QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online May 8, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 1804-1812 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02769

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) An erratum has been published Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Narendra, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Narendra, A.

Homing strategies of the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti II. Interaction of the path integrator with visual cue information

Ajay Narendra

Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia

View larger version (50K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. (A) Experimental set-up of the route-mark corridor in the training field. (B) An example of a homing ant's trajectory (thick line), to demonstrate the method of measuring the deviation from the nest–feeder line (N–F) at every 1 m interval. Cylinders are represented as filled circles.

View larger version (37K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Trajectories of homebound ants in (A) an unfamiliar test field and (B) the familiar training field. Each line represents the path of an ant. (A) Trajectories of FvRm+ (N=24), FvRm– (N=17) and ZvRm+ (N=15) from release point R towards the fictive nest N*. (B) Trajectories of FvRm+ (N=20), FvRm– (N=20) and ZvRm+ (N=21) from the feeder F to the nest N. Route-marks for homing ants are shown as black circles. In FvRm– condition, the grey circles indicate the location of the route-marks that were removed during test conditions. Grid size is 1 m2.

View larger version (23K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Orientation of ants at 0.5 m (inner circle) and 5 m from the release point in (A) unfamiliar test field and (B) familiar training field. Mean vector , length of the mean vector r and sample size N are shown. Nest direction =0°.

View larger version (124K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Trajectories of homing ants following a sideways displacement. Ants travelled through a route-mark corridor (array of black circles) from nest N to a feeder F and were displaced from the feeder 1.5 m (N=21), 3 m (N=20), 6 m (N=18) and 10 m (N=21) from the feeder. (A) All trajectories of ants displaced sideways. (B) Example paths of ants at each displaced distance that had zero turns (black), one turn (blue), no loops (green) and one loop (red) are shown. Grid size is 1 m2.

View larger version (24K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Orientation of ants 0.5 m (inner circle) and 5 m from the release point following a sideways displacement of 1.5 m, 3 m, 6 m and 10 m from the feeder. Nest direction, mean vector , length of the mean vector r and sample size N are shown. The arrowhead indicates the true nest direction, Nest , from the point of release.

View larger version (68K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Trajectories of zero-vector ants (N=15) displaced 10 m west of the nest–feeder line. Cylinders in the route-mark corridor are shown as black circles along with the nest N, feeder F and release position R. (A) All trajectories of ants displaced sideways. (B) Example paths of ants that had no loops (green) and one or more loops (red) are shown. Grid size is 1 m2. Inset: Orientation of the ants at 0.5 m (inner circle) and 5 m from the release point. Mean vector and length of the mean vector r are shown. The arrowhead indicates the true nest direction, Nest , from the point of release.

View larger version (4K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Illustration of the three competing directional cues for ants displaced sideways to R. Route cues direct the ants to move laterally towards the familiar route; distant cue direct the ants towards the nest, whereas the ants' path integrator, relying on the sky compass, directs the ant to the fictive nest N*. Information from route cues, distant cues and the path integrator are in conflict in full-vector ants. Information from route cues and distant cues are in conflict in zero-vector ants.