Loading…

Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees

Tropical canopies are known for their high abundance and diversity of ants. However, the factors which enable coexistence of so many species in trees, and in particular, the role of foragers in determining local diversity, are not well understood. We censused nesting and foraging arboreal ant commun...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2015-02, Vol.10 (2), p.e0117853-e0117853
Main Authors: Klimes, Petr, Fibich, Pavel, Idigel, Cliffson, Rimandai, Maling
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3
container_end_page e0117853
container_issue 2
container_start_page e0117853
container_title PloS one
container_volume 10
creator Klimes, Petr
Fibich, Pavel
Idigel, Cliffson
Rimandai, Maling
description Tropical canopies are known for their high abundance and diversity of ants. However, the factors which enable coexistence of so many species in trees, and in particular, the role of foragers in determining local diversity, are not well understood. We censused nesting and foraging arboreal ant communities in two 0.32 ha plots of primary and secondary lowland rainforest in New Guinea and explored their species diversity and composition. Null models were used to test if the records of species foraging (but not nesting) in a tree were dependent on the spatial distribution of nests in surrounding trees. In total, 102 ant species from 389 trees occurred in the primary plot compared with only 50 species from 295 trees in the secondary forest plot. However, there was only a small difference in mean ant richness per tree between primary and secondary forest (3.8 and 3.3 sp. respectively) and considerably lower richness per tree was found only when nests were considered (1.5 sp. in both forests). About half of foraging individuals collected in a tree belonged to species which were not nesting in that tree. Null models showed that the ants foraging but not nesting in a tree are more likely to nest in nearby trees than would be expected at random. The effects of both forest stage and tree size traits were similar regardless of whether only foragers, only nests, or both datasets combined were considered. However, relative abundance distributions of species differed between foraging and nesting communities. The primary forest plot was dominated by native ant species, whereas invasive species were common in secondary forest. This study demonstrates the high contribution of foragers to arboreal ant diversity, indicating an important role of connectivity between trees, and also highlights the importance of primary vegetation for the conservation of native ant communities.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0117853
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1658422862</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A422370538</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_8810a6d672ec46c7b20b951f422c7368</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A422370538</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkllv1DAUhSMEoqXwDxBEQkLwMIOXeMkLUlW2kSoVsb1aHi8ZV4k92E5F_z2eTlpNUB-QH-Llu-fGx6eqnkOwhJjBd5dhjF72y23wZgkgZJzgB9UxbDFaUATww4P5UfUkpUsACOaUPq6OEGGw4RgeV18_uGR8lr7rne_qvDG1dlcmJpev62BrGdchGtnX0udahWEYvcvOpNr5Osewdaqc2YKkXNbGpKfVIyv7ZJ5N35Pq56ePP86-LM4vPq_OTs8XihGeF9xCK9eYEAw1agxGbWOkhVATrC1tjLUKW0kYQpQADTkxwDJktG6YRYxIfFK93Otu-5DEZEYSkBLeIMQpKsRqT-ggL8U2ukHGaxGkEzcbIXZCxuxUbwTnEEiqaemgGqrYGoF1S6AtSophyovW-6nbuB6MVsWyKPuZ6PzEu43owpVocANa1BaBN5NADL_H4pYYXFKm76U3Ybz575ZRDgAr6Kt_0PtvN1GdLBdw3obSV-1ExWlBMNs9dqGW91BlaDM4VZJjXdmfFbydFRQmmz-5k2NKYvX92_-zF7_m7OsDdlMSlTcp9GN2wac52OxBFUNK0dg7kyEQu-DfuiF2wRdT8EvZi8MHuiu6TTr-CwdF_VU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1658422862</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Klimes, Petr ; Fibich, Pavel ; Idigel, Cliffson ; Rimandai, Maling</creator><contributor>De Marco Júnior, Paulo</contributor><creatorcontrib>Klimes, Petr ; Fibich, Pavel ; Idigel, Cliffson ; Rimandai, Maling ; De Marco Júnior, Paulo</creatorcontrib><description>Tropical canopies are known for their high abundance and diversity of ants. However, the factors which enable coexistence of so many species in trees, and in particular, the role of foragers in determining local diversity, are not well understood. We censused nesting and foraging arboreal ant communities in two 0.32 ha plots of primary and secondary lowland rainforest in New Guinea and explored their species diversity and composition. Null models were used to test if the records of species foraging (but not nesting) in a tree were dependent on the spatial distribution of nests in surrounding trees. In total, 102 ant species from 389 trees occurred in the primary plot compared with only 50 species from 295 trees in the secondary forest plot. However, there was only a small difference in mean ant richness per tree between primary and secondary forest (3.8 and 3.3 sp. respectively) and considerably lower richness per tree was found only when nests were considered (1.5 sp. in both forests). About half of foraging individuals collected in a tree belonged to species which were not nesting in that tree. Null models showed that the ants foraging but not nesting in a tree are more likely to nest in nearby trees than would be expected at random. The effects of both forest stage and tree size traits were similar regardless of whether only foragers, only nests, or both datasets combined were considered. However, relative abundance distributions of species differed between foraging and nesting communities. The primary forest plot was dominated by native ant species, whereas invasive species were common in secondary forest. This study demonstrates the high contribution of foragers to arboreal ant diversity, indicating an important role of connectivity between trees, and also highlights the importance of primary vegetation for the conservation of native ant communities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117853</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25714831</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Abundance ; Analysis ; Animal behavior ; Animals ; Anoplolepis gracilipes ; Ants ; Behavior, Animal ; Biodiversity ; Coexistence ; Communities ; Conservation ; Ecosystem ; Forests ; Formicidae ; Hymenoptera ; Indigenous species ; Introduced species ; Invasive species ; Nesting ; Nests ; New Guinea ; New records ; Rainforest ; Rainforests ; Relative abundance ; Spatial distribution ; Species diversity ; Trees ; Tropical Climate ; Tropical forests</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2015-02, Vol.10 (2), p.e0117853-e0117853</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2015 Klimes et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2015 Klimes et al 2015 Klimes et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1658422862/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1658422862?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25714831$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>De Marco Júnior, Paulo</contributor><creatorcontrib>Klimes, Petr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fibich, Pavel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Idigel, Cliffson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rimandai, Maling</creatorcontrib><title>Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Tropical canopies are known for their high abundance and diversity of ants. However, the factors which enable coexistence of so many species in trees, and in particular, the role of foragers in determining local diversity, are not well understood. We censused nesting and foraging arboreal ant communities in two 0.32 ha plots of primary and secondary lowland rainforest in New Guinea and explored their species diversity and composition. Null models were used to test if the records of species foraging (but not nesting) in a tree were dependent on the spatial distribution of nests in surrounding trees. In total, 102 ant species from 389 trees occurred in the primary plot compared with only 50 species from 295 trees in the secondary forest plot. However, there was only a small difference in mean ant richness per tree between primary and secondary forest (3.8 and 3.3 sp. respectively) and considerably lower richness per tree was found only when nests were considered (1.5 sp. in both forests). About half of foraging individuals collected in a tree belonged to species which were not nesting in that tree. Null models showed that the ants foraging but not nesting in a tree are more likely to nest in nearby trees than would be expected at random. The effects of both forest stage and tree size traits were similar regardless of whether only foragers, only nests, or both datasets combined were considered. However, relative abundance distributions of species differed between foraging and nesting communities. The primary forest plot was dominated by native ant species, whereas invasive species were common in secondary forest. This study demonstrates the high contribution of foragers to arboreal ant diversity, indicating an important role of connectivity between trees, and also highlights the importance of primary vegetation for the conservation of native ant communities.</description><subject>Abundance</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Anoplolepis gracilipes</subject><subject>Ants</subject><subject>Behavior, Animal</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Coexistence</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Formicidae</subject><subject>Hymenoptera</subject><subject>Indigenous species</subject><subject>Introduced species</subject><subject>Invasive species</subject><subject>Nesting</subject><subject>Nests</subject><subject>New Guinea</subject><subject>New records</subject><subject>Rainforest</subject><subject>Rainforests</subject><subject>Relative abundance</subject><subject>Spatial distribution</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Trees</subject><subject>Tropical Climate</subject><subject>Tropical forests</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkllv1DAUhSMEoqXwDxBEQkLwMIOXeMkLUlW2kSoVsb1aHi8ZV4k92E5F_z2eTlpNUB-QH-Llu-fGx6eqnkOwhJjBd5dhjF72y23wZgkgZJzgB9UxbDFaUATww4P5UfUkpUsACOaUPq6OEGGw4RgeV18_uGR8lr7rne_qvDG1dlcmJpev62BrGdchGtnX0udahWEYvcvOpNr5Osewdaqc2YKkXNbGpKfVIyv7ZJ5N35Pq56ePP86-LM4vPq_OTs8XihGeF9xCK9eYEAw1agxGbWOkhVATrC1tjLUKW0kYQpQADTkxwDJktG6YRYxIfFK93Otu-5DEZEYSkBLeIMQpKsRqT-ggL8U2ukHGaxGkEzcbIXZCxuxUbwTnEEiqaemgGqrYGoF1S6AtSophyovW-6nbuB6MVsWyKPuZ6PzEu43owpVocANa1BaBN5NADL_H4pYYXFKm76U3Ybz575ZRDgAr6Kt_0PtvN1GdLBdw3obSV-1ExWlBMNs9dqGW91BlaDM4VZJjXdmfFbydFRQmmz-5k2NKYvX92_-zF7_m7OsDdlMSlTcp9GN2wac52OxBFUNK0dg7kyEQu-DfuiF2wRdT8EvZi8MHuiu6TTr-CwdF_VU</recordid><startdate>20150225</startdate><enddate>20150225</enddate><creator>Klimes, Petr</creator><creator>Fibich, Pavel</creator><creator>Idigel, Cliffson</creator><creator>Rimandai, Maling</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150225</creationdate><title>Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees</title><author>Klimes, Petr ; Fibich, Pavel ; Idigel, Cliffson ; Rimandai, Maling</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Abundance</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Anoplolepis gracilipes</topic><topic>Ants</topic><topic>Behavior, Animal</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Coexistence</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Formicidae</topic><topic>Hymenoptera</topic><topic>Indigenous species</topic><topic>Introduced species</topic><topic>Invasive species</topic><topic>Nesting</topic><topic>Nests</topic><topic>New Guinea</topic><topic>New records</topic><topic>Rainforest</topic><topic>Rainforests</topic><topic>Relative abundance</topic><topic>Spatial distribution</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Trees</topic><topic>Tropical Climate</topic><topic>Tropical forests</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Klimes, Petr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fibich, Pavel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Idigel, Cliffson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rimandai, Maling</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies &amp; aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials science collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Klimes, Petr</au><au>Fibich, Pavel</au><au>Idigel, Cliffson</au><au>Rimandai, Maling</au><au>De Marco Júnior, Paulo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2015-02-25</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>e0117853</spage><epage>e0117853</epage><pages>e0117853-e0117853</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Tropical canopies are known for their high abundance and diversity of ants. However, the factors which enable coexistence of so many species in trees, and in particular, the role of foragers in determining local diversity, are not well understood. We censused nesting and foraging arboreal ant communities in two 0.32 ha plots of primary and secondary lowland rainforest in New Guinea and explored their species diversity and composition. Null models were used to test if the records of species foraging (but not nesting) in a tree were dependent on the spatial distribution of nests in surrounding trees. In total, 102 ant species from 389 trees occurred in the primary plot compared with only 50 species from 295 trees in the secondary forest plot. However, there was only a small difference in mean ant richness per tree between primary and secondary forest (3.8 and 3.3 sp. respectively) and considerably lower richness per tree was found only when nests were considered (1.5 sp. in both forests). About half of foraging individuals collected in a tree belonged to species which were not nesting in that tree. Null models showed that the ants foraging but not nesting in a tree are more likely to nest in nearby trees than would be expected at random. The effects of both forest stage and tree size traits were similar regardless of whether only foragers, only nests, or both datasets combined were considered. However, relative abundance distributions of species differed between foraging and nesting communities. The primary forest plot was dominated by native ant species, whereas invasive species were common in secondary forest. This study demonstrates the high contribution of foragers to arboreal ant diversity, indicating an important role of connectivity between trees, and also highlights the importance of primary vegetation for the conservation of native ant communities.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>25714831</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0117853</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2015-02, Vol.10 (2), p.e0117853-e0117853
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_1658422862
source Open Access: PubMed Central; Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Abundance
Analysis
Animal behavior
Animals
Anoplolepis gracilipes
Ants
Behavior, Animal
Biodiversity
Coexistence
Communities
Conservation
Ecosystem
Forests
Formicidae
Hymenoptera
Indigenous species
Introduced species
Invasive species
Nesting
Nests
New Guinea
New records
Rainforest
Rainforests
Relative abundance
Spatial distribution
Species diversity
Trees
Tropical Climate
Tropical forests
title Disentangling the diversity of arboreal ant communities in tropical forest trees
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T19%3A33%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Disentangling%20the%20diversity%20of%20arboreal%20ant%20communities%20in%20tropical%20forest%20trees&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Klimes,%20Petr&rft.date=2015-02-25&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=e0117853&rft.epage=e0117853&rft.pages=e0117853-e0117853&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0117853&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA422370538%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-8f1fab35531d24e3294eaf11d53df64effc3fa5722650d185e0f72edd47f275a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1658422862&rft_id=info:pmid/25714831&rft_galeid=A422370538&rfr_iscdi=true