A Grassland Ant Community in Argentina: The Case of Solenopsis

FOLGARAIT, P.; D'ADAMO, P.; GILBERT, L.

Annals of the entomological society of America

Año: 2004 vol. 97 p. 450 - 457

We studied the structure of an ant community along a 900-m transect of grassland in Argentina. Two ant species, Solenopsis richteri Forel and Camponotus punctulatus Mayr, monopolized space and food. These two species were distributed as a mosaic with most of the transect always controlled by either one or both. Within monospeciÞc areas, each species reached mound densities comparable to those seen where each is an invasive species. Sampling with tuna and sugar water revealed that these two species together monopolized 95% of all baits. Where they co-occurred, space and food. These two species were distributed as a mosaic with most of the transect always controlled by either one or both. Within monospeciÞc areas, each species reached mound densities comparable to those seen where each is an invasive species. Sampling with tuna and sugar water revealed that these two species together monopolized 95% of all baits. Where they co-occurred, space and food. These two species were distributed as a mosaic with most of the transect always controlled by either one or both. Within monospeciÞc areas, each species reached mound densities comparable to those seen where each is an invasive species. Sampling with tuna and sugar water revealed that these two species together monopolized 95% of all baits. Where they co-occurred, space and food. These two species were distributed as a mosaic with most of the transect always controlled by either one or both. Within monospeciÞc areas, each species reached mound densities comparable to those seen where each is an invasive species. Sampling with tuna and sugar water revealed that these two species together monopolized 95% of all baits. Where they co-occurred, Solenopsis richteri Forel and Camponotus punctulatus Mayr, monopolized space and food. These two species were distributed as a mosaic with most of the transect always controlled by either one or both. Within monospeciÞc areas, each species reached mound densities comparable to those seen where each is an invasive species. Sampling with tuna and sugar water revealed that these two species together monopolized 95% of all baits. Where they co-occurred, S. richteri recruited more effectively and controlled more baits than C. punctulatus. In each area whererecruited more effectively and controlled more baits than C. punctulatus. In each area where S. richteri or C. punctulatus was most abundant, each dominant species arrived Þrst at baits but did not differ from the other species in their persistence at these baits. Both species seemed to prefer to forage in the mornings in areas where each was most abundant; however, only C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon differ from the other species in their persistence at these baits. Both species seemed to prefer to forage in the mornings in areas where each was most abundant; however, only C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon differ from the other species in their persistence at these baits. Both species seemed to prefer to forage in the mornings in areas where each was most abundant; however, only C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon differ from the other species in their persistence at these baits. Both species seemed to prefer to forage in the mornings in areas where each was most abundant; however, only C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon or C. punctulatus was most abundant, each dominant species arrived Þrst at baits but did not differ from the other species in their persistence at these baits. Both species seemed to prefer to forage in the mornings in areas where each was most abundant; however, only C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of Pseudacteon C. punctulatus retained this pattern in the areas at which both species had similar densities. The rare occurrence of PseudacteonPseudacteon parasitoids, and the susceptibility to ßooding in the area, may explain the abundance of S. richteri andS. richteri and C. punctulatus, respectively, in this grassland., respectively, in this grassland.