Jump to content

  • Chat
  •  
  •  

Welcome to Formiculture.com!

This is a website for anyone interested in Myrmecology and all aspects of finding, keeping, and studying ants. The site and forum are free to use. Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation points to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Photo

Colony Growth Rate


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Offline Works4TheGood - Posted September 18 2015 - 5:58 AM

Works4TheGood

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationState College, PA

I started ant-keeping this summer and I'm looking for some time-tables on colony growth.  I know that this varies from species to species, but I don't even have a ballpark figure right now and I have like 6 different species of queens.  I assume that the nanitics generally come in about 45 days, but when should I expect 10, 30, 100, 500 workers for optimal conditions and for typical conditions?  Am I behind?  When will I need formicariums for all my queens?

 

Thanks for reading!


~Dan

#2 Offline Tspivey16 - Posted September 18 2015 - 6:21 AM

Tspivey16

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • LocationColumbus, OH

In my experience it even varies between queen to queen within the same species. Some will be heavy early producers and some sputter to get going. This is why I try to collect as many as I can during flights to try to find that gem producer- but it can take awhile to determine.

 

But generally, real production starts to happen in the 2nd to 3rd year.


Current Colonies:

                               Aphaenogaster tennesseensis (50 Workers)

                               Formica subsericea (5+ Workers)

                               Tetramorium caespitum (50+ Workers)

                               Parastic Lasius (15 Accepted Host Workers)

                               Crematogaster cerasi (10 + Workers)

                               Temnothorax sp. (70 + workers)

 


#3 Offline dspdrew - Posted September 18 2015 - 7:00 AM

dspdrew
  • LocationSanta Ana, CA

Yeah, your particular queen itself is probably going to be as much of a factor as the environment you provide them. The only time-table you can be sure of is a range between nothing at all, and their upper limits of production, and that range can be pretty big. The best thing to do is read other people's journals who have the same species. That's one of the reasons I make journals, is to keep track of that specific data.



#4 Offline Jonathan21700 - Posted September 18 2015 - 11:44 AM

Jonathan21700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 807 posts

I recommend giving colonies outworlds just after they get about 10 workers. Colonies with outworlds seem to do better than colonies without.



#5 Offline Crystals - Posted September 18 2015 - 12:12 PM

Crystals

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,049 posts
  • LocationAthabasca, AB (Canada)

It greatly varies species to species, queen to queen,a nd even region to region.  Researching journals is usually a good clue, but not always reliable.

 

I once caught 100 Camponotus herculeanus queens. Same test tube setup, same feeding schedule and heat. Some laid eggs that day, other 3 months later.  Some had workers in 2 months, others after 13 months.  By the time 12 months rolled around, some had no workers, most had 4-8 workers, and some had over 50 workers.

 

I have a crematogaster colony, Mercutia and Dean each have one from the same flight, mine is in the hundreds already, and I don't think either of thiers has topped 50 workers.

 

Some Soleopsis can have workers in a couple of weeks, some Camponotus can take 3-4 months for their first worker in the bet conditions.


  • dermy and LC3 like this

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astound the rest." -- Samuel Clemens

 

List of Handy Links   (pinned in the General section)

My Colonies


#6 Offline Works4TheGood - Posted September 18 2015 - 12:27 PM

Works4TheGood

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationState College, PA

Wow!  These answers all came as a surprise to me!  I didn't know that there was that much variability between species and that much variability between queens!  Do you folks suspect that it's also this way in the wild, or is this variability mostly a sideffect of our synthetic conditions not matching nature?


~Dan

#7 Offline dermy - Posted September 18 2015 - 12:31 PM

dermy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,392 posts
  • LocationCanada

I'd say it definitely has an impact in wild populations. Probably even more then in Captivity, since there is more variables, such as food availability and temperatures.



#8 Offline dspdrew - Posted September 18 2015 - 1:40 PM

dspdrew
  • LocationSanta Ana, CA

I'm sure it's the same in the wild. It's genetics.



#9 Offline Mdrogun - Posted September 19 2015 - 9:54 AM

Mdrogun

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 943 posts
  • LocationGainesville, FL

If the queens that produce the best and grow their colony's the fastest wouldn't they be the ones to most likely live on? After this process repeats itself for millions of years wouldn't all queens do great and be fast producers? Is there an advantage to being slow growing? I can't think of one. There has to be some reason why queens still grow slow sometimes. Can anybody think of an advantage to being slow growing?


Currently Keeping:
Trachymyrmex septentrionalis

Pheidole pilifera

Forelius sp. (Monogynous, bicolored) "Midwestern Forelius"
Crematogaster cerasi

Pheidole bicarinata

Aphaenogaster rudis

Camponotus chromaiodes

Formica sp. (microgena species)

Nylanderia cf. arenivega


#10 Offline john.harrold - Posted September 19 2015 - 10:51 AM

john.harrold

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48 posts
  • LocationCastro Valley, Ca

If the queens that produce the best and grow their colony's the fastest wouldn't they be the ones to most likely live on? After this process repeats itself for millions of years wouldn't all queens do great and be fast producers? Is there an advantage to being slow growing? I can't think of one. There has to be some reason why queens still grow slow sometimes. Can anybody think of an advantage to being slow growing?

 

 

I believe in an environment that has consistent weather and had abundant resources, the attributes you stated would be selected for. However the environment is both capricious and unforgiving. A colony that grows quickly would have resource needs far greater than one which grows more slowly.  I currently live in California and we're several years into a pretty bad drought. I can imagine this introduces a lot of variability with respect to resources, and a colony that expands gradually might be more successful in such an environment. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users