Search

The chemical integration strategies of facultative social parasites of social insects have not received the scientific attention they deserve, even though there is considerable research being done on the strategies of obligate social parasites. We simulated intraspecific nest usurpations in the social paper wasp, Polistes biglumis, by dividing each nest into two parts and putting one half in the care of the original foundress and the other half in the care of a usurper. After 8days, we removed and killed foundresses and usurpers, and later tested the responses of naïve, sister-offspring to them. In each half-colony, the offspring were more tolerant to the female that was last on the nest, regardless of whether she was the foundress or a usurper. This suggested that usurpers had the chemical means to be tolerated by the host offspring. Comparisons between the epicuticular hydrocarbon profiles of foundresses and usurpers showed that usurpers were neither chemically insignificant nor transparent, nor were they mimetic, as obligate parasites often are. Instead, usurpers had chemical profiles richer in methyl-branched hydrocarbons than those of the foundresses. Analyses of the hydrocarbon profiles of nest paper revealed that usurpers supplemented host nests with their own hydrocarbons, a sort of nest marking. As a result, the chemical profiles of the host nests became qualitatively more similar to those of the usurpers. These chemical strategies illustrate that branched hydrocarbons play a role as semiochemicals and that facultative parasites may not all be on the main pathway to obligate parasitism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Social insects use cuticular hydrocarbons for chemical recognition and communication. Cuticular hydrocarbons can also be exploited by parasites to their advantage for undermining host recognition systems. The small hive beetle (SHB) is a parasite of honey bee colonies but can also infest nests of other bee species. However, its chemical profile is still not known. For the first time, the present study investigated the SHB chemical profile and compared it with that of its honey bee host. The results show that the SHB has a low chemical profile that is similar to its honey bee host's. However, while honey bees had a clear colony-specific chemical profile, SHBs did not. The generic chemical profile of the SHB is most likely linked to its free-flying behaviour in the field as these parasites are known to switch between host colonies, possibly limiting the acquisition of a colony specific chemical profile. Our findings also suggest that SHBs do not exploit any finely tuned chemical strategy to conceal their presence inside host colonies and probably rely on behavioural adaptations. Cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs) cover insects' bodies and play important roles in chemical communication, including nestmate recognition, for social insects. To enter colonies of a social host species, parasites may acquire host-specific CHCs or covertly maintain their own CHC profile by lowering its quantity. However, the chemical profile of small hive beetles (SHBs), Aethina tumida, which are parasites of honey bee, Apis mellifera, colonies, and other bee nests, is currently unknown. Here, adults of SHB and honey bee host workers were collected from the same field colonies and their CHC profiles were analysed using GC-MS. The chemical profiles of field-sampled SHBs were also compared with those of host-naive beetles reared in the laboratory. Laboratory-reared SHBs differed in their CHC profiles from field-sampled ones, which showed a more similar, but ten-fold lower, generic host CHC profile compared to host workers. While the data confirm colony-specific CHCs of honey bee workers, the profile of field-collected SHBs was not colony-specific. Adult SHBs often commute between different host colonies, thereby possibly preventing the acquisition of a colony-specific CHC profiles. An ester was exclusive to both groups of SHBs and might constitute an intraspecific recognition cue. Our data suggest that SHBs do not use any finely tuned chemical strategy to conceal their presence inside host colonies and instead probably rely on their hard exoskeleton and defence behaviours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Social insects use cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs) as recognition cues in a variety of social contexts, such as species and nestmate recognition. Discrimination of nestmates is an important requisite to avoid exploitation by unrelated individuals. In social wasps, use of CHCs in nestmate recognition has been demonstrated only among adults, whereas very little is known regarding brood recognition. We performed gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analyses of the CHCs of adults and larvae of the social wasp Polistes dominulus and found that larvae possess a characteristic chemical colony-specific pattern distinct from that of adults. Behavioural assays confirmed that these are recognized and discriminated by adults. Larval epicuticular substances are therefore sufficient for recognition of nestmate larvae by adults and demonstrate that wasps are able to discriminate between alien and nestmate larval odours. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Insect social life is governed by chemicals. A great number of studies have demonstrated that the blend of hydrocarbons present on the cuticle (CHCs) plays a pivotal role in intra- and inter-specific communication. It is not surprising, therefore, that social parasites, specialized in exploiting the costly parental care provided by host workers, exploit the host chemical communication system too. Throughout their life cycle, social parasites intercept and break this CHC-based code. Recently, however, several polar compounds (mainly peptides) have been found in addition to CHCs both on the cuticle and on the comb surface of social insects, and their semiochemical role has been demonstrated in some circumstances. In the present study, we used the paper wasp social parasite-host system Polistes sulcifer (Zimmerman)-Polistes dominulus (Christ) to evaluate the relative importance of the CHC5 and polar compounds in two different steps of the host exploitation process: host nest detection by the pre-usurping parasite and parasite chemical integration into the host colony. After separating the polar and apolar fractions of the host nest as well as those of pre- and post-usurpation parasites, we carried out laboratory assays based on the binary choice model. Our results show that nest polar compounds neither are used by the parasite to detect the host's nest nor play a role in parasite chemical integration into the host colony. In contrast, we demonstrate that CHCs are fundamental in both steps, thus confirming their primary role in social insect life and consequently in social parasite-host interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]