CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 128Insect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research

Optimal cue integration in ants

Open access
Wystrach, Antoine, Mangan, Michael, Webb, Barbara·2015·Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
DOI 10.1098/rspb.2015.1484PMC PMC4614770
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In situations with redundant or competing sensory information, humans have been shown to perform cue integration, weighting different cues according to their certainty in a quantifiably optimal manner. Ants have been shown to merge the directional information available from their path integration (PI) and visual memory, but as yet it is not clear that they do so in a way that reflects the relative certainty of the cues. In this study, we manipulate the variance of the PI home vector by allowing ants ( Cataglyphis velox ) to run different distances and testing their directional choice when the PI vector direction is put in competition with visual memory. Ants show progressively stronger weighting of their PI direction as PI length increases. The weighting is quantitatively predicted by modelling the expected directional variance of home vectors of different lengths and assuming optimal cue integration. However, a subsequent experiment suggests ants may not actually compute an internal estimate of the PI certainty, but are using the PI home vector length as a proxy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2015.1484

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Navigating animals assign more weight to spatial cues that are more salient or more stable and familiar; this is true in both insects and vertebrates.

    “For example, navigating animals assign more weight to spatial cues that are more salient or more stable and familiar; this is true in both insects8–13 and vertebrates3–7,14.”

    From Multimodal cue integration and learning in a neural representation of head direction (2025) · cites this paper as [10]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. [1]Kording KP. 2014. Bayesian statistics: relevant for the brain. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 25, 130–133. ( 10.1016/j.conb.2014.01.003) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  2. [2]Ernst MO, Banks MS. 2002. Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415, 429–433. ( 10.1038/415429a) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  3. [3]Ernst MO. 2006. A Bayesian view on multimodal cue integration. In Human body perception from the inside out, vol. 131 (eds Knoblich G, Thornton IM, Grosjean M, Shiffrar M), pp. 105–131. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. [4]Cheng K, Shettleworth SJ, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ. 2007. Bayesian integration of spatial information. Psychol. Bull. 133, 625–637. ( 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.625) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  5. [5]Wehner R. 2009. The architecture of the desert ant's navigational toolkit (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Myrmecol. News 12, 85–96. [Google Scholar]
  6. [6]Wehner R, Srinivasan MV. 2003. Path integration in insects: biological basis of navigation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  7. [7]Collett M, Chittka L, Collett TS. 2013. Spatial memory in insect navigation. Curr. Biol. 23, R789–R800. ( 10.1016/j.cub.2013.07.020) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  8. [8]Fukushi T, Wehner R. 2004. Navigation in wood ants Formica japonica: context dependent use of landmarks. J. Exp. Biol. 207, 3431–3439. ( 10.1242/jeb.01159) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  9. [9]Collett M. 2012. How navigational guidance systems are combined in a desert ant. Curr. Biol. 22, 927–932. ( 10.1016/j.cub.2012.03.049) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  10. [10]Narendra A, Gourmaud S, Zeil J. 2013. Mapping the navigational knowledge of individually foraging ants, Myrmecia croslandi. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20130683 ( 10.1098/rspb.2013.0683) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  11. [11]Legge ELG, Wystrach A, Spetch ML, Cheng K. 2014. Combining sky and Earth: desert ants (Melophorus bagoti) show weighted integration of celestial and terrestrial cues. J. Exp. Biol. 217, 4159–4166. ( 10.1242/jeb.107862) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  12. [12]Jander R. 1957. Die optische Richtungsorientierung der Roten Waldameise (Formica ruea L.). Z. Vgl. Physiol. 40, 162–238. ( 10.1007/BF00297947) [DOI] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  13. [13]Reid SF, Narendra A, Hemmi JM, Zeil J. 2011. Polarised skylight and the landmark panorama provide night-active bull ants with compass information during route following. J. Exp. Biol. 214, 363–370. ( 10.1242/jeb.049338) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  14. [14]Graham P, Cheng K. 2009. Ants use the panoramic skyline as a visual cue during navigation. Curr. Biol. 19, 935–937. ( 10.1016/j.cub.2009.08.015) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  15. [15]Wystrach A, Beugnon G, Cheng K. 2011. Landmarks or panoramas: what do navigating ants attend to for guidance? Front. Zool. 8, 21 ( 10.1186/1742-9994-8-21) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  16. [16]Cheung A, Zhang S, Stricker C, Srinivasan MV. 2007. Animal navigation: the difficulty of moving in a straight line. Biol. Cybern. 97, 47–61. ( 10.1007/s00422-007-0158-0) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  17. [17]Mangan M, Webb B. 2012. Spontaneous formation of multiple routes in individual desert ants (Cataglyphis velox). Behav. Ecol. 23, 944–954. ( 10.1093/beheco/ars051) [DOI] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  18. [18]Burnham KP, Anderson DR. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media. [Google Scholar]
  19. [19]Batschelet E. 1981. Circular statistics in biology. London, UK: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  20. [20]Wystrach A, Beugnon G, Cheng K. 2012. Ants might use different view-matching strategies on and off the route. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 44–55. ( 10.1242/jeb.059584) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  21. [21]Cheng K, Narendra A, Sommer S, Wehner R. 2009. Traveling in clutter: navigation in the Central Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti. Behav. Process. 80, 261–268. ( 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.10.015) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  22. [22]Merkle T, Wehner R. 2009. How flexible is the systematic search behaviour of desert ants? Anim. Behav. 77, 1051–1056. ( 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.01.006) [DOI] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  23. [23]Wystrach A, Schwarz S, Schultheiss P, Baniel A, Cheng K. 2014. Multiple sources of celestial compass information in the Central Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sensory Neural Behav. Physiol. 200, 591–601. ( 10.1007/s00359-014-0899-x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  24. [24]Vickerstaff RJ, Cheung A. 2010. Which coordinate system for modelling path integration? J. Theor. Biol. 263, 242–361. ( 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.11.021) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  25. [25]Andel D, Wehner R. 2004. Path integration in desert ants, Cataglyphis: how to make a homing ant run away from home. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, 1485–1489. ( 10.1098/rspb.2004.2749) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  26. [26]Kohler M, Wehner R. 2005. Idiosyncratic route-based memories in desert ants, Melophorus bagoti: how do they interact with path-integration vectors? Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 83, 1–12. ( 10.1016/j.nlm.2004.05.011) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  27. [27]Wystrach A, Schwarz S, Schultheiss P, Beugnon G, Cheng K. 2011. Views, landmarks, and routes: how do desert ants negotiate an obstacle course? J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sensory Neural Behav. Physiol. 197, 167–179. ( 10.1007/s00359-010-0597-2) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  28. [28]Schwarz S, Albert L, Wystrach A, Cheng K. 2011. Ocelli contribute to the encoding of celestial compass information in the Australian desert ant Melophorus bagoti. J. Exp. Biol. 214, 901–906. ( 10.1242/jeb.049262) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  29. [29]Zeil J, Narendra A, Stürzl W. 2014. Looking and homing: how displaced ants decide where to go. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130034 ( 10.1098/rstb.2013.0034) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  30. [30]Wehner R. 2003. Desert ant navigation: how miniature brains solve complex tasks. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sensory Neural Behav. Physiol. 189, 579–588. ( 10.1007/s00359-003-0431-1) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  31. [31]Merkle T, Wehner R. 2010. Desert ants use foraging distance to adapt the nest search to the uncertainty of the path integrator. Behav. Ecol. 21, 349–355. ( 10.1093/beheco/arp197) [DOI] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  32. [32]Cheng K, Schultheiss P, Schwarz S, Wystrach A, Wehner R. 2014. Beginnings of a synthetic approach to desert ant navigation. Behav. Process. 102, 51–61. ( 10.1016/j.beproc.2013.10.001) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  33. [33]Ma WJ. 2012. Organizing probabilistic models of perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16, 511–518. ( 10.1016/j.tics.2012.08.010) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  34. [34]Barthelmé S, Mamassian P. 2010. Flexible mechanisms underlie the evaluation of visual confidence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 20 834–20 839. ( 10.1073/pnas.1007704107) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wystrach, A., Mangan, M., & Webb, B.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Mangan, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Publisher
The Royal Society
Published
2015-10-07
Volume
282
Issue
1816
Pages
20151484
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
DOI
10.1098/rspb.2015.1484
PMC
PMC4614770
OpenAlex
W2295336320
Cited by
128
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
7.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
royalsociety.org/journals/ethics-policies/data-sharing-mining/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I014543/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Insect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Keywords
cue integration, path integration, desert ants, visual memory, optimal foraging theory, vector length
MeSH terms
Animals, Ants, Choice Behavior, Cues, Homing Behavior, Visual Perception, Spatial Memory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review