The Ants of South Carolina

270 Pages·2017·7.79 MB·English

Clemson University
TigerPrints
All Dissertations Dissertations
5-2009
The Ants of South Carolina
Timothy Davis
Clemson University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at:https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations
Part of theEntomology Commons
Recommended Citation
Davis, Timothy, "The Ants of South Carolina" (2009).All Dissertations. 331.
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/331
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Dissertations by
an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please [email protected].
THE ANTS OF SOUTH CAROLINA

A Dissertation
Presented to
the Graduate School of
Clemson University

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Entomology

by
Timothy S. Davis
May 2009

Accepted by:
Dr. Paul Mackey Horton, Committee Chair
Dr. Craig Allen, Co-Committee Chair
Dr. Eric Benson
Dr. Clyde Gorsuch
ABSTRACT

The ants of South Carolina were surveyed in the literature, museum, and field
collections using pitfall traps. M. R. Smith was the last to survey ants in South Carolina
on a statewide basis and published his list in 1934. VanPelt and Gentry conducted a
survey of ants at the Savanna River Plant in the 1970’s. This is the first update on the
ants of South Carolina since that time.
A preliminary list of ants known to occur in South Carolina has been compiled.
Ants were recently sampled on a statewide basis using pitfall traps. Two hundred and
forty-three (243) transects were placed in 15 different habitat types. A total of 2673
pitfalls traps were examined, 41,414 individual ants were identified. Additionally this
list is supplemented with confirmed literature identifications, museum specimens, and
various hand and litter sifting collections. Hand collections and Winkler sifted litter
samples near Clemson, SC yielded an additional 768 specimens. A total of 121 species
from 38 genera are listed. County of record and habitats are given where known.
The data from these collections along with SC GAP Analysis data were used to
map the distribution of the ants across landscape type and physiographic region.
Distributions for a total of 65 species were modeled. A predicted species richness map
was generated by adding the distribution maps using GIS software. Species richness
ranged from zero to 41 species. Species lists by habitat affinities. These distribution
models may be prove useful in predicting ant assemblages in defined landscapes which
can be used in land management decisions.
ii
DEDICATION

The Teacher sought to find delightful words,
and to write accurately truthful sayings.

The words of the sages are like prods,
and the collected sayings are like firmly fixed nails;
they are given by one shepherd.

Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.
There is no end to the making of many books,
and much study is exhausting to the body.

Having heard everything, I have reached this conclusion:
Fear God and keep his commandments,
because this is the whole duty of man.

For God will evaluate every deed,
including every secret thing, whether good or evil.

Ecclesiates 12: 10 -14
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The list of those who have had a part in the completion of this project is much to
long to include all who deserve to be mentioned. My thanks go to all those who have
played a role in advising, instructing, and encouraging me along this long journey. The
following people contributed in various ways to the completion of this project.

Dr. Mac Horton – for asking me to do this in the first place and everything else
along the way
Dr. Sanford Porter – for review of iterations of the manuscript and help with ant
identification and specimen confirmations
Lloyd Davis – for teaching me new characters, and confirming many of my
identifications
Dr. John Morse – for reviewing my use of scientific names
Dr. Craig Allen – for the original idea to do a GAP Analysis layer for ants and
for statistical, GIS, conceptual assistance along the way.
Leslie Parris – for doing all the pitfall collections
Eric Paysen – for adding his collections to my list as well as scouring the
museum for new records
Nichole Bennett, David Wagner, Will Medlin – working as an interns on the
laboratory experiment for the bluebird baffle, and collection
maintenance
Lex Glover – providing field data on predation of bluebirds in the Sandhill
bluebird nestbox program
Student workers – who took on the ugliest job . . . separating the ants in from the
pitfall traps
Dr. Henson – I didn’t want to take entomology because I didn’t want to have Dr.
Henson. By the end of the course I had grown to love both
entomology and Dr. Henson
Mr Plumb – the first teacher that didn’t just let me just sit and daydream and saw
how much I enjoyed science
Grampa, Mom and Dad

I must especially give my thanks and appreciation to those that have sacrificed
the most . . . my family . . . Kim, William, and Zachary.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE .................................................................................................................... i

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... ii

DEDICATION ................................................................................................................ iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
Literature Cited ...................................................................................... 11

II. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 12
Literature Cited ...................................................................................... 21

III. PRELIMINARY LIST OF THE ANTS OF SOUTH CAROLINA ............ 25
Introduction ............................................................................................ 25
Materials and Methods ........................................................................... 27
Results and Discussion .......................................................................... 30
Literature Cited ...................................................................................... 51

IV. DISTRIBUTION AND SPECIES RICHNESS OF ANTS IN SOUTH
CAROLINA ........................................................................................... 53
Introduction ............................................................................................ 53
Materials and Methods ........................................................................... 56
Results .................................................................................................... 61
Discussion and Conclusions .................................................................. 63
Literature Cited .................................................................................... 129
v
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page

V. DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY ............................................................. 132
Literature Cited .................................................................................... 139

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 140

A: Pitfall Location Data .................................................................................. 141
B: Pitfall Collection Data ................................................................................ 155
C: Miscellaneous Publications ........................................................................ 207
THE EXCLUSION OF THE RED IMPORTED FIRE ANT (FORMICIDAE:
SOLENOPSIS INVICTA BUREN) TO PREVENT THE PREDATION
ON THE EASTERN BLUEBIRD SIALIA SIALIS .............................. 209
Introduction .......................................................................................... 209
Materials and Methods ......................................................................... 211
Results .................................................................................................. 214
Conclusions and Discussion ................................................................ 217
Literature Cited .................................................................................... 221
Hints for Effective RIFA Bait Treatment (Fact Sheet) .............................. 222
Managing the Red Imported Fire Ant in Pastures (Fact Sheet) ................. 224
Management of the Red Imported Fire Ant – Theory and Practice in the
United States .................................................................................. 229
Summary of Observations and Thoughts Regarding
the Incursion of the Red Imported Fire Ant
Solenopsis invicta Buren (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE)
in Taiwan. ..................................................................................... 244

vi
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1.1South Carolina GAP Analysis Program’s brief cover descriptions for the sixteen
land covers selected for statewide ant sampling in South
Carolina 1999 – 2000. ....................................................................................... 7

3.1 Land cover descriptions for the sixteen land cover classes selected
for statewide ant sampling in South Carolina 1999 - 2000 .................... 28

3.2 Ants known to inhabit South Carolina ......................................................... 34

4.1 Number of ant sampling replicates in the mountain, piedmont, coastal
plain, and sandhill regions of South Carolina by land cover class
1999 - 2000 .......................................................................................... 106

4.2 Fresh and saltwater marsh .......................................................................... 107

4.3 Bay/Pocosin ............................................................................................... 108

4.4 Swamp and Bottomland Hardwood ........................................................... 109

4.5 Cleared land ............................................................................................... 111

4.6 Upland pine forest ...................................................................................... 113

4.7 Longleaf pine forest ................................................................................... 115

4.8 Upland deciduous forest ............................................................................ 117

4.9 Mesic deciduous forest .............................................................................. 119

4.10 Upland mixed forest ................................................................................... 121

4.11 Mesic mixed forest ..................................................................................... 123

4.12 Grassland.................................................................................................... 124

vii
List of Tables (Continued)

4.13 Cultivated ................................................................................................... 126

4.14 Maritime forest........................................................................................... 127

4.15 Species Richness Summary: The total number of species found in each
landscape type by physiographic region as well as the average
number of species per sample ± standard error is represented in
this table. .............................................................................................. 128

5.1 Summary of bluebird nest box predation from 2000 - 2006 ...................... 215

viii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

3.1 Physiographic regions of South Carolina and collection sites for
1999- 2000 pitfall collections ................................................................ 27

3.2 Winkler Sample bags ................................................................................... 29

4.1 Steps used to model distribution of ant species ........................................... 59

4.2 Example of decision model using Camponotus floridanus ......................... 60

4.3 Aphaenogaster flemingi M. R. Smith Distribution Map .............................. 69

4.4 Aphaenogaster fulva Roger Distribution Map ............................................. 70

4.5 Aphaenogaster lamellidens Mayr Distribution Map .................................... 70

4.6 Aphaenogaster mariae Forel Distribution Map ........................................... 71

4.7 Aphaenogaster picea (Wheeler) Distribution Map ...................................... 71

4.8 Aphaenogaster tennesseensis (Mayr) Distribution Map .............................. 72

4.9 Aphaenogaster treatae Forel Distribution Map ........................................... 72

4.10 Aphaenogaster ashmaedi (Emory) Distribution Map .................................. 73

4.11 Aphaenogaster fulva rudis Enzmann Distribution Map .............................. 73

4.12 Camponotus casteneus (Latreille) Distribution Map ................................... 74

4.13 Camponotus americanus (Mayr) Distribution Map ..................................... 74

4.14 Camponotus chromaiodes Bolton Distribution Map ................................... 75

4.15 Camponotus floridanus (Buckley) Distribution Map .................................. 75

4.16 Camponotus pennsylvanicus (DeGeer) Distribution Map ........................... 76

4.17 Crematogaster ashmeadi Mayr Distribution Map ....................................... 76

ix