Meet the Subject Editors of Myrmecological News!

The start of a new year seems a good time to put a spotlight on the Subject Editors of Myrmecol. News, who have worked for many years to help the journal become what it is today. We asked them a few questions on their ant research topics and what they think is an ideal original article on ant research, what the future may bring for myrmecology, and what makes for a healthy working environment? Here is Part 1 of this new interview series — check out their diverse answers. (And see here for interviews from 2021 with then recently appointed Subject Editors)

Flash interviews compiled by Florian Steiner


Edit by James Trager and Salvatore Brunetti

MNB: What (ant) topics do you work on?
CD: From the very start of my career as a PhD student, I’ve been thrilled to explore questions around the evolution of life-history and reproductive traits. I have focused my research on microevolutionary scale, which is the one that I find the most fascinating, especially when species exhibit polymorphisms (occurrence of different morphs). These polymorphisms are wonderful systems for understanding the forces at play for maintaining diversity. In this context, ants offer fascinating model systems with the occurrence of castes, of unorthodox reproductive systems (i.e., the use of thelytoky in various ways), of social polymorphism (i.e., the presence of a single or multiple queens within colonies), dispersal polymorphism (i.e., the presence or absence of wings) and so much more!
A large part of my research investigated the evolution of reproductive traits. I looked at both the colonial (mode of colony foundation, dispersion) and individual level (facultative use of thelytoky, worker reproduction) in the really fascinating thermophilic ant genus Cataglyphis. More specifically, I studied the Cataglyphis cursor group, in which the queen mates with many males (around five) and uses sexual reproduction to produce the workers whereas she can use both sexual and/or thelytokous parthenogenesis to produce the young queens. To complexify the picture, workers can also use thelytoky to produce young queens! The evolution of sex is one of the main intriguing questions in evolutionary biology, still mostly unresolved. In ants, social conflicts make the story even more complex but thrilling. Cataglyphis piliscapa offers great opportunities as the extent of the use of thelytoky strongly varies among populations, among colonies within populations, and probably also along the queen’s life. Whether this variation is linked to environmental factors and/or social conflicts is still unclear, and we are currently testing whether edge populations submitted to more stressful conditions use sex more frequently.
Over the past ten years, I also developed some research on the impact of urbanisation on ant traits with a specific focus on their resistance to pollutants. This work is conducted in collaboration with Mathieu Mollet (IESS-Paris) on the little acorn ant Temnothorax nylanderi. Our research revealed that urban colonies are less sensitive to the negative effects of cadmium than their forest counterparts under laboratory conditions. They also got less contaminated when forced to ingest cadmium suggesting they cope better with cadmium pollution. How they succeed to do this is yet unclear, as we found barely any genetic differentiation between urban and forest sites and no difference in the transcriptome, and whether the better resilience of urban colonies is also found for other pollutants remains to be investigated.
Very recently, I started to develop a project on the tiny and quite conspicuous ant Myrmecina graminicola that has two very fascinating polymorphisms: a social polymorphism with colonies headed by a single (monogynous) or multiple (polygynous) reproductive queens and a wing polymorphism in queens (winged and apterous queens). Interestingly, these two polymorphisms are not independent with winged queens only found in monogynous colonies. Thanks to next generation sequencing, in the last couple of years, we discovered that the social polymorphism is determined by a supergene, which is a set of tightly linked genes that are inherited as a single Mendelian element thanks to recombination suppression. The genomic analysis, performed in collaboration with Stefano Mona (ISYEB, the same research unit as me) is still underway and should reveal the genetic architecture linking the social and wing polymorphism soon. This is a very exciting project, which highlights the importance of recombination suppression by structural genomic variants on the evolution of phenotypically complex traits. The recent discovery of five independent instances of evolution of supergenes in ants that determine social polymorphism and two supergenes that affect colony split sex-ratio and queen size place the ants as a very promising group for the study of the evolution of supergenes and of their role in the maintenance of phenotypic polymorphism.
MNB: From your personal perspective, what are some characteristics of the ideal original article (on ant research)?
CD: This is a quite tricky question, and I don’t believe there is a single way to write an interesting and original article. However, I do appreciate when an article presents a novel, clear, and logical story built on a set of complementary approaches. Sometimes, the pressure to publish can lead researchers to publish their results separately at the cost of losing the interest of a comprehensive approach. I realize that my answer is very general and not restricted to ant research!
MNB: What will be timely topics in ant research in the next five years?
CD: My answers will undoubtedly reflect by my personal research work, but I am convinced that population genomics can provide unprecedented insight into the evolution of major social traits. The 1990s saw the first genetic revolution in ant research with the development of microsatellites markers. They allow ant researchers to test kin selection theory through multiple facets. We are now in the midst of the whole genome sequencing revolution thanks to the increased efficiency and decreased costs of sequencing technologies; we can now sequence the entire genome of any organism at affordable costs and times. This is an exciting time as the power of genomics is allowing researchers to decipher the genetic architecture of complex traits, to pinpoint hotspots of genomic adaptation, and to infer demographic histories with high reliability (primordial for invasive ant research for instance). An important genetic step would also be to directly manipulate genes through technics such as CRISPR-Cas9 to functionally validate the role of candidate genes on the determination of social traits even though it remains highly challenging in ants. Of course, I would like to put forward the prominent role that supergenes could play in the determination of major social traits. This could completely change our understanding of how they evolve. Indeed, supergenes are often associated with specific features strongly affecting individual fitness and necessary to consider for understanding the evolutionary dynamic of the traits of interest. This will probably force us in the future to reexamine theoretical models that looked at the evolutionary dynamics of traits while ignoring their genetics. Finally, because ants display some of the most extreme levels of phenotypic plasticity with highly differentiated morphological and/or behavioural phenotypes, important discoveries will probably emerge through research on the epigenome, a fascinating area of research that I am not familiar with.
MNB: What is important for a healthy work environment?
CD: Not surprisingly, I would say that money remains the most important parameter enabling us to conduct interesting and novel research. In France, researchers have a permanent position. It is a great way to ensure security and safety! However quite amazingly, if the government can invest around 100,000 euros per year per researcher for their lifetime salaries, the basic recurrent funding for their research is less than 5% of their yearly salary! This is far from sufficient to cover the minimal necessary activity of any researcher. With a success rate at the main funding research French agency, ANR, at around 23%, a non-negligible proportion of researchers are paid without having enough money for doing their research properly. Interesting preliminary data are necessary to get grants, which can be tricky to obtain with the very low recurrent funding. It is crucial to tackle underfunding to ensure the well-being of French researchers and guarantee their competitiveness.

Nicholas J. Gotelli, United States of America
MNB: What (ant) topics do you work on?
NJG: I and my students have worked on a number of ant studies over the years, including ants as prey of pitcher plants and larval ant lions, forecasting range shifts of ants in response to climate change, understanding the responses of deciduous forest ants to experimental warming, characterizing the expression of ant heat shock proteins, and using museum records to document long-term changes in native and non-native ants of Florida.
MNB: From your personal perspective, what are some characteristics of the ideal original article (on ant research)?
NJG: I think the ideal study is one that is based on the collection of new primary data (rather than re-analyzing data collected exclusively in the past) and one that takes advantage of unique aspects of ant biology (such as chemical communication and social behavior) to answer broad questions in ecology and evolution (such as the factors that control species richness or the role of adaptation in speciation).
MNB: What will be timely topics in ant research in the next five years?
NJG: I think a key topic will be the direct responses of ants to ongoing climate change, and the indirect cascading responses of the other species to the arrival of new ant species.
MNB: What is important for a healthy work environment?
NJG: Here are three ideas for creating a healthy work environment for yourself. 1) Isolation. Some of the most important activities for successful science are reading, thinking, writing, and coding. These are best done in isolation, away from colleagues and students in the office and lab, and ideally away from the internet and social media. You should carve out time each week to work in isolation. 2) Health. You should also make time for daily physical exercise. It relieves stress, lets your subconscious continue to work on hard problems, and keeps you mentally and physically fit. 3) Creativity. You should develop a serious interest in a creative activity outside of science. For myself it is music. In my science network, I have met many others who are also musicians or artists. These activities do have an indirect effect on how we approach questions in science, and I think they help to keep us from getting burned out by working all of the time.

Chris R. Smith, United States of America
MNB: What (ant) topics do you work on?
CRS: My research focuses on social phenotypes. Current work is on phenotypic plasticity and how alternative phenotypes evolve and are regulated. One project explores how structures that differ between ant castes are regulated at a molecular/developmental scale, with a particular focus on the Osiris genes. These genes appear to be master regulators of cuticle, and as such likely regulate the divergent pupal/adult phenotypes of different castes. These genes also have a fascinating evolutionary story, whereby the family originated at the dawn of the insects and has maintained remarkable conservation since – and is involved in myriad processes, such as plasticity, immunity, and detoxification. Another current project involves the hypothesis that variation in worker phenotypes is facilitated by sexual dimorphism. This project highlights the overlooked role of male morphology on queen and worker phenotypes.
MNB: From your personal perspective, what are some characteristics of the ideal original article (on ant research)?
CRS: Creativity in ideas, graphics, and writing – backed up by solid science. Good papers are good stories well told. The ideas are exciting, and each part of the paper draws you to the next in a logical progression, integrated and harmonious. There should be elements of beauty, whether in the prose, art, or figures. The peer review process is wonderful, but it does repress creativity. Typically, the more individuals that have a hand in a paper (authors, reviewers, editors), the more homogenous the eventual product. I am always excited when the authors take a few risks in creative expression in papers; when well done, they just sometimes make it through the review process and then make for a more interesting read.
MNB: What will be timely topics in ant research in the next five years?
CRS: I suspect that we will approach an understanding of phenotypes (including social phenotypes) that rely on fewer assumptions – that is, we will rely less on assumptions based on honey bee or fruit fly biology (specifically, gene functions and molecular mechanisms). There is also exciting work on sensory perception of ants, decoding how cues are perceived at the level of signalling pathways – this work ultimately promises to unlock how communication in ants functions and evolves. I have also been excited about recent papers on the pharmacology of ant venoms, and I think more exciting work on these and how they modulate ant ecology will be fun to read in the near future.
MNB: What is important for a healthy work environment?
CRS: I have tried to think much more about this as I have transitioned to more administrative roles. To be honest, and I know it sounds corny, especially in the context of this interview, but I do think a lot about ants when thinking about a healthy work environment. First: good, effective, communication is key. Second: listening, working toward consensus, and trying to discern it. I do often think of Stephen Pratt et al.’s work on collective decision making, particularly in the context of house-hunting, split decisions, consensus, and quorum. Third, transparency, honesty, and trust; without this, it is not possible to achieve a unity of purpose. This is especially true in lean times; when resources are more limiting, competition can be a very divisive force. Lastly, predictability. Traits associated with a greater competitive ability tend to predominate (and are selected for) in highly predictable environments, and I think this is as true in our work lives as it is in life history evolution.

MNB: What (ant) topics do you work on?
BEB: I consider myself to be an evolutionary and systematic morphologist. Most broadly, I ask: What are ants? What are their patterns of diversity currently and through time? How can they do what they do? How did and do they come to be the way they are, across their tremendous diversity? Why are they the way they are, and how do or will they respond to change? To address these questions, I work on the alpha taxonomy, phylogeny, and evolution of living and fossil ants, and the historical and developmental origin of anatomical structures and their forms in the contexts of geological history and of the Hymenoptera and broader groupings. Methodologically, I am particularly interested in the modeling of morphological structure, function, and evolution using micro-computed tomography (µ-CT) and phylogenetic statistics. I recognize there is a need for traditional, specimen-based research, as the diversity of ants is profound, and the fundamental task of sorting naming ant biodiversity will unlikely be achieved any time soon, even with advanced technologies.
MNB: From your personal perspective, what are some characteristics of the ideal original article (on ant research)?
BEB: From my perspective as an anatomist, taxonomist, and evolutionary biologist, the ideal original article on ant research has (a) clear definitions, (b) information-rich descriptions or matrices, (c) conveys enough visual information such that the reader does not require deep experience to understand the anatomical objects or the plots, (d) synthesizes past knowledge with the newly derived understandings, and is (e) well-organized.
(a) Ideally, a work would have (when applicable) clear definitions of anatomical terms, concepts, and measures, the species concept or recognition criteria used, and especially of the species or higher taxa that are described or otherwise treated. For taxonomic works, this would include diagnoses that explicitly distinguish the subject taxon from other, similar or related taxa, and would state what specific character(s) or combinations of characters are necessary for the identification of the given taxon.
(b) There is a limit to the amount of useful information that can be included in, e.g., a taxonomic description, but we are in a real age of discovery when it comes to documenting and comprehending the anatomical diversity of ants and other insects. (The description of new species of Pheidole based on workers or soldiers/majors illustrates this limit.) To come to grips with the diversity of ants and to analyze them, we do need large datasets of morphometrics or discrete characters. Enhancing descriptions with summary plots and matrices is a crucial step for translating morphological research, beyond being essential for quantitative analysis. With that said, basic descriptive work must also be pursued, particularly when coupled with specimen digitization!
(c) The bodies of ants are comparably complex as ours: We have 206 bones in our bodies, give or take, while worker ants have > 320 sclerites. To grasp the structural and functional diversity of ants, we really do need to provide image-based documentation and digital datasets. Because this kind of documentation has not yet been undertaken at the large scale, we need to push the boundaries of illustration, data sharing, and image standardization. Summary plots are extremely valuable to reduce complexity, but do not replace the atlases or guides that are needed for user-oriented work on the phenotypic diversity of ants, given that we are in the early stages of mapping the internal and functional diversity.
(d) In the scholastic tradition of taxonomy and comparative anatomy and toward the goals of communication and replicability, it is critical to recount the histories of terms and concepts, as any usage may change their definition. Moreover, many discoveries are demonstrations or tests of knowledge that has been gained before using more qualitative or subjective methods. Therefore, making clear what was understood and what is now more concretely fact through discussion is essential. In a broader sense, the majority of research – that is published that isn’t strictly a description within an established framework – is revisionary in nature, whether taxonomic or otherwise. Pure discovery and description by necessity are followed by revision, informed by new discovery. Ideally, we should be doing revisions where we can.
(e) Information is meaningless when it isn’t organized. Therefore, every observation needs a system for classification and recording, yet every system of organization can be improved. We must ask ourselves: To whom are we conveying this information, how will these data be used, and how can the data be shared?
MNB: What will be timely topics in ant research in the next five years?
BEB: There is, simply, a deep and vast amount of information that we don’t have about the bodies of ants themselves, from the gross phenotypic patterns used to diagnose species and higher clades to the internal parts and their workings. There is, moreover, a generational turnover occurring in the systematics of ants, as well as major and ongoing revisions of our collective understanding of ant biology, based in many different working fields. From the perspective of a systematic and evolutionary morphologist, I see four central foci. (1) The comparative anatomy and development of all organ systems across all life stages, castes, and sexes, particularly in the light of recent and ongoing phylogenomic works. (2) The morphology and phylogenetic relationships of previously described and new fossil taxa, particularly using µ-CT and other image-based digitization methods. (3) The functional morphology (biomechanics) of all body systems across the diversity of ants, and especially in relation to their behavior and ecology. (4) The alpha taxonomy and phylogeny of living and fossil species, leveraging phenomic and genomic digitization methods, from the gold standard of AntWeb photo stacking through massive synchrotron-radiation µ-CT and next-gen sequencing-based approaches.
MNB: What is important for a healthy work environment?
BEB: Understanding, communication, and open-mindedness. We are all different physically and mentally, and we all come from very different places across the globe in terms of culture, assumptions, language, and expectations. As it is impossible to come to work every day feeling positive, there is a need for personal space and a variety of tasks. There is also a need to ask people about how they are doing, what they are doing, and whether planned work or work being done balances across individuals and groups. The foundation is respect, and open discussion shapes the pillars. Focus and drive complete the work. The key is remembering that we are all in this together, whether we are in the same building or distributed across the globe.
Recent Comments