Abstract

Ants and termites are the most abundant animals on earth. Their ecological success is attributed to their social life. They live in colonies consisting of few reproducing individuals, while the large majority of colony members (workers/soldiers) forego reproduction at least temporarilly. Despite their apparent resemblance in social organisation, both groups evolved social life independently. Termites are basically social cockroaches, while ants evolved from predatory wasps. In this review, I will concentrate on termites with an ancestral life type, the wood-dwelling termites, to compare them with ants. Their different ancestries provided both groups with different life history pre-adaptations for social evolution. Like their closest relatives, the woodroaches, wood-dwelling termites live inside their food, a piece of wood. Thus, intensive costly food provisioning of their young is not necessary, especially as young instars are rather independent due to their hemimetabolous development. In contrast, ants are progressive food provisioners which have to care intensively for their helpless brood. Corresponding to the precocial – altricial analogy, helping by workers is selected in ants, while new evidence suggests that wood-dwelling termite workers are less engaged in brood care. Rather they seem to stay in the nest because there is generally low selection for dispersal. The nest presents a safe haven with no local resource competition as long as food is abundant (which is generally the case), while founding a new colony is very risky. Despite these differences between ants and termites, their common dwelling life style resulted in convergent evolution, especially winglessness, that probably accounts for the striking similarity between both groups. In ants, all workers are wingless and winglessness in sexuals evolved in several taxa as a derived trait. In wood-dwelling termites, workers are by default wingless as they are immatures. These immatures can develop into winged sexuals that disperse and found a new nest or into neotenic replacement reproductives that inherit the natal colony. Depending on the worker instar from which the latter develop, the neotenic reproductives are either apterous or brachypterous, but never winged. I propose that this wing polyphenism might present a basis for the evolution of social life in termites.

Highlights

  • Termites (Isoptera) and social Hymenoptera are the classical social insects. They live in complex societies and are characterized by reproductive division of labour where only few individuals within a colony reproduce while the large majority of a colony forgoes own reproduction, at least temporarilly

  • According to Hamilton's rule, altruism will be favored when rb > c, where r is the relatedness between the altruist and the recipient and b and c are the benefit and cost of the action to the altruist and recipient respectively [1]

  • It seems reasonable to extrapolate the recent results to the evolutionary history and conclude that in termites costly altruistic helping by food provisioning probably only evolved after living in extended family groups [7,10] and that the initial step in termites' social evolution was characterized by immature offspring staying at home without intensive brood care of siblings [16]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Termites (Isoptera) and social Hymenoptera (ants and some bees and wasps) are the classical social insects. Direct fitness benefits gained by inheriting the natal breeding position as neotenic replacement reproductive seem to play an important role in wooddwelling termites, and probably during the termites' social evolution [7,11,16] This might indicate that the genetic architecture underlying wing polyphenism in solitary hemimetabolous insects builds the molecular ground plan from which termites' sociality developed. The expression of genes for maternal care is rerouted to precede foraging, reversing the normal sequence in adult developmental ground plan of the ancestors These results suggest that based on wing polymorphisms different reproductive tactics exist in both wood-dwelling termites and ants. The Drosophila wing formation network has been successfully employed in a study on the loss of wings in workers of several ant species [88]

Conclusion
Maynard Smith J
Korb J
16. Korb J
21. Shellman-Reeve JS
32. Nalepa CA
39. Noirot C
67. Hamilton WD
71. Wilson EO: The Insect Society Cambridge
Findings
74. Thorne BL
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call