Nestmate Recognition in Social Wasps (Polistes, Hymenoptera: Vespidae)

R. Jason Bishop


Abstract
	The more charismatic fauna of the animal kingdom are not alone when it comes 
to the need to discriminate between kin and non-kin individuals.  Insects also face 
this dilemma.  The ability to discriminate between nestmate and non-nestmate kin 
among social wasps can mean the difference between successful propagation and 
usurpation of colony resources.  This paper reviews of previously studied aspects of 
kin recognition and employs the findings of prominent scientists in the field.  The 
phenomenon is well studied as there is a need to learn how and why species identify 
their own kind.  There are several issues which need to be covered when one 
considers kin recognition.  First, a working definition of kin recognition is needed 
so as to be able to identify a given behavior as such.  The behavior then needs to 
be identified as it is observed in social wasps.  Next, it is useful to know the 
mechanisms of kin recognition.  The mechanism of kin recognition in social wasps is 
chemical in nature.  The adaptations of the behavior are also discussed.  The 
adaptations of importance to social wasps involved in nestmate recognition are 
primarily centered around the individuals utilizing the behavior as well as those 
individuals subjected to recognition activities.  The significance of recognition in 
each arena will also be discussed.  Nestmate recognition is vitally important to the 
success of a social wasp colony.  Improper identification may have dramatic 
ramifications.  Specific examples are presented for nestmate and non-nestmate 
recognition in social wasps, (Hymenoptera: Vespidae) with special attention paid to 
Polistes fuscatus.  Examples from other Polistes  species are included.  

Key words:  Polistes, Hymenoptera, Vespidae, nestmate recognition, social wasps

Introduction

	Studies show that animal species have remarkable capacities to recognize their 
own kind (Grafen 1990).  Numerous studies have been done on the behavior 
demonstrating the wide array of mechanisms used and responses elicited by either 
positive or negative encounters.  Eusocial insects, particularly the social wasps, 
provide an ideal arena for the study of nestmate recognition.  Social wasps of the  
genus Polistes  can occur in large numbers as they tend build combs in aggregations 
(Pfennig 1990).  In this context researchers have available interactions between 
nestmates, non-nestmates, kin, and non-kin, and the perfect natural setting in which 
to observe recognition and discrimination behaviors.  Gamboa (1986) provided an 
extensive model review of nestmate recognition in social wasps.

A Definition of Kin Recognition

	There is some disagreement in the literature as to what exactly constitutes 
kin recognition.  Grafen (1990) defines the phenomenon as 'a system whose use and 
function is to assess the kinship of conspecifics.' Many feel his definition is too 
restrictive (Stuart 1991; Gamboa 1991).  According to Grafen (1990) all systems of 
kin recognition involve only genetically bases cues, implying that recognition of 
groups or individuals based on other available cues do not serve to discriminate kin 
from non-kin.  Gamboa (1991) assesses this definition to be more linked to kin 
selection than recognition.  Group and individual systems of recognition should be 
considered systems of kin recognition provided that the groups or individuals being 
scrutinized are consistently kin (Stuart 1991).  Stuart goes on even further to 
discern nestmate recognition in social wasps as actually being a less highly evolved 
form of kin recognition (Stuart 1991).  This contention is based on the notion that 
nestmate recognition in social insects often involves a group recognition mechanism 
and integrates genetic and environmental cues which function as forms of kin 
recognition.  Grafen (1990) excludes such systems from consideration.  
	In this paper the term 'nestmate' recognition will be used as this is how it 
is most commonly seen in the literature.  For the purposes of this paper nestmate 
recognition is to be broadly defined as the differential treatment of conspecifics 
according to their nest of origin (Gamboa (1986).
	In the literature, nestmate recognition activities are primarily identified as 
values of tolerance.  In the studies which looked at mechanisms of nestmate 
recognition researchers consistently measured tolerance among members on the nest as 
well as individuals introduced to the nest.  Individuals recognized as nestmates 
were not only more spatially tolerated, but were also preferentially involved in 
cooperative nest building activities (Gamboa 1986).  Non-nestmates, recognized to be 
harmful intruders were not tolerated on the nest. 

Mechanisms of Nestmate Recognition

Expression, Perception, and Action

	Gamboa (1986) suggests that a useful definition of nestmate recognition 
consists of two distinct components: (1) expression of a recognition cue and  (2) 
perception of that cue.  He later amended this definition to include a third 
distinct component which he termed the 'action' component (Gamboa 1988).  The 
expression component not only involves the nature and production of the recognition 
cue, but also includes the acquisition of cues used in the identification of kin 
(Gamboa 1986).  The perception component involves the development of a template of 
the cue, the processing of that cue once perceived and the algorithm used to match a 
perceived cue with the template (Gamboa 1986).  Finally, the action component refers 
to the action taken by an individual once the recognition cue has been assessed 
based on its similarity to its template (Gamboa 1986).
	It is well known that the recognition cues expressed, perceived, and acted 
upon among members of the order Hymenoptera are chemical in nature (Hepper 1991).  
Specifically, behavioral studies of the paper wasp, Polistes fuscatus, have 
established that nestmate recognition is based on chemoreception (Espelie 1994).  
Furthermore, recent studies have shown the chemical cues used by Polistes  metricus  
to manifest themselves in the form of cuticular hydrocarbons (Singer 1992; Espelie 
1994).  In fact, cuticular hydrocarbons have been shown to be the basis of 
chemoreception in other Polistes  species including P. fuscatus  (Espelie 1994) and  
P. annularis  (Espelie 1990).

Acquisition  

	The acquisition of recognition odors is a critical element of the expression 
component of nestmate recognition as it has been defined.  Gamboa et al. (1986) 
determined that the recognition odor has a significant environmental origin.  Later 
surveys gave a slight indication that the odors may have a heritable component but 
this facet of nestmate recognition in the social wasps is poorly studied.  On the 
other hand, the environmental origin of the recognition odors has been greatly 
scrutinized.  It is now known that prior exposure to the nest is required for gynes 
in Polistes  in order for recognition to occur (Shellman 1982).  This phenomenon was 
evidenced in the observation that gynes isolated from their natal nest immediately 
following emergence failed to recognize their nestmates (Shellman 1982).  The amount 
of time newly emerged adults spend on the nest directly after emergence is also 
important to the acquisition of the odors.  Pfennig (1983b) showed the learning of 
recognition cues to be very rapid.  Recognition cues are in fact learned in the 
adult stage and can be learned in as little as one after of emergence (Pfennig 
1983a).  Pfennig (1983a) also determined that recognition cues were not learned from 
other adults or the emerged adults themselves, rather the odors were learned from 
the natal nest and/or brood within the nest
	An understanding of the acquisition of recognition odors now gives one insight 
into the expression as well as perception component of nestmate recognition.  
Expression of the chemical cue now seems to be a simple "wearing"  of the odor which 
has been previously shown to be a cuticular hydrocarbon acquired in the natal nest.  
Perception of the cue can now be said to be a matter of first learning the odor from 
the natal nest after emergence followed by a recognition of said odor on and 
encountered individual (Gamboa 1986a, Pfennig 1983a).  The action component of 
nestmate recognition is the critical step for social wasps as it details which 
individuals recognize what, as well as the results of recognition, whether they be 
positive or negative.  The action component is identified by the adaptations of 
nestmate recognition as they appear in social wasps.

Adaptations of Nestmate Recognition

	At this point it would be useful to employ a change in terminology.  As one 
discusses the adaptations of the behavior at hand it might prove more useful to 
qualify observed actions as discriminations rather than recognitions.  Although the 
literature does not explicitly differentiate the two, in fact the two are often used 
interchangeably, it is my estimation that the term 'discrimination' is more 
appropriate in the context of application.
	Now that the behavior has been observed and its mechanisms determined there 
only remains the matter of what use this behavior of nestmate discrimination is to 
the social wasps.  One can easily determine the benefits of recognizing the origin 
of an individual making an appearance on a nest.  It would not be difficult to 
realize the importance of quickly recognizing potential predators, particularly if 
said predator is of another order, family, or genus.  The question here is what good 
it does for the social wasps to discriminate among conspecifics.  It has been well 
documented that nestmate discrimination in social wasps occurs among spring 
foundresses (Ross 1981), aunts and nieces (Bura 1994), workers (Pfennig 1990), and 
males (Ryan 1986).  Additionally, foundresses of P. fuscatus  can discriminate kin 
from non-kin brood (Klahn 1983).  The following is a review of the evidence for the 
above mentioned recognition abilities along with a discussion of the implications of 
these actions.

Spring Foundresses

	In a study involving foundresses of Polistes metricus  Ross (1981) determined 
that overwintered P. metricus  gynes have the ability to distinguish former 
nestmates (probably sisters) as well as to collaborate with them in nesting efforts.  
Nestmates were found to be more tolerant of each other than were non-nestmates.  
Results from this study also revealed that foundresses may not have to overwinter 
together in order to retain recognition abilities but do require a period of 
interaction before accepting each other's presence.  Ross did not speculate on any 
possible benefits of the ability to discriminate among spring foundresses, however 
the action does seem to facilitate associations among sisters.  Nestmates spent 
significantly less time engaged in agonistic behaviors than did non-nestmates 
thereby allowing more productive nest constructing activities (Ross 1981).

Aunts and Nieces

	Bura (1994) determined that the relatedness, as well as the caste, of 
interactants plays a role in the tolerance of non-nestmate intruders in a study 
involving P. fuscatus  gynes.  This was evidenced by the observation that aunts who 
were queens were less tolerant of intruders than were their nieces.  Fishwild and 
Gamboa (1992) made similar observations.  The hypothesis is that queens require a 
better match for acceptance than do workers as queens may incur more negative 
fitness consequences for accepting non-nestmates than would workers (Bura 1994).  
Conspecific intruders kill and/or replace queens, not workers.  Proficient 
recognition by queens (presumably aunts) then becomes critical to the propagation of 
her genes as workers (presumably nieces) do not serve in an adequate recognition 
capacity.

Workers

	Because of the fact that female Polistes  are strongly philopatric, nests tend 
to occur within 10 m of the location of their parental nest from the previous year 
and usually occur in aggregations (Pfennig 1990).  In this context there is 
opportunity for interaction between workers from neighboring nests.  Pfennig (1990) 
examined such interactions involving P. exclamans  inhabiting a dense aggregation.  
This study reveals that these wasps can not only discriminate nestmates from non-
nestmates but can also discriminate among workers from their own nest and foreign 
nests as well as workers from nearby and more distant nests.  Much information can 
be gleaned from these interactions.  Wasps seem to gain information on which nests 
to aid and which nests to rob (Pfennig 1990).  Pfennig proposes that these findings 
support the notion that all conspecifics and nests occurring beyond a certain 
distance are treated a foreign.
	Pfennig's study also shows how wasps treat orphaned workers from other 
colonies.  If an orphaned worker is allowed to join the nest the benefits could be 
far reaching.  The addition of a worker could aid in the foraging and defense 
abilities of the nest.  On the other hand, acceptance of a worker into the nest 
could result in the loss of brood as the intruder may be a mere thief, robbing the 
colony of mature larvae for use as food in its own nest (Pfennig 1990).  
	Conspecific usurpation pressures are intense in related species P. fuscatus  
(Gamboa 1992)and P. metricus  (Gamboa 1978).  It would be reasonable to assume that 
many of the same pressures are operating among P. exclamans .  Although the 
usurpation pressures in the prior two species tend to occur during preworker stages, 
it is clear that a poor decision in discrimination could be followed by a nest 
containing few advanced larvae in all three, particularly P. exclamans (Pfennig 
1990).  

Males

	Although the phenomenon is poorly documented and the significance of the 
interaction is unknown (Gamboa 1986), male P. fuscatus  have been shown to recognize 
male nestmates (Shellman-Reeve 1985).
	A recognition ability is also seen between gynes and male P. fuscatus  (Ryan 
1986).  Again, the phenomenon is poorly documented and findings are unclear as to 
the significance of male/female recognition abilities.  Experimental results do 
document nestmate recognition between males and gynes but do not indicate whether 
males, gynes, or both males and gynes have the ability to recognize nestmates of the 
opposite sex (Ryan 1986).  Implications of mate selection through recognition are 
sketchy, but there is evidence from other Hymenoptera of negative fitness 
consequences of inbreeding (Ryan 1986).

Kin and Non-kin Brood

	Colony-founding Polistes fuscatus  queens have been shown to have the ability 
to discriminate between brood-filled combs of their sisters and those of less 
closely related females (Klahn 1983).  The recognition of related brood combs has 
been connected with cooperative colony-founding associations among sisters (Pardi 
1948).  Such associations serve to better the fitness and survival of the broods by 
having more adults around to defend and forage for the combs.  The recognition of 
foreign brood may have even more dramatic effects.  A female recognizing a brood 
comb of a single foundress has a great opportunity for usurpation.  Older brood are 
spared and, upon eclosion, are exploited by the usurper to tend her own brood (Klahn 
1983).  Younger brood are destroyed, yielding three possible advantages to the 
usurper:  1) cells are emptied of resident larvae and filled with her own eggs, 2) 
competitor's genes are removed, and 3) brood may be eaten by herself or used as food 
for her own offspring (Klahn 1983).  In any light, the ability to discriminate kin 
from non-kin brood has importance significance to the social Polistes . 

Final Comments

	Nestmate recognition in social insects has been greatly studied in the past  
decade and a half, however there remain many issues that are either unresolved or 
unexplored (Gamboa 1986).  As suggested by Gamboa (1986) a major goal seems to be 
the exploration of a possible unified mechanism of recognition among all social 
insects.  Furthermore, by looking more closely at the dissimilarities, as well as 
the similarities, of recognition mechanisms among social insects a better 
understanding of the evolution of these behaviors may be at hand (Gamboa 1986).
	More specifically, Gamboa (1986) points out that nestmate discrimination has 
been widely documented in the social wasps.  Research spans six temperate species 
from three genera and two subfamilies.  According to Gamboa (1986) P. gallicus  is 
the only species of social wasp in which nestmate discrimination abilities has been 
studied but not documented.  This is significant because a lack of documentation 
does not necessarily indicate a lack of ability, rather an insensitivity in a 
particular assay for detection of the behavior (Gamboa 1986).  It is clear that many 
consistencies are found among social wasps in the behavior of nestmate recognition, 
particularly among members of the Polistes  paper wasps.  It seems reasonable that 
documentation of nestmate discrimination in P. gallicus  would show the behavior to 
manifest itself in ways very similar to those already discussed here.   The wasps 
apparently use cuticular hydrocarbons as the principal chemical recognition cue.  
This cue would most likely be learned only in the presence of the natal nest and 
learned within one hour of emergence.  Furthermore, it seems likely that P. gallicus  
uses the ability to discriminate kin in much the same adaptations as seen in P. 
fuscatus, P. metricus, P. exclamans, P. carolina, P. annularis, etc.

REFERENCES

Bura, E.A., Gamboa, G.J. 1994. Kin recognition by social wasps. Animal Behaviour, 
47: 977-979.

Crampton, W.G.R., Hurst, L.D. 1994. True kin recognition, in the form of somatic 
incompatibility, has multiple independent origins. Animal Behaviour, 47: 230-234.

Gamboa, G.J. 1978. Intraspecific defense: Advantage of social cooperation among 
paper wasp foundresses. Science, 199: 1463-1465.

Gamboa, G.J., Reeve, H.K., Ferguson, I.D., Wacker, T.L. 1986a. Nestmate recognition 
in social wasps: the origin and acquisition of recognition odours. Animal 
Behaviour, 34: 685-695.

Gamboa, G.J., Reeve, H.K., Pfennig, D.W. 1986b. The evolution and ontogeny of 
nestmate recognition in social wasps. Annual Review of Entomology, 31: 431-454.

Gamboa, G.J., Klahn, J.E., Parman, A.O., Ryan, R.E. 1987. Discrimination between 
nestmate and non-nestmate kin by social wasps (Polistes fuscatus, Hymenoptera: 
Vespidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 21: 125-128.

Gamboa, G.J., Reeve, H.K., Holmes, W.G. 1991. Conceptual issues and methodology in 
kin-recognition research: A critical discussion. Ethology, 88: 109-127.

Gamboa, G.J., Wacker, T.L., Duffy, K.G., Dobson, S.W., Fishwild, T.G. 1992. Defence 
against intraspecific usurpation by paper wasp cofoundresses (Polistes fuscatus, 
Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 70: 2369-2372.

Grafen, A. 1990. Do animals really recognize kin?. Animal Behaviour, 39: 42-54.

Jaisson, P. 1991. Kinship and fellowship in ants and social wasps. In: Kin 
Recognition (Ed. by P.G. Hepper), pp. 60-93. Cambridge: Cambridge University 
Press.

Klahn, J.E., Gamboa, G.J. 1983. Social wasps: Discrimination between kin and nonkin 
brood. Science, 221: 482-484.

Pardi, L. 1948. Physiological Zoology. 21: 1.

Pfennig, D.W., Gamboa, G.J., Reeve, H.K., Reeve, J.S., Ferguson, I.D. 1983a. The 
mechanism of nestmate recognition in social wasps (Polistes, Hymenoptera: 
Vespidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology , 13: 299-305.

Pfennig, D.W., Reeve, H.K., Shellman, J.S. 1983b. Learned component of nestmate 
discrimination in workers of a social wasp, Polistes fuscatus (Hymenoptera: 
Vespidae). Animal Behaviour, 31: 412-416.

Pfennig, D.W. 1990. Nestmate and nest discrimination among workers from neighboring 
colonies of social wasps Polistes exclamans . Canadian Journal of Zoology, 68: 
268-271.

Queller, D.C. 1994. A method for detecting kin discrimination within natural 
colonies of social insects. Animal Behaviour, 47: 569- 576.

Ross, N.M., Gamboa, G.J. 1981. Nestmate discrimination in social wasps (Polistes 
metricus, Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 9: 163-
165.

Ryan, R.E., Gamboa, G.J. 1986. Nestmate recognition between males and gynes of the 
social wasp Polistes fuscatus (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Annals of the 
Entomological Society of America, 79: 572-575.

Shellman, J.S. 1982. Nestmate discrimination in social wasps: The role of exposure 
to nest and nestmates (Polistes fuscatus, Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Behavioral 
Ecology and Sociobiology, 11: 51-53.

Shellman-Reeve, J., Gamboa, G.J. 1985. Male social wasps (Polistes fuscatus, 
Hymenoptera: Vespidae) recognize their male nestmates. Animal Behaviour , 33: 
331-332.

Singer, T.L., Espelie, K.E. 1992. Social wasps use nest paper hydrocarbons for 
nestmate recognition. Animal Behaviour, 44: 63-68.

Stuart, R.J. 1991. Kin recognition as a functional concept. Animal Behaviour, 41: 
1093-1094.