Specialization Does Not Predict Individual Efficiency in an Ant
Open Access
- 18 November 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Biology
- Vol. 6 (11) , e285-2375
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060285
Abstract
The ecological success of social insects is often attributed to an increase in efficiency achieved through division of labor between workers in a colony. Much research has therefore focused on the mechanism by which a division of labor is implemented, i.e., on how tasks are allocated to workers. However, the important assumption that specialists are indeed more efficient at their work than generalist individuals—the “Jack-of-all-trades is master of none” hypothesis—has rarely been tested. Here, I quantify worker efficiency, measured as work completed per time, in four different tasks in the ant Temnothorax albipennis: honey and protein foraging, collection of nest-building material, and brood transports in a colony emigration. I show that individual efficiency is not predicted by how specialized workers were on the respective task. Worker efficiency is also not consistently predicted by that worker's overall activity or delay to begin the task. Even when only the worker's rank relative to nestmates in the same colony was used, specialization did not predict efficiency in three out of the four tasks, and more specialized workers actually performed worse than others in the fourth task (collection of sand grains). I also show that the above relationships, as well as median individual efficiency, do not change with colony size. My results demonstrate that in an ant species without morphologically differentiated worker castes, workers may nevertheless differ in their ability to perform different tasks. Surprisingly, this variation is not utilized by the colony—worker allocation to tasks is unrelated to their ability to perform them. What, then, are the adaptive benefits of behavioral specialization, and why do workers choose tasks without regard for whether they can perform them well? We are still far from an understanding of the adaptive benefits of division of labor in social insects. Social insects, including ants, bees, and termites, may make up 75% of the world's insect biomass. This success is often attributed to their complex colony organization. Each individual is thought to specialize in a particular task and thus become an “expert” for this task. Researchers have long assumed that the ecological success of social insects derives from division of labor, just as the increase in productivity achieved in human societies; however, this assumption has not been thoroughly tested. Here, I have measured task performance of specialized and unspecialized ants. In the ant species studied here, it turns out that specialists are no better at their jobs than generalists, and sometimes even perform worse. In addition, most of the work in the colony is not performed by the most efficient workers. So the old adage “The Jack of all trades is a master of none” does not seem to apply to these ants, suggesting that we may have to revise our understanding of the benefits of colony organization.Keywords
This publication has 70 references indexed in Scilit:
- The correlation of learning speed and natural foraging success in bumble-beesProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2008
- Multimodal signals enhance decision making in foraging bumble-beesProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2008
- Worker caste determination in the army antEciton burchelliiBiology Letters, 2007
- Learning reward expectations in honeybeesLearning & Memory, 2007
- Reconnaissance and latent learning in antsProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2007
- Behavioral genomics of honeybee foraging and nest defenseThe Science of Nature, 2006
- Division of labour and colony efficiency in social insects: effects of interactions between genetic architecture, colony kin structure and rate of perturbationsProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2006
- Sociogenomics: social life in molecular termsNature Reviews Genetics, 2005
- Social Inhibition and the Regulation of Temporal Polyethism in Honey BeesJournal of Theoretical Biology, 2001
- Genetic differences in learning behavior in honeybees (Apis mellifera capensis)Behavior Genetics, 1991