The name is absent

placed a nest of crazy ants 1.5m away from the edge of the prairie into the woods at each
location assigned to the crazy ant addition treatment. At each control location, we placed
a similar amount of ant-free decaying wood 1.5m into the woods. After the treatments
were established, ant baiting was conducted on June 24, Jime 29, July 3, July 8, July 14,
and July 29 which was 5, 10,14,19,25, and 40 days after colony additions.

Statistical analyses

Crazy ants and fire ants were the only two species that recruited to baits with
regularity and abundance, therefore the analyses focused on these two species. On all
days except July 29, baiting data revealed higher average crazy ant recruitment at crazy
ant addition locations than at control locations. Therefore, because the treatment was not
reflected in census data on July 29, that date was excluded from analysis. Repeated
measures ANOVA’s performed in StatView 5.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 1998)
were used to determine if crazy ant and fire ant recruitment to baits after 1 hour changed
through time at control and crazy ant addition locations using the sampling dates from
June 24 to July 14 (i.e. after crazy ants were added). These ANOVA’s included
treatment and bait type, as well as all possible interactions, as factors. Using presence
and absence at baits after 1 hour on July 8 and July 14, we used 2 contingency tables for
each bait type to determine if a single ant species dominated baits more often than 2 or
more ant species shared baits. To examine the number of baits discovered within 10
minutes, we used a series of 2x2 contingency tables tested for significance in Microsoft
Excel or in JMP 7.0.2. Specifically, we tested whether the number of baits discovered in
10 minutes differed by bait type, species, or treatment. We also tested whether average
discovery time differed by species, bait type, treatment, or any of the interactions of those

46

<<   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   >>

More intriguing information