Advertisement

International Journal of Tropical Insect Science

, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp 217–224 | Cite as

Optimizing methods for rearing mated queens and establishing new colony of Oecophylla longinoda (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

  • Rozalia G. RwegasiraEmail author
  • Maulid W. Mwatawala
  • Gration M. Rwegasira
  • Jörgen Axelsen
Article

Abstract

Oecophylla spp. are used as biocontrol agents for many types of insect pests. A large and stable population is essential for effective control of pests. Colonies of Oecophylla spp. can be transplanted from wild habitats into orchards. Transplanted colonies can only survive in the presence of egg laying queens. It is difficult to locate nests with egg laying queens in large colonies that may sometimes contain more than 100 nests. Therefore, the need to explore and develop methods for rearing newly mated queens in nurseries may not be over emphasized, hence the current study. In the first experiment, we tested three rearing methods on queen survival and colony establishment. In the second experiment, we compared feeding techniques of different weaver ants on young colony growth. We observed that queens were best reared under continuous, indirect access to water. The first workers emerged earlier (32 days on average) in indirect and direct continuous access to water methods than on limited access to water (sprinkled) (38 days on average). Moreover, rearing mated queens under continuous indirect access and continuous direct access to water methods saved labour and time, because of limited attendance to the colonies. Availability of water, sugar solution and different sources of protein throughout improved the growth of young colonies. Likewise, the number of workers increased rapidly. Therefore rearing mated queens in nurseries is possible and would minimize hustles in hunting for the colonies and their queens in the wilderness.

Key words

ant nursery ant colonies Oecophylla longinoda queens rearing methods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Crozier R. H., Newey P. S., Schlüns E.A. and Robson S. K. A. (2010) Amasterpiece of evolution — Oecophylla weaver ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecological News 13, 57–71.Google Scholar
  2. Greenslade P. J. M. (1971) Phenology of three ant species in the Solomon Islands. Australian Journal of Entomology 10, 241–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hölldobler B. and Wilson E. O. (1983) Queen control in colonies of weaver ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Annals of the Entomological Society America 76, 235–. doi:10.1093/aesa/76.2.235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hölldobler B. and Wilson E. O. (1990) The Ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA. 746 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lim G.T. and Kirton L.G. (2001) A preliminary study on the prospects for biological control of the mahogany shoot borer, Hypsipyla robusta (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), by ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), pp. 240–244. In Tropical Forestry Research in the New Millennium: Meeting Demands and Challenges (edited by M. Azmy, P. Ismail, I. Shamsudin, M.Y. Safiah Yusmah, H.F. Lim, M.I. Muhammed Azmi, A.G. Ab Rasip, U. Salmiah and H. Khali Aziz).Google Scholar
  6. Lokkers C. (1986) The distribution of the weaver ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (Fabricius) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in northern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 34, 683–.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Offenberg J. (2014) The use of artificial nests by weaver ants: a preliminary field observation. Asian Myrmecology 6, 119–128.Google Scholar
  8. Offenberg J., Cuc N. T. T. and Wiwatwitaya D. (2013) The effectiveness of weaver ant (Oecophylla smaragdina) biocontrol in Southeast Asian citrus and mango. Asian Myrmecology 5, 139–149.Google Scholar
  9. Offenberg J., Peng R. and Nielsen M. G. (2012) Development rate and brood production in haplo-and pleometrotic colonies of Oecophylla smaragdina. Insectes Sociaux 59, 307–311. doi: 10.1007/s00040-012-0221-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ouagoussounon I., Offenberg J., Sinzogan A., Adandonon A., Kossou D. and Vayssières J.-F. (2015) Founding weaver ant queens (Oecophylla longinoda) increase production and nanitic worker size when adopting nonnestmate pupae. SpringerPlus 4, 6. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-4-6.Google Scholar
  11. Ouagoussounon I., Sinzogan A., Offenberg J., Adandonon A., Vayssières J. F. and Kossou D. (2013) Pupae transplantation to boost early colony growth in the weaver ant Oecophylla longinoda Latreille (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 60, 374–379. doi: https://doi.org/10.13102/sociobiology.v60i4.374-379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peeters C. and Andersen A. N. (1989) Cooperation between dealate queens during colony foundation in the green tree ant, Oecophylla smaragdina. Psyche 96, 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Peng R. K. and Christian K. (2005) The control efficacy of weaver ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), on the mango leafhopper, Idioscopus 224 R.G. Rwegasira et al. nitidulus (Hemiptera: Cicadellidea) inmango orchards in the Northern Territory. International Journal of Pest Management 51, 297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peng R. K. and Christian K. (2010) Ants as biological control agents in the horticultural industry, pp. 123–125. In Ant Ecology (edited by L. Lach, C. Parr and K. L. Abbott). Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Peng R. K., Christian K. and Gibb K. (1998) Locating queen ant nests in the green ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insectes Sociaux 45, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Peng R. K., Christian K. and Gibb K. (1999) The effect of colony isolation of the predacious ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (F.) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), on protection of cashew plantations from insect pests. International Journal of Pest Management 45, 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Peng R. K., Christian K. and Gibb K. (2004) Implementing ant technology in commercial cashew plantations and continuation of transplanted green ant colony monitoring. A Report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. RIRDC Publication No. W04/088. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Australian Government.Google Scholar
  18. Peng R. K., Nielsen M. G., Offenberg J. and Birkmose D. (2013) Utilisation of multiple queens and pupae transplantation to boost early colony growth ofweaver ants Oecophylla smaragdina. Asian Myrmecology 5, 177–184.Google Scholar
  19. Peng R., Christian K. and Reilly D. (2010) Weaver ants, Oecophylla smaragdina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), as biocontol agents on African mahogany trees, Khaya senegalensis (Sapindales: Meliaceae), in the Northern Territory of Australia. International Journal of Pest Management 56, 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rwegasira R.G., Mwatawala M., Rwegasira G. M. and Offenberg J. (2015a) Occurrence of sexuals of African weaver ant (Oecophylla longinoda Latreille) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) under a bimodal rainfall pattern in eastern Tanzania. Bulletin of Entomological Research 105, 182–186. doi: 10.1017/S0007485314000868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rwegasira R. G., Mwatawala M., Rwegasira G. M., Mogens G. N. and Offenberg J. (2015b) Comparing different methods for trapping mated queens of weaver ants (Oecophylla longinoda; Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 25, 503–512. doi: 10.1080/09583157.2014.992861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sribandit W., Wiwatwitaya D., Suksard S. and Offenberg J. (2008) The importance of weaver ant (Oecophylla smaragdina Fabricius) harvest to a local community in northeastern Thailand. Asian Myrmecology 2, 129–138.Google Scholar
  23. van Huis A., Van Itterbeeck J., Klunder H., Mertens E., Halloran A., Muir G. and Vantomme P. (2013) FAO Forestry Paper 171. Edible Insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. ISBN 978-92-5-107595-1 (print); E-ISBN 978-92-5-107596-8 (PDF). 187 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Van Mele P. (2008) A historical review of research on the weaver ant Oecophylla in biological control. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 10, 13–22. doi:10.1111/j.1461-9563.2007.00350.x.Google Scholar
  25. Van Mele P. and Cuc N. T. T. (2007) Ants as Friends: Improving your Tree Crops with Weaver Ants (2nd edn). Africa Rice Center (WARDA), Cotonou, Benin, and CABI, Egham, UK. 72 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Van Mele P., Vayssieres J. F., Van Tillingen E. and Vrolijks J. (2007) Effects of an African weaver ant, Oecophylla longinoda, in controlling mango fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae). Benin Journal of Economic Entomology 100, 695–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vanderplank F. L. (1960) The bionomics and ecology of the red tree ant, Oecophylla sp., and its relationship to the coconut bug Pseudotheraptus wayi Brown (Coreidae). Journal of Animal Ecology 29, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Way M. J. (1954) Studies on the life history and ecology of the ant Oecophylla longinoda Latreille. Bulletin of Entomological Research 45, 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Way M. J. and Khoo K. C. (1992) Role of ants in pest management. Annual Review Entomology 37, 479–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rozalia G. Rwegasira
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maulid W. Mwatawala
    • 1
  • Gration M. Rwegasira
    • 1
  • Jörgen Axelsen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Crop Science and HorticultureSokoine University of AgricultureChuo Kikuu, MorogoroTanzania
  2. 2.Department of BioscienceAarhus UniversitySilkeborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations