what is meaning of intelligence for ants
Ant
intelligence
Ants store food, repel attackers and use chemicals
signals to contact one another in case of attack. Such chemical communication
can be compared to the human use of visual and auditory channels (as in
religious chants, advertising images and jingles, political slogans and martial
music) to arouse and propagate moods and attitudes. The biologist Lewis Thomas
wrote, ‘Ants are so much like human beings as to be an embarrassment. They farm
fungi, raise aphids* as livestock, launch armies to war, use chemical sprays to
alarm and confuse enemies, capture slaves, engage in child labour, exchange
information ceaselessly. They do everything but watch television.
However, in ants there is no cultural transmission
–everything must be encoded in the genes –whereas in humans the opposite is
true. Only basic instincts are carried in the genes of a newborn baby, other
skills being learned from others in the community as the child grows up. It may
seem that this cultural continuity gives us a huge advantage over ants. They
have never mastered fire nor progressed. Their fungi faming and aphid herding
crafts are sophisticated when compared to the agricultural skills of humans
five thousand years ago but have been totally overtaken by modern human
agribusiness.
Or have they? The farming methods of ants are at least
sustainable. They do not ruin environments or use enormous amounts of energy.
Moreover, recent evidence suggests that the crop farming of ants may be more
sophisticated and adaptable than was thought.
Ants were farmers fifty million years before humans
were. Ants can’t digest the cellulose in leaves --but some fungi can. The ants
therefore cultivate these fungi in their nests, bringing them leaves to feed on
and then use them as a source of food. Farmer ants secrete antibiotics to
control other fungi that might act as ‘weeds’, and spread waste to fertilise
the crop.
It was once thought that the fungus that ants
cultivate was a single type that they had propagated, essentially unchanged
from the distant past. Not so, Ulrich Mueller of Maryland and his colleagues
genetically screened 862 different types of fungi taken from ants’ nests. These
turned out to be highly diverse: it seems that ants are continually
domesticating new species. Even more impressively, DNA analysis of the fungi
suggests that the ants improve or modify the fungi by regularly swapping and
sharing strains with neighbouring ant colonies.
Whereas prehistoric man had no exposure to urban
lifestyles –the forcing house of intelligence –the evidence suggests that ants
have lived in urban settings for close on a hundred million years, developing
and maintaining underground cities of specialised chambers and tunnels.
When we survey Mexico City, Tokyo, Los Angles, we are
amazed at what has been accomplished by humans. Yet Hoelldobler and Wilson’s
magnificent work for ant lovers, The Ants, describes a super colony of the ant
Formica yessensis on the Ishhikari Coast of Hokkaido. This ‘megalopolis’ was
reported to be composed of 360 million workers and a million queens living in 4,500 interconnected
nests across a territory of 2.7 square kilometres.
Such enduring and intricately meshed levels of
technical achievement outstrip by far anything achieved by our distant
ancestors. We hail as masterpieces the cave paintings in southern France and
elsewhere, dating back some 20,000 years. Ant societies existed in something
like their present form more than seventy million years ago. Beside this,
prehistoric man looks technologically primitive. Is this then some kind of
intelligence, albeit of a different kind?
Research conducted at Oxford, Sussex and ZurichUniversities has shown that when desert anst return from a foraging trip, they
navigate by integrating bearings and distances, which they continuously update
in their heads. They combine the evidence of visual landmarks with a mental
library of local directions, all within a framework which is consulted and
updated. So ants can learn too.
Ant in a twelve years programme of work, Ryabko and
Reznikova have found evidence that ants can transmit very complex messages.
Scouts who had located food in a maze returned to mobilise their foraging
teams. They engaged in contact sessions, at the end of which the scout was
removed in order to observe what her team might do. Often the forgers proceeded
to the exact spot in the maze where the food had been. Elaborate precautions
were taken to prevent the foraging team using odour clues. Discussion now centres on whether the route
through the maze in communicated as a ‘left-right’ sequence of turns or as a
‘compass bearing and distance’ message.
During the course of this exhaustive study, Reznikova
has grown so attached to her laboratory ants that she feels she known them as
individuals – even without the paint spots used to mark them. It’s no surprise
that Edward Wilson, in his essay, ‘In the company of ants’, advises readers who
ask want to do with the ants in their kitchen to: ‘watch where you stop. Be
careful of little lives.’
Comments
Post a Comment