus milvus during winter in the Guadalquivir marshes: a comparison between resident and wintering populations. Ibis 133:274–281Google Scholar
  29. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1977) The number of queens: an important trait in ant evolution. Naturwissenschaften 64(1):8–15Google Scholar
  30. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Holway DA (1998) Factors governing rate of invasion: a natural experiment using Argentine ants. Oecologia 115(1–2):206–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Holway DA (1999) Competitive mechanisms underlying the displacement of native ants by the invasive Argentine ant. Ecology 80(1):238–251Google Scholar
  33. Holway DA (2005) Edge effects of an invasive species across a natural ecological boundary. Biol Conserv 121(4):561–567Google Scholar
  34. Holway DA et al (1998) Loss of intraspecific aggression in the success of a widespread invasive social insect. Science 282(5390):949–952PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Holway DA et al (2002) The causes and consequences of ant invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:181–233Google Scholar
  36. Human KG, Gordon DM (1996) Exploitation and interference competition between the invasive Argentine ant, Linepithema humile, and native ant species. Oecologia 105(3):405–412PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Jeschke JM (2014) General hypotheses in invasion ecology. Divers Distrib 20:1229–1234Google Scholar
  38. Karkauskaite P, Tagesson T, Fensholt R (2017) Evaluation of the plant phenology index (PPI), NDVI and EVI for start-of-season trend analysis of the Northern Hemisphere boreal zone. Remote Sens 9(5):485Google Scholar
  39. Kumar N et al (2018) Habitat selection by an avian top predator in the tropical megacity of Delhi: human activities and socio-religious practices as prey-facilitating tools. Urban Ecosyst 21:39–349Google Scholar
  40. Kumschick S et al (2015) Ecological impacts of alien species: quantification, scope, caveats, and recommendations. Bioscience 65(1):55–63Google Scholar
  41. Kurz-Benson K et al (2006) Hydraulic lift in cork oak trees in a savannah-type Mediterranean ecosystem and its contribution to the local water balance. Plant Soil 282:361–378Google Scholar
  42. Li X et al (2016) Risk of biological invasions is concentrated in biodiversity hotspots. Front Ecol Environ 14(8):411–417Google Scholar
  43. Lowe S et al. (2000) 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species: a selection from the global invasive species database. In: Published by the Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) a specialist group of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the World Conservation Union (IUCN)Google Scholar
  44. Menke SB et al (2007) Biotic and abiotic controls of Argentine ant invasion success at local and landscape scales. Ecology 88(12):3164–3173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Menke SB, Ward PS, Holway DA (2018) Long-term record of Argentine ant invasions reveals enduring ecological impacts. Ecology 99(5):1194–1202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Mothapo NP, Wossler TC (2014) Resource competition assays between the African big-headed ant, Pheidole megacephala (Fabricius) and the invasive Argentine ant, Linepithema humile (Mayr): mechanisms of inter-specific displacement. Ecol Entomol 39(4):501–510Google Scholar
  47. Oksanen J et al. (2016) Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2.4-0. Accessed 24 Mar 2019
  48. Parr CL (2008) Dominant ants can control assemblage species richness in a South African savanna. J Anim Ecol 77(6):1191–1198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Passera L (1994) Characteristics of tramp species. In: Williams DF (ed) Exotic ants: biology, impact, and control of introduced species. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 23–43Google Scholar
  50. Pedersen JS et al (2006) Native supercolonies of unrelated individuals in the invasive Argentine ant. Evolution 60(4):782–791PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. QGIS Development Team, Quantum (2013) QGIS geographic information system. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. Accessed 24 Mar 2019
  52. Ricciardi A et al (2013) Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species. Ecol Appl 83(3):263–282Google Scholar
  53. Roura-Pascual N, Bas JM, Hui C (2009) The spread of the Argentine ant: environmental determinants and impacts on native ant communities. Biol Invasions 12(8):2399–2412Google Scholar
  54. Roura-Pascual N et al (2011) Relative roles of climatic suitability and anthropogenic influence in determining the pattern of spread in a global invader. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108(1):220–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Rowles A, O’Dowd D (2007) Interference competition by Argentine ants displaces native ants: implications for biotic resistance to invasion. Biol Invasions 9(1):73–85Google Scholar
  56. Rowles AD, O’Dowd DJ (2009) New mutualism for old: indirect disruption and direct facilitation of seed dispersal following Argentine ant invasion. Oecologia 158(4):709–716PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Rowles SD, Silverman J (2009) Carbohydrate supply limits invasion of natural communities by Argentine ants. Oecologia 161(1):161–171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. RStudio Team (2016) RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston. Accessed 24 Mar 2019
  59. R Core Team and Contributors Worldwide (2015) The R stats package. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Accessed 24 Mar 2019
  60. Sagata K, Lester PJ (2009) Behavioural plasticity associated with propagule size, resources, and the invasion success of the Argentine ant Linepithema humile. J Appl Ecol 46(1):19–27Google Scholar
  61. Sanders NJ, Gotelli NJ, Heller NE, Gordon DM (2003) Community disassembly by an invasive species. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(5):2474–2477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Savolainen R, Vepsäläinen K, Wuorenrinne H (1989) Ant assemblages in the taiga biome: testing the role of territorial wood ants. Oecologia 81(4):481–486PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Sax DF, Gaines SD (2003) Species diversity: from global decreases to local increases. Trends Ecol Evol 18(11):561–566Google Scholar
  64. Sergio F et al (2005) Preservation of wide-ranging top predators by site-protection: black and red kites in Doñana National Park. Biol Conserv 125(1):11–21Google Scholar
  65. Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17(4):170–176Google Scholar
  66. Shik JZ, Silverman J (2013) Towards a nutritional ecology of invasive establishment: aphid mutualists provide better fuel for incipient Argentine ant colonies than insect prey. Biol Invasions 15(4):829–836Google Scholar
  67. Simberloff D et al (2013) Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol 28(1):58–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Suarez AV, Bolger TD, Case TJ (1998) Effects of fragmentation and invasion on native ant communities in coastal southern California. Ecology 79(6):2041–2056Google Scholar
  69. Suarez AV et al (1999) Behavioral and genetic differentiation between native and introduced populations of the Argentine ant. Biol Invasion 1(1):43–53Google Scholar
  70. Suarez AV, Holway DA, Case TJ (2001) Patterns of spread in biological invasions dominated by long-distance jump dispersal: insights from Argentine ants. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98(3):1095–1100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Vepsäläinen K, Pisarski B (1982) Assembly of island ant communities. Ann Zool Fennici 19:327–335Google Scholar
  72. Walters AC, Mackay DA (2005) Importance of large colony size for successful invasion by Argentine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): evidence for biotic resistance by native ants. Austral Ecol 30(4):395–406Google Scholar
  73. Ward SA et al (1998) Mortality during dispersal and the cost of host-specificity in parasites: how many aphids find hosts. J Anim Ecol 67(5):763–773Google Scholar
  74. Ward D, Harris R, Stanley M (2005) Human-mediated range expansion of Argentine ants Linepithema humile (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in New Zealand. Sociobiology 45(2):401–407Google Scholar
  75. Way MJ et al (1997) Distribution and dynamics of the Argentine ant Linepithema (Iridomyrmex) humile (Mayr) in relation to vegetation, soil conditions, topography and native competitor ants in Portugal. Insectes Soc 44(4):415–433Google Scholar
  76. Welzel KF et al (2018) Verification of Argentine ant defensive compounds and their behavioral effects on heterospecific competitors and conspecific nestmates. Sci Rep 8(1):1–15Google Scholar
  77. Wetterer JK et al (2006) Long-term impact of exotic ants on the native ants of Madeira. Ecol Entomol 31(4):358–368Google Scholar
  78. Wickham H (2009) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Estación Biológica de Doñana, CSICSevilleSpain
  2. 2.Área de Ecología, Campus de RabanalesUniversidad de CórdobaCordovaSpain

Personalised recommendations