24 replies to this topic

[millsart]

Hi I have a question. Today I noticed that a queen hatched in my nest. Now I know that they do not mate in captivity, but I was asking if I release them int the wild when there are other alates swarming do they mate with them?

Honestly I feel a bit sorry for them not being able to do their job because of me raising them in captivity. 

[dermy]

I've noticed captive queens will often fill in the role of a worker or at the very least be inside the nest helping to tend the brood. It would be very hard to release a queen at the exact time that a flight happened for that particular species. I'm also not a big fan of releasing ants that have been i captivity, as I currently do not know what species you are talking about that also raises the concern of if it is an invasive species or not. In which case I would not release it as the world doesn't need even 1 more queen of an invasive species.

 

Generally speaking if you are worried about her flying out or something usually queens do not fly unless certain conditions are met, most of which are hardly if ever replicated in Captivity.

[gcsnelling]

The short answer is an emphatic No!!!! You never, ever release captive kept ants.

[millsart]

OK I understand that its better keeping all the ants raised in captivity. By the way just for making it clear because I did not specify before, the ant's queen mother I was talking about was captured from 1 km away from my home. That's why I thought of releasing them back in the wild. But I take the advice of more experienced ant keepers

thank you

[dominatus]

The short answer is an emphatic No!!!! You never, ever release captive kept ants.

Why would it always be no? Why would it be bad if my native alates had access to the outside to participate in a nuptial flight? I'm not talking about any ant that was introduce at some point, but true natives of your area. 

[Acutus]

 

The short answer is an emphatic No!!!! You never, ever release captive kept ants.

Why would it always be no? Why would it be bad if my native alates had access to the outside to participate in a nuptial flight? I'm not talking about any ant that was introduce at some point, but true natives of your area. 

 

 

Because it's entirely possible your ants have been exposed to things that wild populations have not and in the wild those things could spread. Your colony when you take it in is "Dead" as far as native populations are concerned. It's the same reason why very very few captive breeding programs exist to help even Endangered animals. Without super strict protocols a bad situation could be made worse.

One example I know about was when years ago people were asked to release their captive Desert Tortoises back to the wild to help the endangered population. This resulted in a respiratory virus being spread to wild populations and damn near wiped them out. How ever unlikely you think it may be, it's not impossible and is better to err on the side of caution.

[dominatus]

 

 

The short answer is an emphatic No!!!! You never, ever release captive kept ants.

Why would it always be no? Why would it be bad if my native alates had access to the outside to participate in a nuptial flight? I'm not talking about any ant that was introduce at some point, but true natives of your area. 

 

 

Because it's entirely possible your ants have been exposed to things that wild populations have not and in the wild those things could spread. Your colony when you take it in is "Dead" as far as native populations are concerned. It's the same reason why very very few captive breeding programs exist to help even Endangered animals. Without super strict protocols a bad situation could be made worse.

One example I know about was when years ago people were asked to release their captive Desert Tortoises back to the wild to help the endangered population. This resulted in a respiratory virus being spread to wild populations and damn near wiped them out. How ever unlikely you think it may be, it's not impossible and is better to err on the side of caution.

 

I just read up on that situation. I'm not really sure that is fair comparison, especially to such a different branch of the animal kingdom. Ants don't intermingle in the same way most animals do. Colonies are pretty isolated from each other except when conflict arises or you have one of those species where colonies may merge or are parasitic. If you release alates and they are ill they get better or die, no other colonies exposed. Maybe some alates from the swarm are exposed, but very unlikely a whole colony.

 

Bee keeping is a completely exposed hobby of keeping eusocial insects. The diseases there are readily visible when they show up and have been spread from people moving species around (like AFB), not native bees being in their native area. The most comparable affliction for ants I can think of is mites, and that is a pretty noticeable problem. I'll keep it in mind though, when my colonies produce alates. I'll decide then I suppose.

[Barristan]

I also see no problem in releasing alates of ant species which are native to your area. Wild ants often come into houses so there is already a chance that they might get exposed to parasite, bacteria etc which might not occur in the wild (however I wonder what that could be...)

[Mdrogun]

 

 

 

The short answer is an emphatic No!!!! You never, ever release captive kept ants.

Why would it always be no? Why would it be bad if my native alates had access to the outside to participate in a nuptial flight? I'm not talking about any ant that was introduce at some point, but true natives of your area. 

 

 

Because it's entirely possible your ants have been exposed to things that wild populations have not and in the wild those things could spread. Your colony when you take it in is "Dead" as far as native populations are concerned. It's the same reason why very very few captive breeding programs exist to help even Endangered animals. Without super strict protocols a bad situation could be made worse.

One example I know about was when years ago people were asked to release their captive Desert Tortoises back to the wild to help the endangered population. This resulted in a respiratory virus being spread to wild populations and damn near wiped them out. How ever unlikely you think it may be, it's not impossible and is better to err on the side of caution.

 

I just read up on that situation. I'm not really sure that is fair comparison, especially to such a different branch of the animal kingdom. Ants don't intermingle in the same way most animals do. Colonies are pretty isolated from each other except when conflict arises or you have one of those species where colonies may merge or are parasitic. If you release alates and they are ill they get better or die, no other colonies exposed. Maybe some alates from the swarm are exposed, but very unlikely a whole colony.

 

Bee keeping is a completely exposed hobby of keeping eusocial insects. The diseases there are readily visible when they show up and have been spread from people moving species around (like AFB), not native bees being in their native area. The most comparable affliction for ants I can think of is mites, and that is a pretty noticeable problem. I'll keep it in mind though, when my colonies produce alates. I'll decide then I suppose.

 

Ants don't intermingle? Are you kidding me? The largest competitor for ants is other ants. Even so, I'm sure the tortoises aren't all cracking cold ones and chilling together. Disease can spread through the air, feces, etc. You have probably gotten sick from people that you don't directly come into contact with.

 

Native bees have been struggling heavily lately. There is tons of money to fix honey bees when they start having issues. Mites, mold, etc. But none of that money is thrown at the native, wild bees that they inevitably spread disease to. They're all visiting the same flowers,flapping the same air in their wings, you get the idea.

 

Keeping a animal in captivity alters it. It might not be visible on the surface, but it could be as simple as feeding them a different diet than they get in the wild and altering their gut bacteria. If you care about the wild kin to the creature(s) you're keeping, don't release what creature(s) you've kept in captivity.

 

I also see no problem in releasing alates of ant species which are native to your area. Wild ants often come into houses so there is already a chance that they might get exposed to parasite, bacteria etc which might not occur in the wild (however I wonder what that could be...)

On the scale of ants, 1km is a massive, massive distance. Comparable to humans island hopping or even crossing oceans in certain cases. In a similar fashion to how 90% of Native Americans were killed by diseases from European settlers, you could be doing a similar (although probably not as severe) thing.

 

 

To recap:

1. All animals are altered in some way by even coming into contact with humans

2. We don't know to what extent the animals are altered, or how those alterations could affect wild populations of said animal

3. These alterations to captive animals could harm wild populations or in some way change the ecosystem the previously captive animal is introduced to.

 

There is a reason why myrmecologists tell you not to release your ants, people.

Edited by Mdrogun, June 14 2019 - 10:26 PM.

[dominatus]

Lots of good food for thought.

So what about when people decide to feed wild ant colonies? Is that just as bad as allowing your captive bred alates to go free?

 

It was poorly thought out when I said they don't mingle, I was mostly thinking of alates. It just seems a shame to not allow the alates to contribute to the genetic diversity of the native ants, genetic diversity is a huge factor in species survival. Honeybees are really showing us this on the insect level. I want my native ants to flourish. I hate seeing fire ants everywhere and other invasive species.

 

Some due diligence is required, thanks for making me think more about it.

[Mdrogun]

So what about when people decide to feed wild ant colonies? Is that just as bad as allowing your captive bred alates to go free?

Certainly not. There is some level of forgiving that I think is reasonable. I'm not saying you need to wear a hazmat suit every time you're around wild animals  . But there's no reason to introduce animals to a population that we know have been altered by us.

It just seems a shame to not allow the alates to contribute to the genetic diversity of the native ants, genetic diversity is a huge factor in species survival. Honeybees are really showing us this on the insect level. I want my native ants to flourish. I hate seeing fire ants everywhere and other invasive species.

I totally get you. I would love to live in a world where Solenopsis invicta was eradicated from the United States. The problem is, like someone stated with the tortoises, if you unintentionally infect a population of animals by introducing individuals you could be doing way more harm than good.

 

Personally, as much as I would absolutely love to rid my property of invasive ants and introduce native ones, I know at some point nature just has to kind of run its course. The best way to help your native ants is by making the environment more suitable for them. Often times, invasives need humans to survive. We humans alter the land to a point where native ants aren't as adept at surviving and it basically becomes a game of "whoever gets the biggest colony, and recruits the most workers, wins."

Edited by Mdrogun, June 14 2019 - 11:31 PM.

[Barristan]

To recap:

1. All animals are altered in some way by even coming into contact with humans

2. We don't know to what extent the animals are altered, or how those alterations could affect wild populations of said animal

3. These alterations to captive animals could harm wild populations or in some way change the ecosystem the previously captive animal is introduced to.

 

There is a reason why myrmecologists tell you not to release your ants, people.

 

 

I haven't seen any proof yet that this is the case, can you provide me any proof that only the contact with human will alter an animal?

 

Science shouldn't be based on arguments of authority and that is exactly what you do. Only because a person is a myrmecologist, doesn't mean that this person is right.

 

But if a myrmecologist is right it'd be easy for him/her to provide any facts. As a German ant keeper I unfortunately have a lot of experience with a specific myrmecologist which is trying to force his opinions with arguments of authority on all the German ant keeping community for years. I haven't seen any hard facts (like statistics on how dangerous it might be) on this topic yet.

[rbarreto]

Your colony didn't have to battle the hardships of the outside world. There's no way of knowing if her genotype is fit to enough survive in the wild. Releasing alates might dilute wild populations and reduce genetic fitness.

Probably a small point but then again every queen counts in the fight against RIFA.

My personal opinion is why risk it? You don't gain much from releasing alates/colonies into the wild so better safe than sorry.

Edited by rbarreto, June 15 2019 - 2:25 AM.

[Barristan]

Your colony didn't have to battle the hardships of the outside world. There's no way of knowing if her genotype is fit to enough survive in the wild. Releasing alates might dilute wild populations and reduce genetic fitness.

Probably a small point but then again every queen counts in the fight against RIFA.

My personal opinion is why risk it? You don't gain much from releasing alates/colonies into the wild so better safe than sorry.

 

I don't know where you get your queens from, but I collect mine outside in the wild, that means the queen is a wild animal with all the genes necessary to survive outside. We don't talk about domesticated animals like cattle, pigs, which have been bred by humans for thousands of years and lost most of their genes which enable them to survive in the wild. We don't breed ants, at least a high percentage of ant keeper doesn't, so there is no way the colonies kept by humans will lose any genes which are important for surviving in the wild.

And even if they did, the queens released will have a lower chance of survival and therefore a lower chance of mating and over the time there will be a natural selection and none of the weaker genes will survive.

 

Just think about how many people release fly less fruit flies, until now I don't see any flightless fruit flies reducing the genetically fitness of the wild ones, because the flightless don't have any chance of survival.

Only because there is a chance doesn't mean you should care about. Do you drive a car or go outside at all? There is a risk that you get killed in a car accident, or slain by a tree, struck by a lightning, kidnapped by aliens or whatever. All these things have a chance of happening because almost nothing is impossible. But you don't care because you think that the chances are too low to be worried. And this is exactly why I don't care about releasing native ant species in the wild. Nobody has so far made a clear statement that the risk is high enough to be worried.

[drtrmiller]

If experts are going to assert some position, I really would prefer that they at least back it up with evidence as opposed to conjecture.

 

It seems like much undue hysteria in this hobby comes from some authority saying "It is so because I said so," and all the hobbyists echoing "it is so!"  All the while, nobody really knows whether it is so, or why it is so.  So many just make up stories for why it is so—some plausible, many not.

Edited by drtrmiller, June 15 2019 - 5:17 AM.

[Serafine]

Native bees have been struggling heavily lately. There is tons of money to fix honey bees when they start having issues. Mites, mold, etc. But none of that money is thrown at the native, wild bees that they inevitably spread disease to. They're all visiting the same flowers,flapping the same air in their wings, you get the idea.
 
Keeping a animal in captivity alters it. It might not be visible on the surface, but it could be as simple as feeding them a different diet than they get in the wild and altering their gut bacteria. If you care about the wild kin to the creature(s) you're keeping, don't release what creature(s) you've kept in captivity.

 
Native bees are struggling because - and that's a particular issue in the US - there are huge corporations driving THOUSANDS of bee colonies across the country all year long.
The ant equivalent of that would be someone driving huge Solenopsis invicta colonies all across the US letting them do their nuptial flights in any town they pass.
OF COURSE THIS IS BAD FOR LOCAL INSECT POPULATIONS because it's utterly ridiculous in the first place.
 
There's even studies that can trace the Varroa mite's path with surprising precision, the mites were actually introduced with IMPORTED bees, not with native bees from the corresponding area.
Honey bee companies spent DECADES spreading Varroa mites all over the world before they even realized the problem.
It's not even comparable with a few antkeepers releasing ants that are from their area anyway.
 

On the scale of ants, 1km is a massive, massive distance. Comparable to humans island hopping or even crossing oceans in certain cases. In a similar fashion to how 90% of Native Americans were killed by diseases from European settlers, you could be doing a similar (although probably not as severe) thing.

 
No, not really. Camponotus ants that grow to huge colonies can create satellite nests hundreds of meters away from their main settlement, Messor and Atta walk hundreds of meters to their feeding grounds and a lot of the semi-nomadic ants (Crazy ants, many Tampinoma and Solenopsis species) are traveling all over the place anyway. Even ants as mundane as Lasius niger are known to climb 5-level building because the heat on the roof makes their brood develop faster and they will not hessitate to invade homes when they find food either.
 
The comparison between native ants from the next town and settlers (or ants) from ANOTHER CONTINENT is nonsense. Ant alates by the way can drift for dozens of kilometers when they catch the right winds - for example they obviously can cross the street of Gibraltar as you'll find the same ant species on both sides of that channel (spiders and mosquitos are even more extreme, those can travel for hundreds of kilometers and are actually considered part of the "air plankton", swarming locusts can travel up to 300 kilometers per day).
 

To recap:

1. All animals are altered in some way by even coming into contact with humans
2. We don't know to what extent the animals are altered, or how those alterations could affect wild populations of said animal
3. These alterations to captive animals could harm wild populations or in some way change the ecosystem the previously captive animal is introduced to.
 
There is a reason why myrmecologists tell you not to release your ants, people.

 
Scientists will ALWAYS tell you not to release ANYTHING, it's become pretty much a tradition at this point. For them their test subjects are basically throw-away items. Also they often have other animals from several countries in their labs and there is actually a far higher chance of some cross-infection going on than in the home of a random guy only keeping species local to the area.
Considering the frequency at which ants invade houses and how they interact with each other (particularly in nuptial flights) their populations likely came into contact with anything that can be found in the average household anyway.
If we follow your logic to the last consequence we'd have to utterly purge any ant colony that chose to invade a trash bin because it alters their metabolsims in some way (which would be quite some effort in my city where there's a Lasius niger or Tetramorium colony under almost every public trash bin). Hell, there are even "fast food ants" in New York, specifically ants of the genus Pheidole that have started to revive their lost third worker caste (those ludicrously big-headed supermajors) due to the ridiculous intake of protein from fast food people throw away all the time.
 
We'd also have to lock up or murder any free-ranging cats because those are notorious long-distance travellers and will spread anything they came into contact with in their owner's house across dozens of kilometers and are in fact a member of the "top worst 100 invasive organisms on the planet" list being responsible for the complete eradication of around three dozens species of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and small mammals. Free ranging cats kill 1.4 to 3.7 billion birds and 6.9 to 20.7 billion mammals EVERY YEAR in the US alone.
Cats are actually the single largest threat to wildlife in the US. I'd be far more concerned about those and the stuff they spread around the envirnoment (they are often treated with chemicals so they don't get flea, worms or other parasites and they obviously spread those drugs around whenever they take a dump) than I'd be worried about a few native ants that came into contant with human households - something they frequently do anyway.

 
 

Your colony didn't have to battle the hardships of the outside world. There's no way of knowing if her genotype is fit to enough survive in the wild. Releasing alates might dilute wild populations and reduce genetic fitness.

Probably a small point but then again every queen counts in the fight against RIFA.

My personal opinion is why risk it? You don't gain much from releasing alates/colonies into the wild so better safe than sorry.

 
Um... NO. Evolution and genetics don't work that way.
If an ant survives in your formicarium her offspring are likely to survive in the wild as well, especially considering that if you release the alates they'll have to go through the trials of natural selection anway. The main reason colonies die after their release is because of a poor settlement location but the alates do not have this issue - they can choose a place on their own, like any wild ant alate can do.
 
There's really not too much of a problem with releasing ant alates as long as the colony is healthy, the species is native AND the colony's queen is from the local area (not the other end of the state or country).
I wouldn't encourage anyone to do it but particularly in the case of super abundant ants with massive nuptial flights (Lasius niger, Tetramorium, Iridomyrmex, Solenopsis fugax) it can't really hurt either.

Edited by Serafine, June 15 2019 - 1:01 PM.

[Martialis]

 

Native bees have been struggling heavily lately. There is tons of money to fix honey bees when they start having issues. Mites, mold, etc. But none of that money is thrown at the native, wild bees that they inevitably spread disease to. They're all visiting the same flowers,flapping the same air in their wings, you get the idea.
 
Keeping a animal in captivity alters it. It might not be visible on the surface, but it could be as simple as feeding them a different diet than they get in the wild and altering their gut bacteria. If you care about the wild kin to the creature(s) you're keeping, don't release what creature(s) you've kept in captivity.

 
Native bees are struggling because - and that's a particular issue in the US - there are huge corporations driving THOUSANDS of bee colonies across the country all year long.
The ant equivalent of that would be someone driving huge Solenopsis invicta colonies all across the US letting them do their nuptial flights in any town they pass.
OF COURSE THIS IS BAD FOR LOCAL INSECT POPULATIONS because it's utterly ridiculous in the first place.
 
There's even studies that can trace the Varroa mite's path with surprising precision, the mites were actually introduced with IMPORTED bees, not with native bees from the corresponding area.
Honey bee companies spent DECADES spreading Varroa mites all over the world before they even realized the problem.
It's not even comparable with a few antkeepers releasing ants that are from their area anyway.
 

On the scale of ants, 1km is a massive, massive distance. Comparable to humans island hopping or even crossing oceans in certain cases. In a similar fashion to how 90% of Native Americans were killed by diseases from European settlers, you could be doing a similar (although probably not as severe) thing.

 
No, not really. Camponotus ants that grow to huge colonies can create satellite nests hundreds of meters away from their main settlement, Messor and Atta walk hundreds of meters to their feeding grounds and a lot of the semi-nomadic ants (Crazy ants, many Tampinoma and Solenopsis species) are traveling all over the place anyway. Even ants as mundane as Lasius niger are known to climb 5-level building because the heat on the roof makes their brood develop faster and they will not hessitate to invade homes when they find food either.
 
The comparison between native ants from the next town and settlers (or ants) from ANOTHER CONTINENT is nonsense. Ant alates by the way can drift for dozens of kilometers when they catch the right winds - for example they obviously can cross the street of Gibraltar as you'll find the same ant species on both sides of that channel (spiders and mosquitos are even more extreme, those can travel for hundreds of kilometers and are actually considered part of the "air plankton", swarming locusts can travel up to 300 kilometers per day).
 

To recap:

1. All animals are altered in some way by even coming into contact with humans
2. We don't know to what extent the animals are altered, or how those alterations could affect wild populations of said animal
3. These alterations to captive animals could harm wild populations or in some way change the ecosystem the previously captive animal is introduced to.
 
There is a reason why myrmecologists tell you not to release your ants, people.

 
Scientists will ALWAYS tell you not to release ANYTHING, it's become pretty much a tradition at this point. For them their test subjects are basically throw-away items. Also they often have other animals from several countries in their labs and there is actually a far higher chance of some cross-infection going on than in the home of a random guy only keeping species local to the area.
Considering the frequency at which ants invade houses and how they interact with each other (particularly in nuptial flights) their populations likely came into contact with anything that can be found in the average household anyway.
If we follow your logic to the last consequence we'd have to utterly purge any ant colony that chose to invade a trash bin because it alters their metabolsims in some way (which would be quite some effort in my city where there's a Lasius niger or Tetramorium colony under almost every public trash bin). Hell, there are even "fast food ants" in New York, specifically ants of the genus Pheidole that have started to revive their lost third worker caste (those ludicrously big-headed supermajors) due to the ridiculous intake of protein from fast food people throw away all the time.
 
We'd also have to lock up or murder any free-ranging cats because those are notorious long-distance travellers and will spread anything they came into contact with in their owner's house across dozens of kilometers and are in fact a member of the "top worst 100 invasive organisms on the planet" list being responsible for the complete eradication of around three dozens species of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and small mammals Free ranging cats kill 1.4 to 3.7 billion birds and 6.9 to 20.7 billion mammals EVERY YEAR in the US alone.
Cats are actually the single largest threat to wildlife in the US. I'd be far more concerned about those and the stuff they spread around the envirnoment (they are often treated with chemicals so they don't get flea, worms or other parasites and they obviously spread those drugs around whenever they take a dump) than I'd be worried about a few native ants that came into contant with human households - something they frequently do anyway.

 
 

Your colony didn't have to battle the hardships of the outside world. There's no way of knowing if her genotype is fit to enough survive in the wild. Releasing alates might dilute wild populations and reduce genetic fitness.

Probably a small point but then again every queen counts in the fight against RIFA.

My personal opinion is why risk it? You don't gain much from releasing alates/colonies into the wild so better safe than sorry.

 
Um... NO. Evolution and genetics don't work that way.
If an ant survives in your formicarium her offspring are likely to survive in the wild as well, especially considering that if you release the alates they'll have to go through the trials of natural selection anway. The main reason colonies die after their release is because of a poor settlement location but the alates do not have this issue - they can choose a place on their own, like any wild ant alate can do.
 
There's really not too much of a problem with releasing ant alates as long as the colony is healthy, the species is native AND the colony's queen is from the local area (not the other end of the state or country).
I wouldn't encourage anyone to do it but particularly in the case of super abundant ants with massive nuptial flights (Lasius niger, Tetramorium, Iridomyrmex, Solenopsis fugax) it can't really hurt either.

 

 

Have you considered a career in sensationalist advertising? Your formatting game is on point. 

 

Really, though: that's near perfect emphasis on what you're saying.

[NickAnter]

That was an excellent argument you made there. You would smoke most politicians in debate.

[Wa.Va]

Well said Serafine. U did make a difficult subject a lot clearer for me.

I'm just worried about, if u release a big (native) colony in your garden. Wouldn't it take space of other organisms, or would it find a balanced harmony.

[SuperFrank]

It is never recommended to release captive raised or bred animals into the wild. Even captive breeding programs working with endangered species only do releases under extremely controlled circumstances, and often times they never do a wild release at all. Captive raised animals are exposed to an infinite number of variables they would never encounter in the wild.

Edited by SuperFrank, June 27 2019 - 3:56 AM.