↓ Skip to main content

Tandem carrying, a new foraging strategy in ants: description, function, and adaptive significance relative to other described foraging strategies

Overview of attention for article published in The Science of Nature, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Tandem carrying, a new foraging strategy in ants: description, function, and adaptive significance relative to other described foraging strategies
Published in
The Science of Nature, June 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00114-011-0814-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benoit Guénard, Jules Silverman

Abstract

An important aspect of social insect biology lies in the expression of collective foraging strategies developed to exploit food. In ants, four main types of foraging strategies are typically recognized based on the intensity of recruitment and the importance of chemical communication. Here, we describe a new type of foraging strategy, "tandem carrying", which is also one of the most simple recruitment strategies, observed in the Ponerinae species Pachycondyla chinensis. Within this strategy, workers are directly carried individually and then released on the food resource by a successful scout. We demonstrate that this recruitment is context dependent and based on the type of food discovered and can be quickly adjusted as food quality changes. We did not detect trail marking by tandem-carrying workers. We conclude by discussing the importance of tandem carrying in an evolutionary context relative to other modes of recruitment in foraging and nest emigration.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
India 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
Unknown 48 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 23%
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Unspecified 2 4%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 10 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,621,648
of 23,920,246 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#342
of 2,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,285
of 115,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,920,246 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 115,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.