Colony fragmentation and diet manipulation of Formica podzolica (Formicidae)

Knowledge graph centered on Colony fragmentation and diet manipulation of Formica podzolica (Formicidae) with 65 nodes and 149 connections. Top connected: Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory, Gothic, Scarlet Gilia, Slender-tube Skyrocket, Beetles.

Method synopsis

Wild ant colonies were collected and split into paired fragments, then maintained on controlled diets (carbohydrate vs protein-rich) to test effects of macronutrient balance on behavior. Colony fragments were housed in containers with sticky barriers and deployed adjacent to aphid-bearing plants.

Synthesized from method descriptions across 2 papers using this protocol.

Procedure from a recent peer-reviewed implementation

Steps below were extracted from the most recent peer-reviewed implementation of this protocol in the corpus — Influence of macronutrient imbalance on native ant foraging and interspecific interactions in the field (2012), Ecological Entomology. The protocol was originally introduced by A balanced diet: Effects of ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) nutritional state on the balance between mutualism and predation upon aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) (2009). Implementations in other papers (listed below) may differ.

1. Collect wild ant colonies
   Five satellite nests from separate wild colonies of F. podzolica were collected 3.5 km from the field site in 2009 during 7-16 July, and seven source colonies were collected 1.9 km from the field site in 2010 during 28-31 July. Each source colony was then sorted into two experimental colony fragments composed of 200 workers and 20 first- or second-instar larvae.
   Quantities: 5 satellite nests (2009), 7 source colonies (2010), each split into fragments of 200 workers and 20 larvaeDuration: July 7-16 (2009), July 28-31 (2010)Conditions: Summer field conditions in Colorado montane meadow
   Equipment: collection containers
2. Establish experimental colonies in containers
   Experimental colonies were maintained in 15-litre plastic containers (2009) or 19-litre plastic buckets (2010) rimmed with a sticky paste barrier. Tanglefoot Company Grand Rapids, Michigan or a homopolymer resin (2010: Bioquip Products, Rancho Dominguez, California) was applied. Containers were filled with soil collected near wild nests as a nesting substrate, with a 6-cm diameter hole drilled into them (2010) to prevent flooding by rain but allow air circulation and ant passage to the plant.
   Quantities: 15-litre containers (2009), 19-litre buckets (2010), 6-cm diameter drainage holeDuration: Throughout experiment period Outdoor shadehouse conditions

Typical Equipment

• 15-litre plastic containers
• 19-litre plastic buckets
• Tanglefoot paste
• honey solution
• tuna in oil

Output Measurements

• ant behavioral responses
• diet treatment effects

Papers Using This Protocol (2)

Species Studied With This Protocol

Places Where Used