20365--K Vaitheeswari

Indian Journal of Entomology 83(2021) Online published Ref. No. e20365 DoI No.: 10.5958/0974-8172.2021.00069.9

ANT DIVERSITY AND SEASONAL INCIDENCE IN AGROECOSYSTEMS AT KARAIKAL

K Vaitheeswari* and K Kumar

Department of Agricultural Entomology, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Karaikal 609603, *Email: [email protected] (corresponding author)

ABSTRACT

The diversity of in the agroecosystem was studied in the Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture and Research Institute, Union Territory of Puducherry. Their population dynamics from June 2019 to February 2020 was also evaluated. The fauna was collected at weekly intervals with pitfall traps, in situ counts and net sweeping method. The analysis with Shannon-Wiener index and Margalef richness index revealed that the diversity was more for and Pseudomyrmicinae (1.8668 and 0.9510); Simpson’s index was maximum for Formicinae (5.5140), and Equitability index maximum with (0.8977). Among the 43 observed, bicolor (Wheeler) (Myrmicinae) was the maximum in numbers during August 2019 and the least during June 2019. The incidence of sp. (Myrmicinae) revealed a positive correlation with maximum temperature (Tmax), evening and morning relative humidity, rainfall and a negative one with minimum temperature (Tmin) and bright sunshine hour. The ants’ population had significant positive correlation with Tmax and Tmin (r= 0.43, 0.13).

Key words: Agroecosystems, Karaikal, ants, species diversity, species richness, correlation, biodiversity indices, population dynamics, weather factors, correlation coefficients

Ants belonging to the class Insecta and together at assessing the diversity and population dynamics of with social wasps and bees constitute 80% of the ants in the agroecosystems at Karaikal. biomass (Sheikh et al., 2017). The ants belong to the family Formicidae of the order . As per MATERIALS AND METHODS the recent world classification, all ants are grouped The experiment was conducted in the eastern farm into 26 subfamilies with 428 valid genera and 14,711 of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture species (Bolton, 2011). In India, currently 828 valid and Research Institute, Karaikal, Union Territory of species belonging to 10 subfamilies under 100 genera Puducherry (10°55’N, 79°52’E, 4 masl). Ants were are known (Bharti et al., 2016). Ants are found on collected in the early hours of the day (08:00- 10:00 hr), all continents except Antarctica and only a few large in the afternoon (14:00- 15:00 hr) and in the late evening islands, such as Greenland, Iceland, parts of Polynesia (15:00- 18:00 hr) at weekly intervals using different and the Hawaiian Islands lack native ant species (Jones methods- pit fall trap, in situ counts and net sweeping and Alice, 2008). However, they are abundant in the in the crops of rice, cotton, finger millet, black gram, tropical region both in vegetation ground (Brown, 2000) maize and red gram. Pit fall traps of 9 cm height plastic and species richness in ants varied from region to region cup of 8 cm dia were buried at ground level. Twenty (Kaspari et al., 2000). The ants contribute to crucial pitfall traps were set in five sampling sites randomly ecological functions like nutrient cycling, mixing of and a group of four pitfall traps/ site were installed at organic matter, soil enrichment and aeration (Del et al., equal distance from each other. One third of the traps 2015). Moreover, they also play an important role as were filled with water to which a few drops of detergent predators, defoliators, scavengers, decomposers, seed solution was added as trapping fluid (Deblauwe and dispersers, pollen collectors (Kwon et al., 2014) and also Dekoninck, 2007). The traps were set between 08: sustain mutualistic relationships with a great diversity 00 and 10: 00 hr and the specimens were collected of organisms, such as plants, bacteria, fungi and other on the next morning. The quantitative sampling was (Lange et al., 2015). Therefore, ants are carried out by sweep netting for one hour randomly. excellent models for biodiversity assessment and Grasses, shrubs, understory and lower branches of reliable biological indicators with their high diversity, trees were mainly swept with a sweep net (32 cm dia, easy sampling and relatively well settled 70 cm height). The collected were segregated (Sanabria et al., 2014). The present study was aimed

2 Indian Journal of Entomology 83(2021) Online published Ref. No. e20365 from debris and washed in 70% ethyl alcohol before Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystem: preserving them. The collected ants were preserved and Amblyoponinae later got identified (Varghese, 2003).

Diversity indices viz., 1. Shannon-Wiener index (Hughes, 1978) (H’ = Σ Pi ln (Pi), where Pi = S/ N; S = number of individuals of one species, N = total number of all individuals in the sample, ln= logarithm to base e); 2. Simpson’s diversity index (Simpson, 1949) (D = Σ n Fig.1. Stigmatomma bellii (n-1) / N (N-1) where n = total number of organisms of a particular species and N = total number of organisms of all species); 3. Margalef index (Margalef, 1958) ( α Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: = (S – 1) / ln(N); S = total number of species, N = total Dolichoderinae number of individuals in the sample) and Equitability J (Magurran, 1987) ( α = Σ (n / N ln (n / N)) / ln N, where n = total number of organisms of a particular species and N = total number of organisms of all species, ln = logarithm to base e) were computed for assessing the species diversity, richness and dominance. The indices were calculated using https://www.alyoung.com/labs/ biodiversity calculator.html. The data obtained were Fig.2. Tapinoma melanocephalum Fig.3. Technomyrmex albipes correlated with fortnightly weather data viz., maximum and minimum temperature, morning and evening Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: relative humidity, bright sunshine hours and rainfall. Dorylinae

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 4727 ants belonging to 43 species, 25 genera and 7 subfamilies were collected. The subfamilies Myrmicinae (10 genera and 15 species) and Formicinae (5 genera and 16 species) were the most diverse followed by Ponerinae (5 genera and 6 species), Dolichoderinae Fig.4. Aenictus ceylonicus (2 genera and 2 species), Pseudomyrmicinae (1 genera and 2 species), Amblyoponinae (1 genera and 1 species) Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: and Dorylinae (1 genera and 1 species) (Figs. 1-43). The Formicinae Formicinae and Myrmicinae are the largest subfamilies and the dominant ones in most terrestrial habitats (Marsh, 1986; Lindsey and Skinner, 2001). The rich diversity of subfamilies Formicinae and Myrmicinae documented during this study might be because of adequate nesting sites and availability of food as well foraging. Shannon-Wiener index was maximum for Formicinae (1.8668) followed by Myrmicinae (1.7284); Fig.5. Camponotus compressus Fig.6.Camponotus nirvanae and Simpson index was maximum with Formicinae (5.5140) followed by Myrmicinae (5.1604). Margalef index was maximum with Pseudomyrmicinae (0.9510) followed Formicinae (0.9279); and Equitability index was maximum with Myrmicinae (0.8977), it was followed by Formicinae (0.8906) (Table 1). These results indicate that the subfamilies Formicinae, Myrmicinae and Pseudomyrmicinae were species rich and diverse. The incidence was maximum during the Fig.7. Camponotus parius Fig.8. Camponotus rufoglaucus

Ant diversity and seasonal incidence in agroecosystems at Karaikal 3 K Vaitheeswari and K Kumar

Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: Formicinae (Contd) Myrmicinae

Fig.9. Camponotus sericeus Fig.10. Camponotus variegatus Fig.21. Cardiocondyla sp. Fig.22. Crematogaster anthracina

Fig.11. Camponotus varius Fig.12. Camponotus sp. Fig.23. Crematogaster Fig.24. Crematogaster brunnea subnuda

Fig.13. Camponotus sp. Fig.14. Camponotus sp.

Fig.25. Meranoplus Fig.26. Meranoplus sp. bicolor

Fig.15. Oecophylla Fig.16. Paratrechina smaragdina longicornis Fig.27. Monomorium pharaonis Fig.28. Myrmicaria brunnea

Fig.17. Fig.18. Polyrhachis exercita lacteipennis Fig.29. Pheidole spathifera Fig.30. Pheidole indica

Fig.19. Polyrhachis punctillata Fig.20. Prenolepsis imparis Fig. 31. Pheidole fergusoni Fig.32. Pheidole sp.

4 Indian Journal of Entomology 83(2021) Online published Ref. No. e20365

second week of February 2020 and minimum during the fourth week of July 2019.

Bany and Joseph (2017) revealed that the Shannon- Weiner diversity index was more in agricultural ecosystem (1.04412) than forest ecosystem (1.02115). Saranya et al. (2013) reported that 31 species of ants Fig.33. Solenopsis geminata Fig.34. Tetramorium walshi belonging to 14 and 4 subfamilies were collected, where Shannon’s diversity showed a higher value in semi-evergreen habitat and minimum in riparian habitats. The study carried out to investigate the diversity and distribution of ants in Gautala Autramghat Sanctuary, where the Shannon-Weiner diversity index of forest and grassland habitat was found to be higher Fig.35. Trichomyrmex criniceps when compared to human and agricultural habitat (Sonune and Chavan, 2016). Hazarika et al. (2019) Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: reported that the Shannon-wiener index was highest Ponerinae in hilly area (2.793) followed by open area (2.291), human habitat area (2.265), near the wetland area (1.993) and the highest value of evenness index of ants was near the wetland area followed by hilly area in Assam. Ratnayake et al. (2019) reported the Shannon’s

Diversity Index (α diversity) and Simpson’s Diversity index for ants was higher in buffer zone while the Fig.36. Bothroponera Fig.37. Brachyponera tesseronoda jerdonii Jaccard Index (β diversity) similarity value of both the zones was only 0.55.

The observations on the population dynamics revealed the dominance of species viz., Pheidole sp., Meranoplus bicolor (Wheeler), Polyrhachis exercita (Walker), Camponotus rufoglaucus (Jerdon) and Solenopsis geminata (F.). The population of M. Fig.38. Leptogenys chinensis Fig.39. Leptogenys bicolor (Wheeler) (Myrmicinae) was the maximum processionalis during August 2019 and the least during June 2019. It was observed that weather parameters had significant influence on populations ofPheidole sp. with R2 value of 0.819, respectively; and a positive correlation was observed with maximum temperature, evening relative humidity, rainfall, morning relative humidity; and a negative one with bright sunshine hours and minimum Fig.40. Odontomachus simillimus Fig.41. Pachycondyla harpax temperature (Table 1). The combined correlation Biodiversity of Ants in Agricultural ecosystems: analysis of ants’ occurrence during June 2019 to Pseudomyrmicinae February 2020 showed that there existed a significant positive correlation with maximum temperature (r=0.43) and minimum temperature (r=0.13). The morning and evening relative humidity had non-significant negative correlation (r= -0.39,-0.26), while bright sunshine hours showed non-significant negative correlation (r=-0.06) and rainfall showed non-significant negative one (r= - 0.12) (Table 1). Fig.42. Tetraponera allaborans Fig.43. Tetraponera rufonigra Ant diversity and seasonal incidence in agroecosystems at Karaikal 5 K Vaitheeswari and K Kumar

Table 1. Biodiversity indices and population dynamics of ant subfamilies in agroecosystems S.No. Subfamilies No. of No. of Abundance Shannon- Simpson Margalef Equitability Genera species (Number) Weiner index Richness index index index 1. Amblyoponinae 1 1 1 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2. Dolichoderinae 2 2 53 1.2551 3.3934 0.7669 0.6036 3. Dorylinae 1 1 36 1.0130 2.7403 0.5771 0.4872 4. Formicinae 5 16 1885 1.8668 5.5140 0.9279 0.8906 5. Myrmicinae 10 15 2392 1.7284 5.1604 0.8907 0.8977 6. Ponerinae 5 6 113 1.2487 2.8658 0.0597 0.6005 7. Pseudomyrmicinae 1 2 247 1.5920 4.2791 0.9510 0.7656 Regression coefficients- weather factors vs. incidence of selected ants S.No. Ants Regression equation R2 * 1. Pheidole sp. Y= -173.07 + 3.34X1 - 0.53X2 + 5.02X3 + 0.04X4 - 0.25X5 + 0.04X6 0.819 # 2. Meranoplus bicolor Y= -638.22 + 6.31X1 + 0.81X2 + 3.70X3 + 3.41X4 + 0.61X5 - 0.17X6 0.561 # 3. Polyrhachis exercita Y= -65.04 + 0.83X1 - 0.58X2 + 1.29X3 + 0.53X4 + 0.05X5 + 0.21X6 0.468 # 4. Camponotus rufoglaucus Y= -28.79 + 0.73X1 + 0.95X2 + 0.95X3 - 0.82X4 + 0.14X5 - 0.01X6 0.474 # 5. Solenopsis geminata Y= 182.92 - 1.01X1 - 0.31X2 - 0.23X3 - 1.53X4 + 0.13X5 + 0.18X6 0.568 Correlation coefficients- ants incidence vs weather factors (June 2019 to February 2020) Parameters BSH MRNG RH EVE RH Tmin Tmax Rf Mean ant (%) (%) (°C) (°C) (mm) BSH 1 MRNG RH (%) 0.11 1 EVE RH (%) -0.18 0.86 1 T min (°C) 0.67 -0.04 -0.35 1 T max (°C) -0.53 -0.67 -0.45 -0.62 1 Rf (mm) -0.61 0.39 0.61 -0.61 0.13 1 Mean ant -0.06# -0.39# -0.26# 0.13* 0.43* -0.12# 1

* = Significant at p=0.01; #- Not significant; X1 = Maximum temperature; X2 = Minimum temperature; X3 = Morning relative humidity; X4 = Evening relative humidity; X5 = Bright sunshine hours; X6 = Rainfall; Tmax= Maximum temperature; Tmin = Minimum temperature; MRNG RH= Morning relative humidity; EVE RH = Evening relative humidity; BSH = Bright sunshine hours; Rf= Rainfall

Holdingstone and Hajong (2013) reported that the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ants’ individual numbers, species richness and Shannon- The authors thank Dr Himender Bharti, Department Weiner index were significantly positively correlated of Zoology and Environmental Sciences, Punjabi with soil temperature, relative humidity, air temperature University, Patiala and Dr Kalesh Sadasivan and Mr K and soil moisture, but not significantly correlated Manoj, Research Associates, Travancore Nature History with soil pH values. Bharti and Sharma (2009) found Society, Trivandrum, Kerala for identification and that, the Camponotus population was average at 22°C confirmation of ant species. The authors acknowledge and relative humidity of 52%. The diversity study PAJANCOA and RI Society, Government of Puducherry in the Thommankuth Forest and Adjacent Areas of for permitting to conduct the study. Idukki District in Western Ghats, India, resulted in the identification of 19 species of ants, out of which REFERENCES three species viz., Camponotus angusticolis (Jerdon), spiny ant, Polyrhachis tibialis (Smith), P. rastellata Bany J, Joseph G K. 2017. A study on the hymenopteran diversity with special reference to ants in agricultural ecosystem of Idukki found only in forested areas, whereas four species district in Western Ghats of India. International journal of zoology viz., pharaoh ant, Monomorium pharaonis Linnaeus, studies 2: 15-18. C. carincarin Emery, C. mitis Smith, C. compressus Bharti H, Guenard B, Bharti M, Economo E P. 2016. An updated checklist F. were found only in agricultural areas (Bany and of the ants of India with their specific distributions in Indian States Joseph, 2017). (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Zookeys 551: 1-83. 6 Indian Journal of Entomology 83(2021) Online published Ref. No. e20365

Bharti H, Sharma Y P. 2009. Diversity and abundance of ants Journal of Uberlandia 31: 1501- 1511. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) along an elevational gradient in Lindsey P A, Skinner J D. 2001. Ant composition and activity patterns as Jammu-Kashmir Himalaya-1. Halteres 1:10-19. determined by pitfall trapping and other methods in three habitats Bolton B. 2011. Bolton’s Catalogue and Synopsis. http://gap.entclub.org. in the semi-arid Karoo. Journal of Arid Environments 48: 551-568. Brown W L. 2000. Diversity of ants: Standard methods for measuring Magurran A E. 1987. The diversity of Macrolepidoptera in two and monitoring biodiversity, Washington and London. Biological contrasting woodland habitats at Banagher, Northern Ireland. diversity hand book series, Smithsonian Institution Press: 280. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 85: 121-132. Deblauwe, Dekoninck W. 2007. Diversity and distribution of ground- Margalef R D. 1958. Information theory in ecology. General Systems dwelling ants in a lowland rainforest in southeast Cameroon. 3: 36-71. Insectes Sociaux 8: 1-9. Marsh A C. 1986. Ant species richness along a climatic gradient in the Del T I, Ribbons R R, Ellison A M. 2015. Ant-mediated ecosystem Namib Desert. Journal of Arid Environments, 11: 235-241. functions on a warmer planet: Effects on soil movement, Ratnayake K S D., Yamane S, Akbar S A, Hetti A W S P. 2019. Discovery decomposition and nutrient cycling. Journal of Ecology of the worker caste of Protanilla schoedli Baroni (Formicidae: 84: 1233-1241. ) in . Oriental insects 53: 160-166. Hazarika, H. N., Adhikari K, Khanikor B. 2019. Diversity and distribution Sanabria C, Lavelle P, Fonte S J. 2014. Ants as indicators of soil-based of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Gauhati University Campus, ecosystem services in agroecosystems of the Colombian Llanos. Assam. International Journal for Research in Engineering Applied Soil Ecology 84: 24-30. Application & Management 4: 2454-9150. Saranya S, Anto A, Joseph G K, Thomas S. 2013. A study on the ant Holdingstone K, Hajong S R. 2013. Seasonal patterns in ant diversity (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of periyar tiger reserve in (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) activity in a forest habitat of the West South Western Ghats. Indian forester 139: 936-942. Khasi hills, Meghalaya, India. Asian myrmecology 5: 103-112. Sheikh A H, Iqbal J, Azad Z. 2017. Study of ant (Formicidae: Formicinae: Hughes B D. 1978. The influence of factors other than pollution on the Camponotus) fauna of medical hills Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh. value of Shannon’s diversity index for benthic macro-invertebrates National Journal of Advanced Research 3: 44-46. in streams. Water Research 12: 359-364. Simpson E H. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688-696. Jones, Alice S. 2008. “Fantastic ants, National Geographic Magazine. Sonune B V, Chavan R J. 2016. Distribution and diversity of ants Kaspari M, Donnell S O, Kercher J R. 2000. Energy, density and (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) around Gautala Autramghat Sanctuary, constraints to species richness: Studies of ants assemblages along Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India. Journal of Entomology and a productivity gradient. American Naturalist 155: 280-293. Zoology Studies 4: 361-364. Kwon T S, Lee C M, Sung J H. 2014. Diversity decrease of ant Varghese T. 2003. Ants of the Indian Institute of Science Campus, (Formicidae, Hymenoptera) after a forest disturbance: different Bangalore. Karnataka, India. Centre for Ecological Sciences: 93. responses among functional guilds. Zoological Studies 53: 37-45. Young T M. 2017. Biodivesity calculator. https://www.alyoung.com/ Lange D M, Vilela A A, Graziella D D. 2015. Temporal dynamic of labs/ biodiversity calculator.html. foraging of epigeic ants in an urban forest fragment. Bioscience

(Manuscript Received: October, 2020; Revised: January, 2021; Accepted: January, 2021; Online Published: February, 2021) Online published (Preview) in www.entosocindia.org Ref. No. 20365