DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the dissertation entitled “DIVERSITY OF ANT IN SELECTED AREA
OF MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH” submitted to the Mahatma Gandhi
university, kottayam in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the Bachelor
degree of science in zoology is a bonafide project work done by me under the supervision of
Mrs. Poornima baby, Assistant professor, Department of zoology, Alphonsa college, pala.

Place:PALA

Date:

Sreelakshmi sanil

Bsc zoology

Alphonsa college pala

1
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First and above all, I would like to thank the supreme power the Almighty God who is
obviously the one has always guided me to work on the right path of life. Without his grace
this project could not become reality.

I convey my sincere gratitude to Mrs. Poornima baby my supervising teacher, for her insightful
feedback pushed me to sharpen my thinking and brought my work to a higher level.

I would like to thank Dr. Manju Elizabeth Kuruvila Head,Department of zoology, Alphonsa
college pala for helping me to use the facilities of the department and for rendering her kind
help and support throughout the completion of my work.

In the accomplishment of this project successfully, many people have best owned upon me
their blessings and the heart pledged support, this time I am utilizing to thank all the people
who have been concerned with this project.

Last but not the least I would like to thank my family and friends who have helped me with
their valuable suggestions and guidance has been helped in various phases of the completion
of project.

2
 DIVERSITY OF ANT IN SELECTED AREA OF
MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH

3
 TABLE OF CONTENT
no: Title Page no

1 ABSTRACT 1

2 INTRODUCTION 2-8

3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES 9

4 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 10-12

5 MATERIALS AND METHODS 13

6 OBSERVATION 14-26

7 RESULT AND DISCUSSION 27-28

8 CONCLUSION 29

9 REFERENCE 30-35

4
 ABSTRACT
A study on diversity of ant in selected area of Mundakayam grama panchayath was
carried out for a period of four months from October 2020 to January 2021.11 species of
Formicidae belonging to three subfamilies(Formicinae,Myrmicinae and Ponerinae) were
collected.Out of total 11 species,three species only found in human habitat area, whereas three
species found only in agricultural ecosystem.However five species were observed from both
the habitat. The subfamily Formicinae found to be most predominant in this area .Paratrechina
longicornis is most predominant in human habitat area and Myrmicaria brunnea is most
predominant in agricultural ecosystem. According to Shannon Weiner diversity index human
habitat area(1.874)is more diverse than agricultural ecosystem(1.668).

5
 INTRODUCTION
INSECTS
Insects are virtually everywhere on the earth’s surface, excluded only by the extremes
of Climate at the poles and on the peaks of highest mountains; just a few species live in the sea
(Cheng, 1976). May (1990) estimates show that there are around 750000 and 790000 insect
Species whereas Hammond (1992) estimates show that as 950000. For the purpose of
Inventorying a number of 8 million insects and 8.9 million arthropods is currently used, With
a world total of all the species coming to about 12.25 million (Hammond, 1992). Currently
estimates ranges from 1.84 million to 50 million, with around 10 million being More favoured
(Samways 1994) and quoted. Insects are numerous as individuals and Species, being by far the
most dominant animal biomass, genetic variety and bioticspecies Interactors in terrestrial
ecosystems. One of the intricate across-taxon interaction has been Insect-plant interrelations
(Samways 1994). Insects have a strong hold and a major say in Most ecosystem processes, as
they are pollinators and nutrient cyclers. A large number of Them act as insect predators and
mutualists all of which require conservation. Using insects To study how creation of mosaics,
fragmentation of land, deforestation and creation of Monocultures have an impact on diversity
and stability of an ecosystem is a challenging And interesting task as it not only involves
taxonomy of the concerned group but also Related to the behavioural aspects of the taxa under
study.

HYMENOPTERAN
Ants are treated as a single family, Formicidae, in the order Hymenoptera, a large and
diverse Group of holometabolous insects. The earliest hymenopterans were herbivores, with
caterpillar-like larvae that fed on plant tissues. But most extant Hymenoptera are parasitoids or
predators belonging to a distinctive clade known as the Apocrita, in which the first segment of
the abdomen has become fused to the thorax, and is separated from the remainder of the
abdomen by a strong constriction. Morphologists use the term tagma (plural tagmata) to refer
to a functionally integrated set of body segments. Insects are classically considered to have
three tagmata: head, thorax and abdomen. Apocritan Hymenoptera exhibit a unique
reorganization of the body parts in which the middle tagma is composed of the thorax plus
abdominal segment 1, while the posterior tagma comprises the remaining abdominal segments.
It is unclear how this evolutionary novelty arose, but one apparent consequence is that
additional constrictions, involving abdominal segments 2–4, evolved in some apocritans,giving

6
them exceptional dexterity of abdominal movement. This takes on added significance when we
consider another important development that occurred within one group of Apocrita: the
ovipositor was modified into a stinging device, used to inject paralyzing venom into hosts or
prey. The sting also became a potent defensive weapon in those species caring for young in a
nest. The stinging Hymenoptera, or Aculeata, include both parasitoids and predators, but the
latter are predominant and show an illuminating array of nesting behaviours.

Some species simply cache prey items in a crude cavity, lay eggs and depart, while
others construct nests of varying degrees of elaboration, sometimes providing parental care of
offspring. It is within this group of nesting, stinging Hymenoptera that ants evolved. Another
important heritage that ants share with all other hymenopterans is Haplodiploidy, a genetic
system in which males are haploid and arise from unfertilized eggs, while females are diploid
and develop from zygotes. Haplodiploidy yields unusual asymmetries of genetic relatedness,
with females being more closely related to their sisters (0.75) than to their brothers (0.25). It
has been proposed that this underpins a universal feature of social hymenopterans: the workers
are female only, with males showing little or no helping behavior.

This is in contrast to the other major group of eusocial insects, the diploid termites, in
which workers are drawn from both sexes. An additional, and perhaps co-acting, constraint on
male aculeate hymenopterans is that they do not possess a sting, limiting their ability to adopt
worker-like roles. Ants differ from social bees and wasps in one important respect: the workers
of ants are entirely wingless. This places constraints on their foraging behavior and has
probably spurred the evolution of complex chemical communication systems, such as trail and
recruitment pheromones, designed for terrestrial (as opposed to aerial) movement. It also
makes the analogy between ant colonies and perennial plants especially striking. Both are long-
lived, sessile organisms that are limited spatially in their ability to reach out and procure
resources.

ANTS

Ants belong to the family Formicidae, super family Vespoidea, order Hymenoptera.
Ants are one of evolution’s great Success stories. Arising in the Mid-Cretaceous about 120
million Years ago, they now comprise a Diverse assemblage of Approximately 20,000 species
and Have colonized most of the World’s terrestrial biomes. Among The social insects ants are
placed in the category of “eusocial insects” or “truly insects”, Where individual of the same

7
species cooperate in caring for the brood,there is a reproductive division of labour with more
or less sterile individuals working on behalf of The fertile individuals in the colony and there
is an overlap of at least 2 generations in the Life cycle capable of contributing to colony labour,
so that offspring’s assist the parents During some period of their lifetime. Ants tend to be very
aggressive and have great ability To dominate themselves because of which direct interactions
between them and plants and Also with other arthropods and insects are distinctly seen.
Together with Homo sapiens, ants are one of the few animal groups that commonly Manipulate
and modify their surroundings to suit their needs and it’s a truism that they occupy a position
among terrestrial invertebrates equivalent to that occupied by our Species in/among the
vertebrates (Bolton 1995).

Nests are situated in a wide Variety of sites from high in the Forest canopy to deep
Underground. While most ant Species are rather generalized Scavengers, others have become
Specialized predators, seed-Harvesters, and fungus-growers. Many species avidly tend
Honeydew-producing Hemipterans, imbibing liquids Processed through the gut of These plant-
feeding insects, and Thereby acting as indirect Herbivores (as well as mutualists With their
hosts). A legion of other arthropods has Become intimately associated with Ant colonies,
exploiting the rich Concentration of resources Therein. Mutualistic interactions between ants
and vascular plants are also common, with many plants supplying rewards to ants in the form
of food and/or shelter in return for protection against herbivores. Nearly all ant species are
eusocial, that is, they live in perennial colonies with overlapping generations, cooperative care
of the brood, and — crucially — reproductive division of labor, such that most colony members
belong to a non-reproductive (worker) caste.

The only exceptions are a few socially parasitic species which have secondarily lost
the worker caste and rely on labor supplied by workers of their host ants. It is reasonable to
assume that the most recent common ancestor of ants was eusocial, and that subsequent
evolution has involved elaborations of that trait. This is in contrast to bees and wasps in which
worker-based societies have evolved several times from solitary ancestors. Because they are
fully social, ants do not tell us a great deal about the transition from solitary to eusocial
behavior. Nevertheless the ontogeny of ant colonies with queens of most species founding
colonies on their own and single-handedly rearing the first brood of workers suggests that
eusociality in ants was achieved via the so-called subsocial route, in which extended parent-

8
offspring contact led to overlap of generations and was then followed by the origin of non-
reproductive workers. Regardless of the details of this sequence of events, which of course was
played out long ago, contemporary ants offer abundant opportunity for comparative studies of
colony life after the eusocial threshold has been crossed.
There is substantial variation among ant species in such traits as the number of queens
per colony, mating frequency, sex ratio, male parentage and the extent to which workers and
queens have diverged morphologically and behaviorally. This provides fertile material for
studies of intra-colony conflict, caste evolution and other aspects of advanced eusocial life. For
reasons that are not fully understood there are remarkable discrepancies in the complexity of
colony organization among different groups of ants. The popular imagination is excited by
stories of army ants, leaf-cutter ants, mound-building wood ants and other species with
populous colonies, dense foraging trails, specialized worker subcastes and complex systems of
chemical communication.
Yet at the same time many ant species, occurring in the same communities as these
ecological dominants, have small colony sizes, show limited worker-queen differentiation, and
exhibit much more modest capabilities of foraging, recruitment and communication. Despite
apparent advantages at the colony level of having specially adapted worker subcastes, most
species of ants have workers that are morphologically uniform in size and shape The factors
responsible for such heterogeneity in the rate of social evolution have been little explored, and
will require a careful analysis of ecological and phylogenetic influences.

ORGIN OF ANT
Ants make their appearance a little later, about 140 to 168 million years ago. The first
discovered and most famous of Cretaceous ants is Sphecomyrma, described almost 40 years
ago from two wonderfully preserved worker specimens in 92 million-year-old New Jersey
amber. Sphecomyrma bears a tantalizing mix of ant- and wasp-like traits. It is more closely
related to ants than to any other extant organisms, but the most recent common ancestor of
living ants and their descendants (the crown-group formicids) are more closely related to one
another than to Sphecomyrma. A more extensive series of fossil ants has now been documented
from the Cretaceous. The fossils range in age from about 78 to 100 million years, and they
include some undoubted crown-group taxa. Among the more spectacular finds are additional
well preserved specimens from New Jersey amber, including representatives of the modern
subfamily Formicinae, as well as fossils from Canada, Eurasia, and southern Africa. This

9
taxonomic diversity and geographic spread indicates that crown-group ants arose some time
before this period, perhaps as long ago as 120 million years. The prevalence of northern
hemisphere fossils suggests an origin in the northern supercontinent of Laurasia, followed by
dispersal to Gondwana. Ant-like fossils placed in the extinct family Armaniidae are known
first from northern mid-Cretaceous deposits, and are considered to be early stem-group
formicids, probably the next closest relatives of crown-group ants after the sphecomyrmines.

BODY STRUCTURE
Ant body segments Like all insects. Ant’s body is divided into three main parts ~ the
head, the thorax, and the abdomen.Ants have a hard, waterproof exoskeleton, which is made
of a material called chitin. They are exceptionally strong for their size- They can lift 10 times
their own weight. Most ants have two large compound eyes.They often have three simple eyes
called which consist of many omatidia (eye facets) ocelli, which detect light and shadow.
Maxillary palps Ants also have two antennae they use to recognize their nest mates and detect
enemies.When ants find food they emit pheromones that provide scent trails so their nest mates
can find the food.Ants also have maxillary palps which detect scents.Ants use their powerful
mandibles to grasp and carry, as well as for cutting and biting.The ant’s six legs are attached
to the thorax.The abdomen contains the ant’s vital organs and reproductive parts. This is also
called the gaster. Ants in the formicinae subfamily have an acidopore to emit formic acid when
threatened.Ants do not breathe like we do. They take in oxygen through tiny holes all over the
body called spiracles. They emit carbon dioxide through these same holes. The heart is a long
tube that pumps colorless blood from the head throughout the body and then back up to the
head again. The nervous system of ants consists of a long nerve cord that also runs from head
to rear with branches leading to the parts of the body, kind of like a human spinal cord. An ant
has a petiole connecting the thorax to the abdomen. The petiole can be one or two segments.
This feature is used to identify ant subfamilies.

ANT DIVERSITY
The ecological Dominance and conspicuous Social behavior of ants have long Engaged
the attention of natural Historians. In terms of their Species diversity, relative Abundance,
ecological impact And social habits, ants emerge as One of the most prominent groups Of
arthropods.Ants are an important taxon for comparing habitat diversity and monitoring
environmental changes because numerous species have habitat preferences and respond

10
quickly to disturbances to their environment There is impressive breadth in The ecological
characteristics of Ants and in the range of Environments to which they have Adapted. From
deserts to tropical Rainforests, from grasslands to Mangrove swamps, most Terrestrial habitats
are tenanted by Ants, and usually in moderate to High densities.There are 828 species are
known from India. These ants representing 100 genera grouped in 10 subfamilies. In terms of
species richness, the subfamily Myrmicinae is the most speciose (354 species, 42.7%),
followed by Formicinae (241 spekcies, 29.1%) Ponerinae (111 species, 13.4%), Dorylinae (55
species, 6.6%) and Dolichoderinae (30 species, 3.6%), while the rest of the smaller subfamilies
together constitute 4.2% (Pseudomyrmecinae 11 species, Amblyoponinae 10 species,
Proceratiinae State wise distribution of Indian ants 56 species, Ectatomminae 5 species and
Leptanillinae 4 species). The trend for generic richness is almost the same except for the
subfamily Ponerinae which represents a larger percentage of generic richness than Formicinae
(Myrmicinae 37.4%, Ponerinae 20.2% and Formicinae 18.2%).
Two biogeographically significant regions of India, Himalaya and Western Ghats
harbour a large number of ant species. 656 species from 88 genera were recorded from
Himalaya, and 455 species from 75 genera were recorded from the Western Ghats. From a total
828 species, 256 species (31%) we considered endemic to India and approximately 71% of
these endemics are exclusively concentrated in two of the above listed biodiversity hotspots.
Although we feel that some of the Indian states are underrepresented in the existing data due
to inadequacy of surveys, based on the currently available data the state of West Bengal has
the highest number of species (382) representing 65 genera followed by state of Sikkim with
276 species representing 69 genera.The endemism of Indian ants (31%) is much higher than
for birds (4.3%), fishes (8%), angiosperms (10%) or mammals (11%), lower than amphibians
(49%) and most similar to reptiles (29%) With nearly one of three ant species known to be
endemic to India, more conservation efforts should be directed to this group to evaluate the
distribution and ecology of these species and evaluate the potential threat that some of these
species might already experience.
Among the species present in India, 24 species are considered here as non-native,
although the exact origin of a few other species is still uncertain and thus could be included (or
removed) if more targeted future studies are conducted. Among the exotic species, several are
known for their invasive ecological characteristics: Anoplolepis gracilipes, Paratrechina
longicornis, and Pheidole megacephala. The ecological impacts of these species in India have
not been studied to date. Furthermore, this list could, and likely will, expand in the future with
new arrivals. In particular, several damaging species including Solenopsis invicta and

11
Wasmannia auropunctata are already widespread in tropical and subtropical parts of Asia and
with no doubt could find suitable habitats within the diversity of Indian ecosystems if given
the opportunity.

BIODIVERSITY INDICES

The biodiversity indices have strict sampling requirements, including that a significant
amount of data be collected for those species and ecosystems to be assess. The species
diversity was calculated using Shannon Weiner index.

SHANNON-WEINER'S INDEX

Shannon-Weiner index is based on the weighted geometric mean of the proportional

abundance of the different species. Shannon -Weiner index is also accounts for both abundance
and evenness of the species present,or by having greater species Evenness.

Shannon- wiener’s index (H)

Where,

H= the Shannon species diversity index

S= no. of species encountered or species richness

Pi = proportion of the total sample belonging to the species.

lnPi=natural logarithm with base e = 2.718281828…….

∑ = sum from species 1 to species S

The index values (H) can range of 0 to ~4.6. A value near 0 would indicate that every Species
in the sample is the same i.e there is no diversity, while higher value of H would Indicate more
diverse communities and the numbers of individuals are evenly distributed Between all the
species.

12
 OBJECTIVE

❖ To study the diversity of ant in the selected area of mundakayam grama panchayath.
❖ Identification of ant up to species level.
❖ To assess the habitat preference of ant from different habitat of mundakayam grama
panchayath.
❖ To assess the distribution and abundance of ant in the selected area.

13
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Philip S. ward,(2007).conducted a study on phylogeny, classification, and species-

level taxonomy of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).It was found that the Most of the extant ant
subfamilies And genera are well defined morphologically and likely monophyletic, but there
are some notable exceptions including the subfamily Cerapachyinae and several large and
ambiguously delimited genera such as Pachycondyla. Several tribes In the large subfamilies
Formicinae and Myrmicinae also represent artificial assemblages. Finally, while the species-
Level taxonomy of some ant genera is in a satisfactory state, taxonomic anarchy reigns in
others, with numerous ill-Defined species and many names of uncertain applicability. Progress
in this area of ant systematics will require sustained Individual efforts, expansion of job
opportunities, enlistment of new technologies, and a deeper understanding of the Nature of ant
species and the differences between them.

Hill et al: Ant habitat associations in Mississippi,(2008),found that variation in flora

and habitat architecture had smaller but significant effects on ant species diversity and
functional group composition.The results imply that restoration of native ant communities in
disturbed habitats must consider how current disturbance regimens likely interact with the
presence of Solenopsis to lower ant biodiversity.

Thresiamma varghese,(2009),A Review of Extant Subfamilies, Tribes and Ant Genera

in India. In this review, the author has looked at some of those changes, which are pertaining to
Indian fauna and the results are summarised below. Out of 5 subfamilies of the
familyFormicidae, mentioned in Bingham, 4 of them have valid status, while one of them is
now known under different name. Of the 79 genera mentioned, 53 of them are currently known
to be present in India And retains the same name and valid status. Further, as per a recent
approximation of ant species in India estimates 633 species of ants coming under 82 genera
distributed across 13 subfamilies.

Ramachandra T.V. Subash Chandran M.D. Joshi N.V. Ajay Narendra Ali
T.M(2012),study on Ant Species Composition and Diversity in the Sharavathi River Basin,
Central Western Ghats.This study emphasises the Dominancy exhibited by the subfamily
Myrmicinae within the ant communities, due to their Ability to adapt to different niches with

14
a variety of feeding habits. Dominancy exhibited by Ponerinae and Formicinae subfamilies in
only certain habitats has been related to their very Specific niche and food requirements.

Flavio Siqueira de Castro et al(2012) conducted a study on Annual and Seasonal

Changes in the Structure of Litter-Dwelling Ant Assemblages (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in
Atlantic Semideciduous Forests.The study concluded that contrasting forest types may have
similar total ant species richness, as well as asimilar amount of rare and ecologically specialized
species.
According to Holdingstone Kharbani and Sudhanya Ray Hajong, (2013) the
number of species recorded was highest During spring and summer and lowest during winter
in Meghalaya.Number of individuals And species diversity per sample was lower during winter
and higher during Summer. Number of individuals, species richness and Shannon entrop.

Saranya sivadasan,anu anyo,gigi k. Joseph,and shaju thomas,(2013), conducted a

study on ant diversity of periyar tiger reserve in south-western Ghats,and found that Ants
represent a unique focal group, due to their ability to navigate across all trophic levels, along
with their sensitivity to any changes in the environment.And determined the species
composition of ants across varying Vegetation.

N.B. Patkar and AurangabadR.J(2014) evaluated that Ants are good indicators of
disturbance, because they show quick reponse to environmental changes and invented that
abundance and Composition were significantly different from undisturbed and disturbed forest
site.
Paul et al,(2016),estimated that the distribution of species in the different subfamilies
showed a dominance of Formicinae with 4 genus (15 species)followed by Myrmicinae with 5
genera (6 species), Ponerinae with 2 genera (3 species) and Pseudomyrmecinae with least
species (1 species). The genus Camponotus (Mayr) was the most abundant genera with 12
species. Findings of this preliminary study indicated that much more detailed study should be
conducted to investigate the diversity of ants of Macha region of Thrissur.Keywords:
Formicidae, Diversity, Camponotus, Dominance.

Himender Bharti et al,(2016) evaluated the Potential erroneous data,

misidentifications and dubious distributional records of ant species.The exhaustive listing of
Indian ants will provide a holistic view about diversity and distribution and will also help to

15
identify major under sampled areas where future sampling and taxonomic efforts should be
directed.

Azhagu Raj R, R Sathish, A Prakasam, D Krishnamoorthy and M

Balachandar(2017) conducted a study on Diversity and distribution of Ant species
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae), in Pachaiyappa’s College, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu,india.A
totally 10 species Belonging to 09 genera, 04 subfamilies of ants were recorded, out of the four
subfamilies, the Formicinae Was the most dominant subfamily in terms of species richness (5
species) followed by Myrmicinae (03 Species),Pseudomyrmicinae (01 species) and
Dolichoderinae (01 species).

Bany Joy and Gigi K Joseph,(2017)Conduct a comparative Study On The

Hymenopteran Diversity With Special Reference To Ants In Thommankuth Forest And
Adjacent Areas Of Idukki District In Western Ghats.They invented that,Ant species are belong
to one family named Formicidae and four subfamilies such as Formicinae, Myrmicinae ,
Ponerinae and Dolichoridinae. Out of the total 19 species observed, three species found only
in forested areas, whereas four Species found only in agricultural area. However 11 species
were observed from both the habitats.

Dash et al,(2017),study on the Diversity and Species Richness of Ants in coastal

Odisha,invented that a total of 27 ant species have been documented across locations and
seasons.The sub-family Myrmicinae was represented by a maximum of 13 species Which was
followed by Formicinae with 6 species and Ponerinae and Dolichoderinae, each With 3 species.
The Pseudomyrmicinae with two species was least dominant.

V.sabitha et al,(2018),invented that the most species rich genera was Pachycondyla (3
species) and Polyrhachis (4 species) in the silent valley national park of western ghats.And
recorded the four invasive ant species, namely Anoplolepis gracilipes, Monomorium
sp.,Paratrechina longicornis and Tapinoma melanocephalum.

Indra Prasad Subedi and Prem Bahadur Budha1,(2020) study on the diversity and
distribution patterns of ants along elevational gradients estimated that the Temperature was
found as the major predictor of species richness patterns of ants.

16
 MATERIALS AND METHODS

STUDY SITE
The study site was located in selected area of mundakayam grama
panchayath.Geographically the place is located at approximately latitude(9.5371°N)and
longitude(76.8874°E).The study was conducted from September 2020 10th to January 10th
202.Ant were collected during morning 7-10 am and evening 4-5 pm from two different habitat,
human habitat area and agricultural ecosystem.

STUDY METHOD
Hand picked method,brait trap and all about search method are used to collect ant
species.The species were identified based up on the colour, size and some basic morphological
features.Identified species were listed and number of ants was recoded. The species diversity
was calculated using Shannon – Weiner ‘s index.

17
 OBSERVATION
Table :1 Classification of identified ant species collected from selected area upto species level.

FAMILY SUBFAMILY GENUS SPECIES

No:

Formicidae Formicinae Anoplolepis garcilipes

1

Formicidae Formicinae Camponotus atriceps

2

Formicidae Formicinae Camponotus irritans

3

Formicidae Formicinae Camponotus sericeus

4

Formicidae Formicinae Oecophylla smaragdina

5

Formicidae Formicinae Paratrechina longicornis

6

Formicidae Myrmicinae Myrmicaria brunnea

7

Formicidae Myrmicinae Monomorium pharaonis

8

Formicidae Myrmicinae Monomorium Minimum

9

Formicidae Myrmicinae Solenopsis invicta

10

Formicidae Ponerinae Odontomachus monticola

11

18
Table:2 subfamily and number of species.

SUBFAMILY
NUMBER OF SPECIES

Formicinae
6

Myrmicinae
4

Ponerinae
1

NUMBER OF SPECIES

9%

Formicinae
Myrmicinae
36% 55%
Ponerinae

Figure :1Subfamily wise distribution of ants found at study area.

19
 Habitat preference of ants in mundakayam grama panchayath.

Table :3 Checklist of ant collected from human habitat area.

SPECIES NAME OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY TOTAL

Anoplolepis garcilipes 39 28 40 20 127

Camponotus atriceps 0 0 11 24 35

Camponotus irritans 2 5 17 33 57

Oecophylla smaragdina 0 0 0 59 59

Paratrechina longicornis 60 58 20 41 179

Monomorium pharaonis 18 25 51 30 124

Monomorium minimum 19 15 20 49 103

Odontomachus monticola 2 1 5 1 9

20
 Table :4Checklist of ant collected from agricultural ecosystem.

SPECIES NAME OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY TOTAL

Anoplolepis garcilipes 35 20 15 30 100

Camponotus sericeus 40 39 45 29 153

Oecophylla smaragdina 0 0 0 101 101

Paratrechina longicornis 9 13 10 12 44

Myrmicaria brunnea 69 98 109 70 346

Monomorium minimum 21 9 10 18 58

Solenopsis invicta 0 0 0 4 4

Odontomachus monticola 4 8 10 7 29

21
 human habitat area
200 179
180
160
140 127 124
120 103
100
80 57 59
60 35
40
20 9
0

Series1

Figure :2 Graphical representation of ant species in human habitat area.

Agricultural ecosystem
400 346
350
300
250
200 153
150 100 101
100 44 58
29
50 4
0

Series1

Figure :3 Graphical representation of ant species in agricultural ecosystem..

22
 Table :5 Shannon-Weiner index of the ant collected from human habitat area.

Species Name No.of individuals Relative abundance (Pi) Pi(InPi)

A.garcilipes 127 00.183 -00.311

C.atriceps 35 0.051 -00.151
C.irritans 57 0.082 -00.205
O.smaragdina 59 0.085 -00.21
P.longicornis 179 0.258 -00.35
M.pharaonis 124 0.179 -00.308
M.minimum 103 0.149 -00.283
O.monticola 9 0.013 -0.056

Shannon Weiner index 1. 874

23
 Table :6 Shannon-Weiner's index of ant collected from agricultural ecosystem.

Species Name No.of individuals Relative abundance (Pi) Pi(InPi)

A.garcilipes 100 00.12 -00.254

C.sericeus 153 00.183 -00.311
O.smaragdina 101 00.121 -00.255
P.longicornis 44 0.053 -00.155
M.brunnea 346 00.414 -00.365
M.minimum 58 0.07 -00.185
S.invicta 4 0.005 -0.026
O.monticola 29 0.035 -00.117

Shannon Weiner index 1.668

24
 ANT SPECIES

1.Anoplolepis garcilipes

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Anoplolepis
GENUS : garcilipes

Figure :4 Anoplolepis garcilipes

Commonly known as yellow crazy ant.Large slender, brownish yellow coloured body, head
is ovoid .Originally from Southeast asia.

2.Oecophylla smaragdina

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Oecophylla
GENUS : smaragdina
Figure :5 Oecophylla smaragdina

Commonly known as weaver ant.Mostly coloured orange with long strong legs and large
mandibles.speciesm of arboreal ant found in tropical Asia and Australia.

25
3.Paratrechina longicornis

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Paratrechina
GENUS : longicornis

Figure :6 Paratrechina longicornis

Commonly known as black crazy ant,is a species of small, dark-coloured insect. The body has
a few short, whitish bristles and the antennae and limbs are pale brown.It present in North and
south America,Africa,Europe,asia,and oceania .

4.Camponotus irritans

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : camponotus
GENUS : irritans

Figure :7 Camponotus irritans

Commonly known as carpenter ant.It is found in many asian and Oceanian countries.

26
5.Camponotus sericeus

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Camponotus
GENUS : sericeus Figure :8 camponotus sericeus

Carpenter ant. This species can be recognized by the robust build (the major worker with very
broad head and mesosoma), the coarse sculpture of the head and mesosoma, and by the gaster
covered with thick, apressed, golden-mossy pubescence. Widely distributed in the afrotropical
and Oriental regions.

6.Camponotus atriceps

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Camponotus
GENUS : atriceps
Figure :9 Camponotus atriceps

Carpenter ant.Camponotus atriceps is a large reddish brown to black polymorphic ant with
lighter coxae and legs,previously referred as C. abdominalis, is a species of carpenter ant,
endemic to the Americas.

27
7..Myrmicaria brunnea

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Myrmicaria
GENUS : brunnea
Figure :10 Myrmicaria brunnea

Commonly known as spiny harvester ant.Chestnut -brown,shining,mandibles finely and

closely.They have a distinctive down-curved abdomen and spines on the thorax.Native of
southern asia.

8.Monomorium pharaonis

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Monomorium
GENUS : pharaonis
Figure :11 Monomorium pharaonis

Commonly known as pharaoh ant. They are comparatively small, body colour ranges from
yellowish or light brown to red, with the abdomen often darker to blackish.Introduced virtually
every area of the world,including southeast asia,Europe,America and Australia.

28
9.Solenopsis invicta

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Solenopsis
GENUS : invicta
Figure :12 Solenopsis invicta

Commonly known as red imported fire ant. .It is reddish brown to dark brown in color with a
black gaster,or posterior portion of the abdomen.Native to Southwestern Brazil,Paraguay and
northern Argentina.

10.Odontomachus monticola

KINGDOM : Animalia
PHYLUM : Arthropoda
CLASS : Insecta
ORDER : Hymenoptera
FAMILY : Formicidae
SPECIES : Odontomachus
GENUS : monticola

Figure :13 Odontomachus monticola

Commonly called trap jaw ant.They have a pair of large,straight mandibles capable of opening
180 degrees. Widespread in asia,including India,Myanmar,mainland china and Taiwan.

29
11.Monomorium minimum

KINGDOM : Animalia

PHYLUM : Arthropoda

CLASS : Insecta

ORDER : Hymenoptera

FAMILY : Formicidae

SPECIES : Monomorium

GENUS : minimum Figure :14 Monomorium minimum

Commonly known as little black ant.It is a shiny black color, the workers about 1 to 2 mm long
and the queens 4 to 5 mm long. It is a monomorphic species, with only one caste of worker,
and polygyne, meaning a nest may have more than one queen. A colony is usually moderately
sized with only a few thousand workers.It is a species of ant native to North America.

30
 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
In the present study 11 species of ants were observed, identified, photographed and
documented.Human habitat and agricultural ecosystem were the selected areas for the study.
The ant species belonged to one family named Formicidae and 3 subfamilies such as
Formicinae,Myrmicinae and Ponerinae.The detailed representation of ant species were listed
in(table1&2).The distribution of species in different subfamilies showed a dominance of
Formicinae 55%with six species, followed by Myrmicinae 36%with four species and Ponerinae
9%with only one species.

According to Shannon weiner diversity index in human habitat area,Paratrechina

longicornis with high Diversity index -00.35 and Odontomachus monticola with least
diversity index -0.056(table 5).In agricultural ecosystem, Myrmicaria brunnea with high
diversity index-00.365 and Solenopsis invicta with least diversity index-0.026(table 6).while
analysing the relative abundance Paratrechina longicornis with high relative abundance and
Odontomachus monticola with least abundance(table 5). And in agricultural ecosystem,
myrmicaria brunnea with high relative abundance and Solenopsis invicta with least
abundance(table 6).The Shannon Weiner diversity index human habitat area is(1.874)is and
that of agricultural ecosystem is (1.668).This values shows that the more diversity,abundance
and distribution of species is observed in the human habitat area than that of agricultural
ecosystem. Paratrechina longicornis was commonly found in human habitat area. Myrmicaria
brunnea found commonly in agricultural ecosystem. Overall study reveals that Myrmicaria
brunnea is most abundant in the study area.

A similar kind of work done in the Thommankuth forest and adjacent areas of Idukki
district was carried out by Bany joy and Gigi k Joseph.Here,19 species of ant were observed
from forest ecosystem and agricultural ecosystem. All recorded species are belongs to family
Formicidae and four subfamilies Formicinae, Myrmicinae, Ponerinae and Dolichoridinae.
Oeocophylla smaragdina was found as the most dominant species in agricultural ecosystem
and Technomyrmex albipes commonly found in forest ecosystem. In this study, agricultural
ecosystem is more diverse than forest ecosystem. Both study revealed that the dominancy
exhibited by the Formicinae subfamily, is due to their ability to adapt with different niches with
a variety of feeding habits

31
 Technomyrmex Albipes commonly found in human dominated,disturbed habitats,found
also in Thommankuth forest indicating Growing disturbance happening to prestine forests. It
may be due to the over interference of tourist into the Forest as part of ecotourism. Similar
findings have been reported in this study which took place in human habitat too with
Paratrechina longicornis as the predominant species. Paratrechina longicornis can live
indoors anywhere that humans live, there is no limit to the latitude where it could thrive and
also an increase in their number is due to the presence of microhabitats, which is ideal for their
growth. So it can be conclude that Paratrechina longicornis commonly spread by human
commerce and associate with human disturbance.

Agricultural ecosystem is common in both the studies. Oecophylla smaragdina (Weaver ant)is
the predominant species in the agricultural ecosystem of Thommankuth area.Increase in
vegetation, tree height, number of nests per tree etc are suitable for the abundance of weaver
ant But in this study Myrmicaria brunnea is the predominant species in agricultural
ecosystem.Myrmicaria brunnea mainly construct huge underground nests at the bottom of low
shrubs and small plants. Here, agricultural ecosystem is rich with small plants. So, this ideal
condition for nesting is suitable for myrmicaria brunnea. Presence of myrmicaria brunnea is
observed throughout the study. This reveals that the Climatic changes will not affect the
occurrence of myrmicaria species. Good soil condition, food availability are also influence the
distribution and abundance of myrmicaria species in this area.

32
 CONCLUSION
Ants are an abundant, diverse, and ecologically important group of arthropods in most
terrestrial ecosystems (Folgarait 1998).Species composition and diversity patterns in human
habitat area and agricultural ecosystem have been analyzed in this study.This study revealed
that the dominancy exhibited by the Formicinae subfamily in human habitat area as well as in
agricultural ecosystem,is due to their ability to adapt with different niche with a variety of
feeding habit.The study held in the selected area of mundakayam grama panchayath resulting
in identifying 11 ant species.11 Species of Formicidae belonging to three
subfamilies(Formicinae,Myrmicinae and Ponerinae) were collected.Out of total 11
species,three species only found in human habitat area, whereas three species found only in
agricultural ecosystem.However five species were observed from both the
habitat.Paratrechina longicornis was commonly found in human habitat area.It may be due to
the over interference of human.Myrmicaria brunnea found commonly in agricultural
ecosystem.Overall study reveals that Myrmicaria brunnea is most abundant in the study area.
agricultural ecosystem is rich with small plants. So, this ideal condition for nesting is suitable
for myrmicaria brunnea.Good soil condition, food availability are also influence the
distribution and abundance of myrmicaria species in this area.According to Shannon Weiner
diversity index human habitat area(1.874)is more diverse than agricultural ecosystem(1.668).

33
 REFERENCE
1. Albéryca Stephany de J. C. Ramos, Raimunda Nonata S. de Lemos, Alirya Magda S.
do Vale, Michela C. Batista, Aldenise A. Moreira, Ana Y. Harada and Mário L. R.
Mesquita,2015.Ant diversity in agro ecosystems and secondary forest,Volume10(49).

2. Anongnat Chengsutdha, Pongchai Dumrongrojwatthana and Duangkhae

Sitthicharoencha, 2016.Species diversity of ants in different land use types in dry
season at Wiang SaDistrict, Nan Province,volume 3:171-180

3. Azhagu Raj R, R Sathish, A Prakasam, D Krishnamoorthy and M

Balachandar,2017.Diversity and distribution of Ant species (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae), in Pachaiyappa’s College, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, India,Journal of
Entomology and Zoology Studies,volume 5,issue1: 459-464.

4. Bakhtiar Effendi Yahya, Seiki Yamane1 and Maryati Mohamed,, 2009.Morphological

and Behavioral Characters of the Two Species Groups of the Ant Genus Myrmicaria
(Insecta: Hymenoptera:Formicidae: Myrmicinae) from Southeast Asia, Species
Diversity, volume 14, 249–265.

5. Bany Joy1 Gigi K Joseph2,2017,A Comparative Study On The Hymenopteran

Diversity With Special Reference To Ants In Thommankuth Forest And Adjacent
Areas Of Idukki District In Western Ghats, Volume 11, Issue 5 Ver. II: PP 01-08.

6. Bharti H, Guénard B, Bharti M, Economo EP (2016) An updated checklist of the ants

of India with their Specific distributions in Indian states (Hymenoptera, Formicidae).
ZooKeys 551: 1–83. Doi: 10.3897/zookeys.551.6767.

7. Bolton B. 1995. A new general catalogue of the ants of the world, Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

8. Changlu wang,John strazanac and Linda butler,2020.Abundance, Diversity, and

Activity of Ants (Hymenoptera:Formicidae) in Oak-Dominated Mixed Appalachian
Forests Treated with Microbial Pesticides,Vol. 29, no. 3.

34
 9. Cheng L (ed). 1976. Marine Insects, North Holland, Amsterdam.

10. Flavio Siqueira de Castro et al,2012.Annual and Seasonal Changes in the Structure of
Litter-DwellingAnt Assemblages (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in
AtlanticSemideciduous Forests,Hindawi Publishing Corporation Psyche Volume
2012, Article ID 959715.

11. Folgarait PJ (1998) Ant biodiversity and its relationship to ecosystem functioning: a
review. BiodiversConserv 7:1221–1244

12. Gayathri G and Dr. J. Roopavathy,2019.A survey on ant diversity in two different areas
of Thrissur district, Kerala.Volume.4,Issue.5.

13. Hammond PM. 1992. Species inventory in Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth’s
living resources (ed. B. Groombridge). Chapman and Hall London pp: 17-39

14. Henri Goulet, John T. Huber.1993, Hymenoptera of the world: an identification

guide,(Publication; 1894/E).

15. Holdingstone Kharbani and Sudhanya Ray Hajong,2013.Seasonal patterns in ant

(Hymenoptera: Formicidae)Activity in a forest habitat of the West Khasi
Hills,Meghalaya, India, Asian mermicology Volume 5, 103–112,Issn 1985-1944.

16. Hridisha Nandana Hazarika,Kamal Adhikari,Bulbuli Khanikor,2019.Diversity and

Distribution of Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Gauhati University Campus,
Assam, Vol-04, Issue-11.

17. Indra Prasad Subed and Prem Bahadur Budha1,2020.Diversity and distribution
patterns of ants along elevational gradients.Nepalese Journal of Zoology volume
4,issue1.

35
 18. James K. wetterer, 2008.Worldwide spread of the longhorn crazy ant, Paratrechina
longicornis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae),Myrmecol. News,volume :11.

19. Jan wriedt,Dirk Mezger Lucky chong and Martin pfeiffer,2008. Observations on the
foraging behaviour of Myrmicaria brunnea subcarinata (Smith) (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae) in a tropical rainforest in Sarawak (Malaysia) Asian myrmecology,
Volume 2, 109 – 120.

20. John H. Klotz, Laurel D. Hansen, Reiner Pospischil, Michael Rust,2008Urban Ants of
North America and Europe: Identification, Biology, and Management,Cornell
University Press IISB0801474736, 9780801474736.

21. Jour,Antony,Anupa,Prasad G 2014,Research Paper Zoology Diversity of Ants

(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) From Undisturbed And Disturbed Habitats of Great
Indian Bustard Wildlife Sanctuary,International Journal of Scientific Research
3(12):398-401

22. Jour, Chavhan Dr. Arvind, Pawar Santosh ,2011,Distribution and Diversity of Ant
Species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in and Around Amravati City of Maharashtra,
India,World Journal of Zoology.

23. Jov onn G.hill,Keith S.summer villi and Richard L.brown 2008Habitat Associations
of Ant Species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in a Heterogeneous Mississippi
Landscape,Vol. 37,issue2 : 453Ð463

24. J. Van Itterbeeck,N. Sivongxay,B. Praxaysombath,A. van Huis 2015, Location and
external characteristics of the Oecophylla smaragdina ,queen nest, Article in Insectes
Sociaux.

25. Kashmira Khot, Goldin Quadros and Vaishali Somani,2013.Ant Diversity in an urban
garden at Mumbai, Maharashtra,National Conference on Biodiversity : Status and
Challenges in Conservation – ‘FAVEO’ 2013.

36
 26. Kirsti L Abbott, Peter T Green and Dennis J O’Dowd,2014.Seasonal shifts in
macronutrient preferences in supercolonies of the Invasive (Yellow Crazy Ant )
Anoplolepis gracilipes(Smith, 1857)(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) on Christmas Island,
Indian Ocean, Article in Austral Entomology, doi:10.1111/aen.12081
27. L. Lach, C. L. Parr & K. L. Abbott,2010.Ant ecology,Revista Colombiana de
Entomología,volume 39,issue 1: 174-176.

28. May RM 1990. Taxonomy as destiny. Nature 347: 129-130

29. Md. Mostofa Ali Sarkar, Molla Huq and Syed Shahadat Hossain,2010.Consideration
of detectability and sampling in measuring biodiversity , Pakistan Journal of
Statistics.

30. Mohammed M. El Bokl,Fayez M. Semida, Mahmoud S. Abdel-Dayem, Eman I. El

Surtasi,2015.ant (Hymenoptera : Formicidae ) diversity and bioindicators in the lands
with different anthropogenic activities in new damietta , EGYPT,Int. J. Entomol. Res.
03 (02) 2015. 35-46.

31. Nayana Paul, Presty John, Baaby Job and P. Lakshmi Devi Menon,2016.Comparison
of Ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Diversity in Different Habitats of Machad Region
of Thrissur,BEPLS Vol 5 [2].

32. N.B. Patkar and R.J. Chavan,2014.Diversity of Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) From
Undisturbed And Disturbed Habitats of Great Indian Bustard Wildlife Sanctuary, (M.
S.), India,Volume : 3 | Issue : 12 |.

33. Philip S.ward,2007.Phylogeny, classification, and species-level taxonomy of ants

(Hymenoptera: Formicidae),Zootaxa 1668: 549–563.

34. Philip S. ward 1,4, Bonnie B. blaimer & Brian L. Fisher ,2016,A revised phylogenetic
classification of the ant subfamily Formicinae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), with
resurrection of the genera Colobopsis and Dinomyrmex,Zootaxa 4072 (3): 343–357

37
 35. Prashant Neupane and Indra Prasad Subedi1,2018,Ant diversity in Muhan Pokhari area
of Shivapuri-Nagarjun National Park, Nepal,Vol. 30, 2016-18

36. Prema Pramod Ratnaparkhi, Dr. Gokul Kale,2018,Study of Ant Diversity in Various
Localities of Akola, Maharashtra, India,Vol.3; Issue: 4.
37. Ramachandra T.V. Subash Chandran M.D. Joshi N.V. Ajay Narendra Ali
T.M,2012.Ant Species Composition and Diversity in the Sharavathi River Basin,
Central Western ghats , Sahyadri Conservation Series 3 ENVIS Technical Report: 20.

38. R. Kyerematen et al.2014Species Composition and Diversity of Insects of the Kogyae

Strict Nature Reserve in Ghana,Open Journal of Ecology, 2014, 4, 1061-1079.

39. Samways JM. 1994. Insect Conservation Biology.

40. Saranya sivadasan , Anu Anto, Gigi K. Joseph and Shaju Thomas ,2013A study on the
ant diversity (Hymenoptera : Formicidae ) of periyar tiger reserve in south western
Ghats,volume 139,issue10 : 936-942,

41. S. Dash, H.P.Patnaik and R.K.Tarai,2017.Diversity and Species richness of Ants in

coastal Odisha. Int. Arch. App. Sci. Technol; Vol 8,issue1:17-21.

42. Stacy M. Philpott, Ivette Perfecto, Inge Armbrecht,and Catherine L. Parr,2009,Chapter

8Ant Diversity and Function in Disturbed and Changing Habitats, ant ecology.

43. Sunil Kumar, M.; Srihari, K. T.; Nair, P.; Varghese, T.; Gadagkar, R. 1997. Ant species
richness at selected localities of Bangalore. Insect Environment 3:3-5.

44. Thresiamma varghese 2015.A Review of Extant Subfamilies, Tribes and Ant Genera
in India,Biosystematica,volume 3,issue 2,: 81-8981.

45. V. Sabitha K. Harsha R. Lekshmi1 K. Gopinath C. Balalakshmi,2018.Checklist of

Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of Silent Valley National Park, Western Ghats,
Kerala, India,Journal of science and technology investigation,Vol-1-9.

38