Ant mega-colony takes over world
news.bbc.co.uk
news.bbc.co.uk
Ants, along with bees and a few other species have a haplodiploid sex determination system, unlike the XY system in mammals. This has a variety of consequences that are hard to swallow at first sight -- males have no father, all workers in a colony are clones, and so on. This is what leads to their highly social behavior within a colony: the good of one is the good of all. I don't yet understand how supercolony behavior arises out of ant genetics, but I'm sure it somehow does.
It appears to me that this one of those evolutionary behaviors gone awry due to the rapidly changing environment. In the past, you could expect that ant colonies would migrate geographically at a fixed rate (on average); so with a constant mutation rate, you'd expect territoriality to arise from this behavior -- ants colonies in regions within (say) a 100- mile radius would be co-operative. Quite clever, actually. However, since humans are capable of transmitting the ants anywhere instantaneously (in evolutionary time), it has produced results that evolution didn't "intend."
BTW here's the original paper http://www.springerlink.com/content/u081508512u7k421/
More info. about the species in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linepithema_humile
Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplodiploid_sex-determination_...
For example, there are two species of crickets that live amongst each other, are capable of producing viable offspring with each other, and behave identically except for the frequency of their mating calls. When we tweak the mating calls in a lab, we can get crickets from the different groups to mate. But since they don't mix in the wild, we call them two different species.
By "expect", we don't mean conscious calculation, of course. Rather, we mean that the genes which favor this sort of behavior tend to be successful than genes that do not.
EDIT: although it's well off topic, sorry EDIT': all I can find are the "babyface helps black CEOs" story... wasn't that one I read but it deals with similar findings
Good thing. I'd hate to see ants fighting when they're that far away from each other.
The meat of the article is that researchers collected specimens from around the world, and some of the ants from different colonies didn't try to kill each other on sight.
What's even more interesting is people probably help to create and maintain the giant colony's in the same geographic area in the same way.
Edit: Not to complain, but what's up with the -2?
What happens when they're older is anyone's guess.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_%28Clifford_D._Simak_novel...
Even the large continental colonies probably need a certain amount of help with humans transporting new queens/males from one side of the colony to another side to help keep the genes similar. It's not like colonies that large only have a single queen. And with a large number of queens there is the possibility of genetic divergence from each other.
Unless the ants in those colonies have developed some sort of system themselves where they distribute new queens/males from one part of the colony to another... but I can't imagine that it would be easy for them to transport breeding ants (or for those ants to fly for that matter) 900km from one side of the colony to the other.
On the other hand, when it's time to mate, all the breeding/flying ants take to the sky. It's possible that each of the points of exit is close enough to other points of exit that somehow genetic 'stability' is maintained through this mingling. It just seems incredible that just random chance and proximity of flying/breeding ants to others with the beginnings of genetic divergence are able to keep genetic divergence in check to a degree that allows for these HUGE colonies to maintain close enough familial ties to cooperate.
Edit: Sorry, this just kind of turned into me rambling on with your post as a starting point.
From what I can tell, jokes are not tolerated here because they lower the signal-to-noise ratio. It's not that HN voters are humorless, it's just that they don't want HN to be a place people come for humor, because there's plenty of other spaces on the web for that. I'm starting to think of it as a college discussion group - you go to learn, not to hear Simpsons jokes.
Also the "overlords" joke has a long and tired memetic history in the hackersphere, which would explain the quantity of downvotes.
also, jokes are ranked differently. if you make a non-joke comment that is polite but not very interesting, its score will probably stay at 1. if you make a polite joke that isn't funny, it's probably going to get downmodded.
that might seem cruel, but i'd say it's necessary. a joke that falls flat tends to drag down the level of commentary.
Snarky, overplayed comments are never well received here.
Even less well received are complaints about being downmodded.