> but the pheromone only does this for the spider's target species
replyIsn't this concluded through observational studies? Is it possible that its just not universally true, like it still impacts, idk, 0.01% of this ant's species due to gene diversity?
Ultimately, it's probably due to the rate of encounter with this species and the evolution of the pheromone towards the most consistent and intense response from that particular species. It's likely that a more general pheromone wouldn't induce such a consistent response, since it would be a less specific and reliable cue from the ant's perspective. So if you encounter lots of different ant species, a more general pheromone with a 50% response rate could work, but if you primarily encounter this ant species, a more specific pheromone with a 90% response rate is going to confer a greater fitness advantage.
replyCould be due to the rate of encounter with this species vs. other species, could also be due to the consistency of response with more general vs. specific pheromones. You start with spiders with silk/pheromones that ants are a little more aggressive towards, then variance in that chemical makeup leads to fitness advantages. If the pheromone confers a strong advantage in a specific ant,
Yeah, that is pretty crazy. I wonder what it smells like? Has to be an enemy specific to that ant species right?
replythat's a good question -- the paper describes it triggering aggression in the ant within milliseconds of it probing the snare with its antenna. I don't know the basis for it, but that's some down-to-the-metal ant programming right there
replyYou should read up on manipulative parasites too! Things like wasp larvae developing inside an insect and changing its behavior through chemical manipulation of neural pathways. Some really remarkable specialization!
reply