Ants need work-life balance, research suggests

January 16, 2017
Temnothorax rugatulus. Credit: Arizona State University

As humans, we constantly strive for a good work-life balance. New findings by researchers at Missouri University of Science and Technology suggest that ants, long perceived as the workaholics of the insect world, do the same.

In fact, according to these researchers, it is imperative that some rest while others work to conserve food, and resources for the colony. And the larger the colony, the more important this work-rest balance becomes.

"It has been a long-standing question in the field as to why large colonies of ants use less per-capita energy than small colonies," says Dr. Chen Hou, assistant professor of biological sciences at Missouri S&T and research team lead. "In this work, we found that this is because in large colonies, there are relatively more 'lazy workers,' who don't move around, and therefore don't consume energy.

"We found that the portion of inactive members of a group increases in a regular pattern with the group size," Hou says.

The research team consistently observed that 60 percent of workers were not moving around in a 30-ant group, whereas this percentage increased to 80 percent when the group size increased to 300 ants.

"The simultaneous energetic measurements showed that the per capita energy consumption in the 300-ant group is only 50 percent of that in the 30-ant group," Hou says.

By not consuming energy, these "lazy" ants are actually saving resources for the colony and making the colony more productive.

This realization could provide valuable insight into making our societies more productive and sustainable.

"Humans are like ants in a way that we all live together in groups, collaborating toward our own betterment," Hou says. "Both humans and ants face similar problems of allocating resources based on tasks and energy. Understanding how ants spend their energy in relation to their group and why they do so will provide insight into conditions for individuals that allow a group to perform collective optimization of behavior, that is, in the context of sustainable use of scarce resources."

Hou and his team, which includes two undergraduate Missouri S&T students, discuss their findings in a forthcoming issue of the journal Insect Science.

"Maximizing resource acquisition would require most individuals to be highly active, but would also result in high energy expenditure and long average foraging time. In contrast, minimizing time and energy expenditure would require most individuals to be inactive, but would also result in low resource acquisition," Hou says. "Thus, we postulate that ant colonies balance these two optimization rules by the coordination of the forager's interaction."

Hou says his team came to its conclusion using a state-of-the-art computerized vision analysis program to track the motion trajectories of ants. His colleague, Dr. Zhaozheng Yin, assistant professor and Daniel C. St. Clair Fellow of computer science at Missouri S&T, developed the program.

Using Yin's automatic algorithm, the research team was able to analyze the movements of ants over longer periods of time and higher temporal resolution than had ever previously been conducted. Previous studies had only analyzed the movements of ants in minute-long intervals. The analysis of a two-hour-long video by the research team showed a large variation in the average walking speed of ants in the colony, from .2 centimeters a second to 1.4 centimeters a second.

"This indicates it is likely that the analyses of one-minute observations give only momentary snapshots, and may not well represent the ants' behaviors over long periods," says Hou. "These comparisons highlight the advantage of our automatic computerized tracking technique, because it is difficult, if not possible, to manually digitize coordinates of individual ants with high temporal resolution over a long period."

By tracking ants' walking behaviors over longer periods of time, the researchers also determined how much energy ants consume while working as opposed to resting.

"We found that walking ants consume five times more energy than resting ants," says Hou. "This means that energy wise, one walking ant is equivalent to five resting ants. Thus, if a group has 20 percent active members, this group would consume 180 percent more energy than a similar sized group with all inactive members."

The research team, which also includes sophomore Nolan Ferral and junior Kyara Holloway, both biological sciences majors at Missouri S&T, and Mingzhong Li, a Ph.D. student in computer science, shared its findings in an article titled "Heterogeneous activity causes a nonlinear increase in the group energy use of ant workers isolated from queen and brood." The article will be published in an upcoming issue of Insect Science.

"It is intuitive that colonies have inactive members, because these members may serve a backup role or buffer, which would be activated when colonies are under stress, such as an urgent need for nest maintenance or defense," says Hou. "But it is unclear why the proportion of the inactive members is not a constant—why larger colonies have relatively more 'lazy' workers. Thus, our study calls for future research on ant interaction networking and behaviors."

Explore further: Picky ants maintain color polymorphism of bugs they work with

More information: Nolan Ferral et al. Heterogeneous activity causes a nonlinear increase in the group energy use of ant workers isolated from queen and brood, Insect Science (2016). DOI: 10.1111/1744-7917.12433

Related Stories

Parasitic ants alter how captive ants recognize nest mates

February 3, 2016

Enslaved Formica worker ants are more genetically and chemically diverse and less aggressive towards non-nest mates than free-living Formica ant colonies, according to a study published February 3, 2016 in the open-access ...

Recommended for you

The astonishing efficiency of life

November 17, 2017

All life on earth performs computations – and all computations require energy. From single-celled amoeba to multicellular organisms like humans, one of the most basic biological computations common across life is translation: ...

Unexpected finding solves 40-year old cytoskeleton mystery

November 17, 2017

Scientists have been searching for it for decades: the enzyme that cuts the amino acid tyrosine off an important part of the cell's skeleton. Researchers of the Netherlands Cancer Institute have now identified this mystery ...

6 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Eikka
1 / 5 (1) Jan 16, 2017
Could it be because the amount of ground the colony can control cannot grow beyond what individual ants can travel, so increasing the size of the colony won't allow them to cover more ground - merely to increase the density of ants over the area they already control. Adding more will not increase the amount of food they can gather over the energy they'd spend, so the extra ants stay home.



HansV
not rated yet Jan 16, 2017
Quote:
"We found that walking ants consume five times more energy than resting ants," says Hou. "This means that energy wise, one walking ant is equivalent to five resting ants. Thus, if a group has 20 percent active members, this group would consume 180 percent more energy than a similar sized group with all inactive members."
Is there a typo above?
The calculation seems wrong.
Example:
If one walking ant consumes 500 units of energy...
... and 5 resting ants consume the same, 500 units of energy... or 100 units each...
Then a group of 10 inactive ants would consume 1000 units of energy.
And a group of 10 ants, with 20% active ants, or 2 of them, would consume 1000 units for the walking ants, and 800 units of energy for the 8 inactive ants for a total of 1800 units of energy for all 10 ants.

This way of looking at it tells me that the second group consumes 800 units of energy MORE than the entirely inactive ant group.
This is not 180 percent more.
It is 80 percent more.
HansV
not rated yet Jan 16, 2017
Could it be because the amount of ground the colony can control cannot grow beyond what individual ants can travel, so increasing the size of the colony won't allow them to cover more ground - merely to increase the density of ants over the area they already control. Adding more will not increase the amount of food they can gather over the energy they'd spend, so the extra ants stay home.


Eikka, I think you are right.
The "further distance" theory makes sense with more ants in a colony.
The extra expenditure in energy to get the same amount of food means that a per capita-trip-expenditure of energy results in less return.
This is similar to larger societies having to use more hinterland to support their "colonies" and using more and more energy to process and return the needed resources back to the "colony" (say, the Big City in case of humans).
The ants are smarter than us: they live at a lower "standard of living" but do not use up all available resources as quickly.
HansV
not rated yet Jan 17, 2017
It could also be that ants know when to keep some of their labor force in reserve, temporarily as an 'inactive' workforce --- for that unexpected manna that might fall from the sky close-by (someone discards an apple core, etc.) --- or as an army corp to defend the nest.

Or those inactive workers could just be government workers, part of the bureaucracy that every advanced civilization appears to need to support as part of that 'advanced' society --- after all, no organized society wants chaos and anarchy!!??

Or maybe they are the Philosopher Ants and Academic Ants and Management Ants, who are just thinking, philosophizing, and solving mental problems.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Jan 17, 2017
Is there a typo above?

Not really

All inactive ants:
n = number of ants
e = energy expended by an inactive ant
Etot_inactive = total energy expended by inactive group

Etot_inactive = n * e

Group with 20% active ants:
Etot_20%_active = total energy expended by a group with 20% active members
Energy expenditure of an active ant = 5 * e
Etot_20%_active = 0.2 * n * 5 * e + 0.8 * n * e = n * e + 0.8 * n * e = 1.8 * n * e

So :
Etot_20%_active = 1.8 * Etot_inactive

I think the 'more' is worded a bit unfortunately. They use 180% of the energy of an inactive group. (Same stupid type of wording that gave us statements like "five times less" or similar)
Eikka
not rated yet Jan 19, 2017
(Same stupid type of wording that gave us statements like "five times less" or similar)


I don't know.

You're essentially multiplying the original figure by N^(+-1) where positive is "more" and negative is "less". That's also the rule by which you remember that negative exponents are actually divisions.

The idea that "two times more" means you add the original number back in, is the odd one out because it doesn't fit a system. If theres "N times more" then there's obviously "N times less", and if you were being consistent with defining the former N*m + m then the latter would follow suit as N*m - m, which is silly. People intuitively think that one increases the number while the other decreases the number, and the system that does so consistently and logically is the definition where you multiply by N^(+-1).

Alternatively, you could clam that "less" means m - N*m but that's even more uncommon.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.