4.3 Article

Visual cue learning and odometry in guiding the search behavior of desert ants, Melophorus bagoti, in artificial channels

Journal

BEHAVIOURAL PROCESSES
Volume 91, Issue 3, Pages 298-303

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.09.013

Keywords

Desert ants; Navigation; Melophorus bagoti; Path integration; Systematic search

Funding

  1. Macquarie University
  2. Australian Research Council [DP0770300, DP110100608]
  3. Australian Research Council [DP0770300] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Terrestrial panoramic cues, path integration and search behavior are the main navigational strategies used by ants to locate food and find their way back to the nest. Searching becomes important when the other navigational cues are either not available or cannot provide sufficient information to pinpoint the goal. When searching in one-dimensional channels Melophorus bagoti ants exhibit a systematic drift in the starting-point-to-goal direction as they turn back and forth, sometimes past the goal location (Narendra et al., 2008). Here we show that this drift in channels is not a stereotypical part of the search behavior in these ants. It rather depends on the conditions of training. In experiments in which the nest entrance is located not at the end but at the side of the channel, forward drift is not always part of the nest search. Experiments on food searches showed that with the food source at the end of the channel, ants performed a linear drift in the starting-point-to-food direction. With food at the side of the channel, they showed a less pronounced drift toward the food source. In this constrained environment, especially with the goal at the end of the channel, ants seem to learn a routine such as 'run along the channel', and mix this routine with their usual strategy of turning back and forth in search. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available