J. Appl. Entomol.

ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION

Increases in crop pests caused by Wasmannia auropunctata in
Solomon Islands subsistence gardens
J. Fasi1, G. Brodie2 & C. Vanderwoude3
1 School of Education, Solomon Islands College of Higher Education, Honiara, Solomon Islands
2 Biological Science Division, School of Biological and Chemical Science, Faculty of Science, Environment and Technology, University of the South
Pacific, Suva, Fiji
3 Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA

Keywords
Cyrtohinus fulvus, hemiptera, little fire ant,taro, Tarophagus, Wasmannia auropunctata
CorrespondenceJohn Fasi (corresponding author), School of
Education, Solomon Islands College of Higher
Education, P O Box R113, Honiara, Solomon
Islands. E-mail: fasi.john@gmail.com
Received: May 21, 2012; accepted: December
5, 2012.
doi: 10.1111/jen.12033

Abstract
The impacts of Wasmannia auropunctata (the little fire ant) on the native
biota and subsistence agriculture in the Solomon Islands are poorly understood. This species was originally introduced as a biological control against
nut-fall bugs (Amblypelta sp.) around 30 years ago and in the intervening
time has spread throughout the Solomon Islands, aided movement of produce and planting material. It is now itself a major pest of coconut, cocoa
and subsistence agriculture. In this study, we show the negative effects ofthis invasive ant on subsistence agriculture in the Solomon Islands. We do
this by (i) assessing the presence of insect pests that develop a mutual
relationship with W. auropunctata on four common subsistence crops; and(ii) measuring the impact of a significant pest (Tarophagus sp.) and its
natural predator the bug Cyrtohinus fulvus, in the presence and absence ofW. auropunctata on taro crops. The existence of insect pests that form amutual relationship with W. auropunctata was measured in a total of 36
gardens of the four subsistence crops. This was conducted through standardized visual searches, plus identification and collecting from randomly
selected plants within the gardens. A number of additional insect pests
causing major problems to subsistence crops have also developed mutual
relationships with W. auropunctata. Infested taro gardens have more
Tarophagus sp. compared with taro plants that are free of the little fire ant.
The presence and abundance of Wasmannia therefore has the potential toinflict considerable crop loss in rural subsistence gardens in the Solomon
Islands.

Introduction
Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger 1863) (the little fireant) is an invasive species alien to the Pacific region(Holway et al. 2002) and is listed among the hundred
worst invaders globally (Lowe et al. 2000). Most
previous studies of this species have focused on its
biology and ecological impacts. For example, W. auropunctata decrease arthropod diversity and are general
predators of vertebrates such as birds and lizards(Allen et al. 1995; Jourdan et al. 2001). They canout-compete prey on native ants (Clark et al. 1982) as
580

well as affect nesting and survival of young birds andreptiles. W. auropunctata cause blinding of dogs andcats (Wetterer 1997; Wetterer and Porter 2003;
Causton et al. 2005; Theron 2005) and decrease theabundance of native lizards in sclerophyll forests of
New Caledonia (Jourdan et al. 2001). This invasive
ant also infests homes and causes disturbance to the
inhabitants. The practice of treating inside the residential structures with dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) to control mosquitoes (Sadasivaiah et al.
2007) also appears to control W. auropunctata frominvading some homes (J. Fasi, personal observations).
J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

In the Solomon Islands, the little fire ant has been
responsible for the gradual blindness of domesticateddogs, cats and birds (Fasi et al. 2009). Cornea trauma
inflicted on many village dogs by W. auropunctata iscommon, and dogs rarely live more than 5 years after
being stung (Wetterer 1997). Data for non-domestic
vertebrates, however, are scarce, and it is more difficult to directly attribute mortality to invasive ant species (Holway et al. 2002).
There are few previous studies describing theimpacts of W. auropunctata on agriculture or crops.
Introduced into Solomon Islands around 1974 (Ikin1984), the little fire ant was widely accepted as a biological control against nut-fall bug (Amblypelta sp) in
coconut and cocoa (Wetterer 2006). Since that time,it has spread across the Solomon Islands, carried byhuman movement and transport of commodities.
In the rural areas in the Solomon Islands, the little
fire ant is associated with stings and discomfort, andsubsistence farmers are often reluctant to work ininfested gardens. These ‘social’ impacts are rarely
included in assessments of damage by agriculturalagencies (Fasi et al. 2009). Compounding these‘social’ impacts, many common crop pests thrive inthe presence of invasive ants, especially hemiptera inwhich ants actively tend for their carbohydrate-richexcretions (Eastwood 2004). For example, honeydew-producing scale insects are greatly increased in
the presence of another invasive ant, Anoplolepis gracilipes (Abbott and Green 2007). In the case of the little fire ant, Le Breton et al. (2002) noted it was awell-known pest of agricultural areas and natural ecosystems in New Caledonia. The association between
the W. auropunctata and crop-damaging hemipterans
was also noted in areas where they were in abundance by Wetterer and Porter (2003).
The actual effect of W. auropunctata on subsistencecrops, however, is yet to be fully understood. The
common understanding is that crops that produce
large quantities of sugary sap are more likely to attract
both honeydew-producing hemipterans and the little
fire ant. Hemipterans would have the benefit of being
protected from their natural predators by these ants
and thus result in increased damage to plants. Mutually beneficial associations such as these may be an
important, previously unquantified factor promoting
the success of some of the major hemipteran pests andthereby playing a major role in crop loss (Helms andVinson 2003). Often, the impacts of these mutualistic
relationships are anecdotal, and little is known about
the real impacts on crop productivity this may cause.
In this study, we measured the effects of this mutualism on crop productivity for common subsistence
J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

garden crops in the rural areas in the Solomon Islands.
We did this by (i) surveying crop pests that may
develop mutual relationship with W. auropunctata;and (ii) assessing the role of W. auropuntata on the
population density of Tarophagus sp, an important pestof taro and its natural predator.
Colocasia esculenta (Taro) is an important subsistencecrop in the Solomon Islands. It provides edible corms
and leaves. The corm is especially important because
it can be stored for later consumption, unlike manyother crops that must be consumed quickly after harvest. Additionally, it has a high cultural value, oftenfeaturing in ceremonial gift-giving ceremonies. Productivity of this crop is affected by two importantcrop-specific pests: Papuana woodlarkiana Montrouzier(the Taro Beetle) and Tarophagus sp. (the Taro Planthopper). Tarophagus sp. damages the edible leaves,
reduces plant vigour and is implicated in the spread of
pathogens and viruses such as alomae and bobone.
These viruses cause wilting and stunted growth inaffected plants (Matthews 2003).
Material and Methods
Study area: Makira Island (San Cristobal)

This study was conducted in the district of Bauro on
the island of Makira (formerly referred to as San Cristobal) in the Solomon Islands. The islands are locatedwithin 12°S of the equator and more than 1500 km
from the nearest continent (Government of Solomon
Islands, 2009). There are six major islands within thearchipelago (fig. 1) with approximately 900 smaller
volcanic islands and coral atolls. Major islands are characterized by steep mountain ranges with dense tropicalforest. The island of Makira is located at 10.60°S
161.85°E. It is 140 km long and between 12 and 40 km
wide with a land area of 3100 sq km and the highest
point above sea level at 1250 m (Allen et al. 2006).
Makira is the fourth largest island of the Solomon
Islands archipelago (Petterson et al. 1998) and has a
wet tropical climate characterized by high humidity
and uniform hot temperatures, which are occasionallytempered by sea breezes. We conducted the study fromJanuary to February and from April to May 2008.
Four study sites were selected: two in villages
infested with W. auropunctata and two in villages thatwere uninfested. Each village was separated by morethan 2 km, ensuring independent sampling locations(fig. 1). The infested villages were located closer tothe coastline and were at a lower elevation than theuninfested villages (approximately 50 m. a.s.l. vs.
approximately 400 m. a.s.l.).
581

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

Fig. 1 Map of Solomon Islands showing
Makira (San Cristobal) in red circle. (Adapted
from: Bourke et al. 2006).

Surveying crop pests that develop mutual relationshipwith Wasmannia auropunctata

Four common subsistence crops, cassava (Manihot
esculenta), sweet potato (Ipomea batatas), taro (Colocasia esculenta) and yam (Dioscorea spp.), were surveyed for crop pests and associations with
W. auropunctata. Within study areas, taro gardens
were grouped into four different locations. Eachlocation was separated by over 2 km. Within eachlocation, taro plots (gardens) were separated byabout 100 m. A total of 56 taro gardens wereselected: half infested with LFA and the other half
free of LFA. Within each taro plot, 25 taro plants
were randomly selected, and standardized visual
identification and recording for Tarophagus sp andits natural enemy C. fulvus was conducted. The sizeof gardens varied considerably from 80 m2 to
322 m2. To allow for equal or similar dimensions
among all the gardens surveyed, the actual sampling area within each garden was standardized toapproximately 80 m2 (8 9 10 m). Following Jourdan et al. (2001) and Lester et al. (2003), we determined the presence or absence of hemipterans(aphids, mealy bug, scale insects or whiteflies)
tended by W. auropunctata, as well as other insects(most of them being crop pests). This was conducted by systematic visual searching for 30-min
duration at each location, identification and collection. A relationship between an ant species andhemipterans was defined as established if the ants582

were observed collecting the exudates from thehemipterans or seen to be congregating aroundthem (Lester et al. 2003).
The results of this survey were tabulated against
the crops they were associated with. Insects wereidentified to genus (species if possible) and common
names assigned using nomenclature provided by
Borror and White (1970) and French (2006), as
well as by cross reference to insect collections heldat the Biology Division, University of the South
Pacific. Pest status was determined using information provided by Borror and White (1970). The
insects that were tended by W. auropunctata werecategorized according to their status as crop pests.
Finally, all the insect species were classified aseither having a known mutualistic relationship with
W. auropunctata, or not, using field notes taken during direct observation.
Assessing a significant pest of Colocasia esculenta and its
natural predator

Measuring the possible impact of W. auropunctata on
subsistence crops was conducted by correlating theabundance of W. auropunctata with those of Tarophagus sp (a pest of taro) and Cyrtohinus fulvus (a natural
predator of Tarophagus sp.) on taro plants. This wasundertaken to determine whether W. auropunctatachanged the relationship or abundance of Tarophagus
sp and C. fulvus, thereby changing rates of phytophagyon the crop.
J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

At each village, seven taro gardens were selected,
each approximately 100 m apart from the others.
These gardens constituted plots. Twenty-five taroplants of approximately equal size were randomly
selected within each garden for measuring insectabundance. On each plant the number of W. auropunctata, Tarophagus sp. and C. fulvus was counted.
An independent sample t-test using SPSS version 16(SPSS, Inc., 2009, Chicago, IL) was conducted
to determine whether any significant differences
between abundances existed.
Results
Relationships between the little fire ant and otherinsects

Twenty different insect species were found on thefour subsistence crops studied (table 1). The insect
assemblages on each crop were different. Eleven crop
pests were recorded on potato, six on yam and five on
cassava and taro (table 1). The majority of insect species found overall were from the order Hemiptera. Of
the twenty insect species found, eight were had aputative mutualism with W. auropunctata (table 2).
All eight of these insects are recognized crop pests. Six
insects (Bemisia sp., Planococcus citri, Planococcus dioscoreae, 2 species of Aleurodicus sp. and Tarophagus sp.)
Table 1 Common insects found in different subsistence crops at lowland garden sites
Insect species

Order

Common nameCrop

Atractomorpha sp
Valanga sp
Cyrtohinus fulvus
Riptortus sp
Podisus maculiventris
Jalysus wickhami
Bemisia sp
Planococcus citri
Aleurodicus sp
Leptoglossus phyllopus
Tarophagus sp
Planococcus dioscoreae
Cyclas formicarius
Hippodamia sp
Henosepilachna sp
Otiorhynchus sp
Aspidomorpha sp
Sanninoidea sp
Spodoptera litura
Hippotion celerio

Orthoptera
Orthoptera
Heteroptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Lepidoptera
Lepidoptera
Lepidoptera

Grasshopper
Grasshopper
Leafhopper
Pod-sucking bug
Spine soldier bug
Stilt bug
Whitefly
Mealybug
WhiteflyLeaf-footed bug
Planthopper
Mealybug
Sweet potato weevil
Ladybird
Ladybird
Snout beetle
Tortoise beetle
Tree borer
Cluster worm
Taro hornworm

P, Y
P, Y
T
P
P
P, Y
P
C, T, Y
C, Y
C
T
Y
P
P
P
P
P
C
C, T
T

P, potato; C, cassava; T, taro; Y, yam.

J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbHare hemipterans, and two (Spodoptera sp. and Hippotion sp.) are lepidopterans in the larval stage. A Bemisia
sp. was also found on potato gardens; Planococcus
citri, Aleurodicus sp. and Spodoptera sp. were found on
cassava; Tarophagus sp., Planococcus citri, Spodoptera sp.
and Hippotion sp were found on taro; and Planococcus
citri, Planococcus dioscoreae and Aleurodicus sp were
found on yam. Other serious crop pests did not exhibit
ant mutualism including the sweet potato weevil(Cyclas formicarius) and two species of unidentified
grasshopper (table 2). In total, ten different insect
species found on potato did not appear to be tended
by ants. This compares with only two in each of theother three crops (table 1). In contrast, only one anttended insect species was observed in potato crops
compared with three in cassava crops, four in taro
crops and three in yam crops (table 2).
Effect of Wasmannia auropunctata on abundance ofTarophagus sp and Cyrtohinus fulvus

We selected one plant pest (Tarophagus sp.) and its
natural predator Cyrtohinus fulvus for closer study. A
mean of 50.0 (SE  4) Tarophagus sp. adults wererecorded per taro plant in W. auropounctata-infested
gardens. This was compared with only 18.0  1
adults in uninfested gardens (t(54) = 7.1, P < 0.05). In
contrast, the mean number of C. fulvus per plant was
similar in infested gardens (3.5  0.4 per plantcompared with 4.2  0.3 in uninfested gardens)(fig. 2). This difference was not statistically different(t(54) = 1.61, P = 0.11).
Discussion
Relationship between Wasmannia auropunctata andother insects

In this study, six hemipteran species exhibited mutual
relationships with W. auropunctata on four subsistencecrops. According to Styrsky and Eubanks (2007), such
relationships are an example of food-for-protection
mutualism and are common between ants (Formicidae) and honeydew-producing insects in the hemipteran suborders Sternorrhyncha (particularly theaphids, whiteflies, scales and mealy bugs) and Auchenorrhyncha (particularly the leafhoppers). The six
ant-tended hemipteran species in this study are allcommon crop pests (French 2006) and are from thetwo hemipteran suborders listed above.
This mutualistic behaviour is common and widespread in agricultural production systems (Way andKhoo 1992). The presence of a large number of host583

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

Crops/Insect species
PotatoCyclas formicarius
Hippodamia sp
Henosepilachna sp
Otiorhynchus sp
Aspidomorpha sp
Riptortus sp
Podisus maculiventris
Jalysus wickhami
Bemisia sp
Atractomorpha sp
Valanga sp
Cassava
Planococcus citri
Aleurodicus sp
Leptoglossus phyllopus
Sanninoidea sp
Spodoptera litura
Taro
Tarophagus sp
Planococcus citri
Cyrtohinus fulvus
Valanga sp
Spodoptera litura
Hippotion celerio
Yam
Planococcus citri
Planococcus dioscoreae
Jalysus wickhami
Aleurodicus sp
Atractomorpha sp

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

Observed
relationship

Order

Common name

Pest Status

Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Orthoptera
Orthoptera

Sweet potato weevil
Ladybird
Ladybird
Snout beetle
Tortoise beetle
Pod-sucking bug
Spine soldier bug
Stilt bug
WhiteflyGrasshopper
Grasshopper

+

+
+
+

+

Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Lepidoptera
Lepidoptera

Mealybug
WhiteflyLeaf-footed bug
Tree borer
Cluster worm

+
+
+
+
+

+
+

Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Orthoptera
Lepidoptera
Lepidoptera

Planthopper
Mealybug
Leafhopper
Grasshopper
Cluster worm
Taro hornworm

+
+

+
+

+
+
+

+
+

Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Hemiptera
Orthoptera

Mealybug
Mealybug
Stilt bug
WhiteflyGrasshopper

+
+
+
+
+

Table 2 Insects observed in the lowland
gardens

+
+
+
+

+

+
+
+

(+), relationship observed with Wasmannia auropunctata; ( ), relationship not observed with
W. auropunctata; (+), insect known to cause damage to crops; ( ), insect not documented tocause damage to crops.

plants allows an abundance of crop pest species toflourish, and the proximity to human structures provides a vector for the movement of invasive ants into
cropping systems (Rowles and Silverman 2009). In thefour crops surveyed at the lowland sites, crop damage
appeared most severe on young potato plants, cassava
plants and the young leaves of taro and yam plants.
Some non-hemipteran insects were also tended by
W. auropunctata. For example, two unidentified Lepidoptera caterpillar species collected from taro and cassava plants were seen with several W. auropunctata
swarming around them as they were feeding. Myrmecophily is common in lepidoptera (Holldobler andWilson 1990). The caterpillars may secrete exudates
that attract W. auropunctata (Marshall 1999), and attimes, in return, the ants protect the caterpillars fromnatural enemies such as wasps (Devries 1991). The
major predators of the two species of caterpillar found584

Fig. 2 Mean abundance of Tarophagus sp. and C. fulvus per taro plant
sampled.
= uninfested taro plants,= infested taro plants.

■■

J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

in taro and cassava according to Hinckley (1964) and
Vargo et al. (1993) are two species of wasp Apanteles
sp. and Trichogramma sp. Protection of lepidopteranlarvae from such wasps has been previously observed
by Devries (1991). In other cases, ants may predateon the larvae rather than protect them (Freitas andOliveira 1992). While current knowledge on ant–
insect relationships focuses primarily on hemipteraninsects (Lester et al. 2003; Styrsky and Eubanks2007), similar relationships with lepidopteran species
may also exist, with associated losses in crop productivity. Although it appears the behaviour we observedin this case was mutualistic, further study is needed toconfirm this.
Wasmannia auropunctata also congregated in large
numbers on the leaves of taro, yam and potato beinggrazed by grasshoppers (Atractomorpha sp. and Valangasp.). It is possible that these phytophagous insects
damaged the leaf through feeding activity, thus
exposing the sugary sap of the plant. This may haveattracted W. auropunctata to these leaves and allowed
them easier access to the same resources. This behaviour is neither mutualistic nor predatory, but simply
convenient for the ants that would consume the same
sources of carbohydrates as the herbivores.
Being both ground and arboreal dwelling, W. auropunctata has a three-dimensional foraging strategy andforage for food on leaf litter on the garden floor andalso at higher levels on parts of the crop (Jourdan
1997; Vanderwoude et al. 2010). It is very likely thatwithin a crop, W. auropunctata may be tending honeydew-producing hemipteran pests at all levels including the stem, leaves, flowers and roots. Hence, thelevel of insect load being tended by W. auropunctata
could be much higher than was estimated by theobservations taken in this study.
There is sufficient evidence to show that mutualistic relationships between W. auropunctata and honeydew-producing hemipterans can result in greatly
increased densities of these crop pests. This willclearly lead to increased yield losses for crop plants
such as those observed in other studies (Delabie
2001; Holway et al. 2002). Accurate determinationof insect pests that have mutualistic relationships
with W. auropunctata in subsistence garden crops isimportant because it provides a better understanding of (i) pest outbreak dynamics; and (ii) causes ofhigh densities of certain insect pests on subsistencecrops. Studies of mutualism dynamics of other invasive ant species are reported more frequently(Buckley 1987; Holway et al. 2002; Renault et al.
2005), and some of these ant species are also common in many food gardens in the Bauro area.
J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

Additional studies of the relationships between
W. auropunctata and other plant pests, particularly
for aphids, mealy bug and scale insects, may reveal
similar relationships affecting crop health.
Effect of Wasmannia auropunctata on abundance ofTarophagus sp and Cyrtohinus fulvus

Cyrtohinus fulvus is a mirid bug that is found almost
exclusively on taro plants (Colocasia esculenta) andother taro species (Matthews 2003). This relationshipexists because C. fulvus feeds on the eggs of Tarophagussp., a pest that is almost exclusively found on taroplants (Waterhouse and Norris 1987). On infested
taro plants, the Tarophagus sp. and their eggs appeared
to be protected from C. fulvus by W. auropunctata;
however, we did not directly observe specific interactions between these two species. This protection disrupts the normal predator–prey relationship and led
to the increase in pest densities we observed.
Based on similar studies (Eubanks 2001; Moreiraand Del-Claro 2005), we predicted that the abundance of Tarophagus sp. in this study would be significantly higher on taro plants infested with
W. auropunctata. This hypothesis proved to be correct
as population densities of Tarophagus sp. were substantially greater where W. auropunctata were present.
Contrary to other studies that attribute reduction insurvival and abundance of hemipteran predators to
ant-hemipteran mutualisms (Tedders et al. 1990;
Stechmann et al. 1996; Kaplan and Eubanks 2002;
Renault et al. 2005), this study did not show the same
results for C. fulvus. Predator abundance, as determined by counts of C. fulvus, was not lower in infested
gardens (3.5 vs. 4.3 mean individuals per plant),
despite three times greater prey availability. Population estimates were unchanged, but the proportion of
C. fulvus to Tarophagus sp was substantially lower
when W. auropunctata were tending Tarophagus. The
primary food source for C. fulvus is Tarophagus eggs,
and it could be expected there would be more eggs
with a higher Tarophagus population. Therefore, animbalance between predator and prey availability
existed.
Although the question of whether W. auropunctata
alters C. fulvus abundance remains unanswered, they
appeared to be directly responsible for a substantial
increase in Tarophagus sp. on taro plants. This may be
due to W. auropunctata protecting Tarophagus sp. fromits predator (C. fulvus) or by stimulating Tarophagus sp.
feeding rate, fecundity and dispersal as found in otherant mutualisms (Bristow 1983; Buckley 1987; Delabie
2001; Billick and Tonkel 2003). Consequently,
585

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

W. auropunctata may exacerbate the negative effects ofhoneydew-producing hemipterans on taro plants,
which include stunted growth, reduced leaf area andthe introduction of plant pathogens, all of which
can decrease taro plant productivity (Beattie 1985;
Delabie 2001).
Tarophagus sp. benefit from the presence and attendance of W. auropunctata. Del-Claro and Oliveira(2000) also demonstrated increased hemipteran productivity in the presence of tending ants. The mechanism leading to increased abundance is not clear andmay be one or a combination of interference, predation or aggressive defence that prevents C. fulvus predation, thus allowing an increase in Tarophagus sp
density and resulting crop damage. Regardless of theexact mechanism(s) involved, the presence and abundance of W. auropunctata on taro plants appears toincrease Tarophagus abundance.
Decreases in crop productivity directly impact subsistence farmers whose primary purpose for cropping
is to supply food to the family or the community on a
day-to-day basis. Taro is a particularly important staple in the Solomon Islands, as it is often the most
readily available and abundant source of complex carbohydrates. Additionally, it is one of the few cropsthat can be stored and consumed at a later time.
Refrigeration and other forms of food preservation areusually not available so most other food items have tobe grown and harvested on a daily basis. A substantial
increase in the abundance of the primary crop pest of
taro may therefore limit the sustainable production ofthis important crop.
As W. auropunctata spread further through the Pacific region, crop losses in subsistence gardens will
become more common and is expected to be one of
the major impacts on island communities. Once established, many communities will be unable to manage
this pest because access to appropriate treatment
methods is not readily available. The best strategy
should be based on prevention and include rigorous
biosecurity measures, early detection surveillance,
good awareness and outreach programs.
Conclusion
This study documents common invertebrates foundon four subsistence crops in the rural areas in the Solomon Islands that harbour little fire ants. It identifies
a number of insects (many of which are pest species)that form mutualistic relationships with W. auropunctata and highlights the association of W. auropunctata
with a common pest Tarophagus sp. in the important
subsistence crop C. esculenta. This relationship results
586

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

in an increased population density of Tarophagus sp.,and this relationship appears to reduce the effectiveness of its natural predators against the pest which inturn reduces crop fitness and yield.
Acknowledgements
This study was made possible through funding and support from the following people and organizations
which we wish to thank: Research Fund from the Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji. National Training
Unit, Ministry of Education and Human Resources
Development, Honiara, Solomon Islands. Solomon
Islands College of Higher Education, Honiara, Solomon
Islands. The Communities and Farmers of Bauro District, Makira Province, Solomon Islands, who allowed
us to carry out the study on the land and crops.
References
Abbott KL, Green PT, 2007. Collapse of an ant–scalemutualism in rainforest on Christmas Island. Oikos 116,
1238–1246.
Allen CR, Lutz SR, Demarais S, 1995. Red imported Fire
ants impacts on Northern Bobwhite populations. Ecol.
Appl. 5, 632–638.
Allen MG, Bourke RM, Evans BR, Iramu E, Maemouri RK,
Mullen BF, Pollard AA, Wairiu M, Watoto C, Zotalis S,
2006. Solomon Islands Smallholder Agriculture Study.
Vol. 4: Literature Review: A Brief National Assessmentof the Agriculture Sector. http://www.ausaid.gov.au/
Publications/Documents/solomon_study_vol5.pdf[accessed on December 2012].
Beattie AJ, 1985. The evolutionary ecology of ant-plantmutualisms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK.
Billick I, Tonkel K, 2003. The relative importance of spatial
vs. temporal variability in generating a conditional
mutualism. Ecology 84, 289–295.
Borror DJ, White RE, 1970. A field guide to insects.
Houghton Mifflin Company, USA.
Bourke RM, McGregor A, Allen GM, Evans BR, Mullen
BF, Pollard AA, Wairiu M, Zotalis S, 2006. Solomon
Islands smallholder agriculture study. Commonwealthof Australia, Canberra.
Bristow CM, 1983. Treehoppers transfer parental care toants: a new benefit of mutualism. Science 220, 532–533.
Buckley RC, 1987. Interactions involving plants, homoptera and ants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18, 111–135.
Causton CE, Sevilla CR, Porter SD, 2005. Eradication of
the Little Fire Ant, Wasmannia auropunctata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), from Marchena Island, Galapagos: onthe edge of success. Fla. Entomol. 88, 159–168.

J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

Clark DB, Guayasamin C, Pazmino O, Donoso C, Villacis Y,
1982. The tramp ant Wasmannia auropunctata: autecology
and effects on ant diversity on Santa Cruz Island,
Galapagos. Biotropica 14, 196–207.
Delabie JHC, 2001. Trophobiosis between Formicidae andHemiptera (Sternorrhyncha and Auchenorrhyncha): an
overview. Neotrop. Entomol. 30, 501–516.
Del-Claro K, Oliveira PS, 2000. Conditional outcomes in aneotropical treehopper – ant association: temporal andspecies – specific variation in ant protection and homopteran fecundity. Oecologia 124, 156–165.
Devries PJ, 1991. Mutualism between Thisbe irenea butterflies and ants, and the role of ant ecology in the evolutionof larval-ant associations. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 43, 179–195.
Eastwood R, 2004. Successive replacement of tending ant
species at aggregations of scale insects (Hemiptera: Margarodidae and Eriococcidae) on Eucalyptus in south-east
Queensland. Aust. J. Entomol. 43, 1–4.
Eubanks MD, 2001. Estimates of the direct and indirect
effects of red imported fire ants on biological control infield crops. Biol. Control 21, 35–43.
Fasi J, Brodie G, Markwell T, 2009. Quantifying the dominance of the little fire ant (Wasmannia auropunctata) andits effect on crops in the Solomon Islands. Proceedings
from the Pacific Science Inter-congress, Tahiti, 2nd – 6th
March, 2009.
Freitas AVL, Oliveira PS, 1992. Biology and behavior of
the neotropical butterfly Eunica bechina (Nymphalidae)
with special reference to larval defence against ant predation. J. Res. Lep. 31, 1–11.
French BR, 2006. Insect Pests of Food Plants of Papua New
Guinea: A compendium. Papua New Guniea. http://
www.foodplantsinternational.com [accessed on March2011].
Helms KR, Vinson SB, 2003. Apparent facilitation of aninvasive mealybug by an invasive ant. Insectes Soc. 50,
403–404.
Hinckley DA, 1964. Ecological notes on the larvae of somepyraloid moths in Fiji. Pac. Insects 6, 234–241.
Holldobler B, Wilson EO, 1990. The ants. Springer-Verlag,
USA.
Holway DA, Lach L, Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND, Case TJ, 2002.
The causes and consequences of ant invasions. Annu.
Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 181–233.
Ikin R, 1984. Cocoa tree-ant. Quarterly Newsletter. FAO.
Asia Pacific Plant Protection Commission 27: 8.
Jourdan H, 1997. Threats on Pacific islands: the spread of
the tramp ant Wasmannia auropunctata (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae). Pac. Cons. Biol. 3, 61–64.
Jourdan H, Sadlier RA, Bauer AM, 2001. Little fire ant
invasion (Wasmannia auropunctata) as a threat to New
Caledonia lizards: evidence from a sclerophyll forest(Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 38, 283–301.
Kaplan I, Eubanks MD, 2002. Disruption of cotton aphid(Homoptera: Aphididae) - natural enemy dynamics by

J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

red imported fire ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Environ. Entomol. 31, 1175–1183.
Le Breton J, Chazeau J, Dejean A, 2002. Field experiments
to assess the use of repellent substances by Wasmannia
auropunctata (Formicidae: Myrmicinae) during food
exploitation. Sociobiology 20, 437–442.
Lester JP, Baring CW, Longson CG, Hartley S, 2003.
Argentine and other ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)
in New Zealand horticultural ecosystem: distribution,
hemipteran hosts and review. New Zeal. Entomol. 26,
79–89.
Lowe SM, Browne S, Boudjelas S, De Poorter M, 2000.
100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species: a Selection from the Global Invasive Species Database. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN),
Auckland, New Zealand.
Marshall K, 1999. Eunica bechina (Nymphalidae): biology,
behavior, and larval defense. www.colostate.edu[accessed on May 2011].
Matthews PJ, 2003. Taro planthoppers (Tarophagus sp.) in
Australia and the origins of taro (Colocasia esculenta) in
Oceania. Archaeol. Ocean. 38, 192–202.
Moreira VSS, Del-Claro K, 2005. The outcomes of an
ant–treehopper association on Solanum lycocarpum St.
Hill: increased membracid fecundity and reduced
damage by chewing herbivores. Neotrop. Entomol.
34, 881–887.
Petterson MG, Magu R, Mason A, Mahoa H, Tolia D,
Neal CR, Mahoney JJ, 1998. A first geological map ofMakira, Solomon Islands: Stratigraphy and Tectonic
implications. SOPAC Technical Bulletin 11. PacificMinerals in the New Millennium – The Jackson Lum
Volume (p 145 – 162).
Renault CK, Buffa LM, Delfino MA, 2005. An aphid-ant
interaction: effects on different trophic levels. Ecol. Res.
20, 71–74.
Rowles AD, Silverman J, 2009. Carbohydrate supply limits
invasion of natural communities by Argentine ants. Oecologia 161, 161–171, www.springlink.com/content/b7632131011k530/ DOI: 10.1007/s00442-009-1368z.
Sadasivaiah S, Tozan Y, Breman JG, 2007. Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) for indoor residual spraying in
Africa: how can it be used for malaria control. Am. J.
Trop. Med. Hyg. 77, 249–263.
Stechmann DH, V€
olkl W, Stary P, 1996. Ant-attendance asa critical factor in the biological control of the banana
aphid Pentalonia nigronervosa Coq. (Hom. Aphididae) in
Oceania. J. Appl. Entomol. 120, 119–123.
Styrsky DJ, Eubanks DJ, 2007. Ecological consequences ofinteractions between ants and honey-producing insects.
Proc. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci 274, 151–164.
Tedders WL, Reilly CC, Wood BW, Morrison RK, Lofgren
CS, 1990. Behavior of Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera:
Formicidae) in pecan orchards. Environ. Entomol. 19,
44–53.

587

Crop losses caused by the Little Fire Ant

Theron L, 2005. Hypothese d’une keratopathie liee a Wasmannia auropunctata, le modele polynesien. Masters thesis. University de Liege.
Vanderwoude C, Onuma K, Reimer N, 2010. Eradicating
Wasmannia auropunctata (hymenoptera: formicidae) from
Maui, Hawaii: The use of combination treatments tocontrol an arboreal invasive ant. Proc. Hawaii. Entomol.
Soc. 42, 23–31.
Vargo AM, Ali L, Fruen K, Sworts V, Fa’aumu S, 1993. The
success of natural enemies in controlling introduced
pests in American Samoa. Micronesica 4, 69–77.
Waterhouse DF, Norris KR, 1987. Biological control: Pacific prospects. Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research. Inkata Press, Melbourne.

588

F. John, G. Brodie and C. Vanderwoude

Way MJ, Khoo KC, 1992. Role of ants in pest management. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37, 479–503.
Wetterer JK, 1997. Alien ants of the Pacific islands. Aliens
6, 3–4.
Wetterer JK, 2006. Wasmannia auropunctata (insect): Detailof this species in Solomon Islands. Global Invasive Database. http://www.issg.org/database/species/distribution[accessed May 2011].
Wetterer JK, Porter SD, 2003. The little fire ant Wasmannia
auropunctata: distribution, impact and control. Sociobiology 42, 1–41.

J. Appl. Entomol. 137 (2013) 580–588 © 2013 Blackwell Verlag, GmbH