Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 1. A in Solenopsis invicta virus 3: infection tests with adult honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Fig. 1. A) Comparison of SINV-3 genome copies per nanogram of RNA in red imported fire ant colonies and honey bee groups inoculated with SINV-3 shown in days since being inoculated (N = 6 samples). Note that the Y-axis is in millions of copies. Error bars, where visible, show the standard error of the mean. B) Y-axis of top graph expanded by 1,000 times to show mean SINV-3 genome copies found in each of the 6 inoculated honey bee groups graphed over time (N = 3 bees per group).

Figure 4 in Testing the Attractiveness and Efficacy of Baits for the Monitoring and Control of the Thief Ant, Solenopsis papuana

Figure 4. Mean number (±SE) of S. papuana attracted to pesticide baits at Lyon (top) and Pahole (bottom) over the course of three hours. Means sharing the same letters within each hour are not significantly different (Welch's ANOVA and Games-Howell posthoc test on log-transformed counts, α=0.05; depicted means and SEs are backtransformed). None of the means were significantly different at any hour at Pahole.

Figure 3 in Testing the Attractiveness and Efficacy of Baits for the Monitoring and Control of the Thief Ant, Solenopsis papuana

Figure 3. Percent of baits occupied by S. papuana at Lyon (top) and Pahole (bottom) over the course of three hours.

Figure 1 in Testing the Attractiveness and Efficacy of Baits for the Monitoring and Control of the Thief Ant, Solenopsis papuana

Figure 1. Layout of 5 x 5 m pesticide bait efficacy plots. Each plot contained nine bait stations and 25 monitoring points, whose positions were as indicated except on occasions when bait stations were shifted (see text). Monitoring points were either 0 m, 1.25 m, or 1.8 m from bait stations.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2022View details →

Fig. 1 in Red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta (Burden) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), abundance and arthropod community diversity affected by pasture management

Fig. 1. Mean ± SE Solenopsis invicta mound abundance (A) and mound area (B) in adaptive multi-paddock and conventionally grazed (CG) pastures (n = 6). Statistical analysis was conducted using 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), *α = 0.05.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2022View details →

Fig. 2 in Genetic and chemical profiling of Solenopsis spp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) intercepted in Hawaii

Fig. 2. The Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS), total ion chro- matogram (TIC) of a methanol extract of a gaster from a single ant intercepted in 2019 at a port in Hawaii. The reported major venom alkaloids from Solenopsis geminata and Solenopsis xyloni are cis-2-methyl-6-undecyl-piperidine (peak 1) and trans-2-methyl-6-undecyl-piperidine (peak 3). This intercepted Solenopsis geminata worker has 2-methyl-6-undecyl-pyridine (peak 2) as its major component. The areas under peaks 1, 2, and 3 are proportional to their quantity. This is expressed on the graph as the percent composition of the 3 identified peaks. This is the first time that the pyridine (peak 2) has been reported as a major venom component of Solenopsis geminata. Components 1 and 3 have been identified in previous literature.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2022View details →

Fig. 1 in Genetic and chemical profiling of Solenopsis spp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) intercepted in Hawaii

Fig. 1. Unrooted neighbor-joining tree constructed using the matrix of absolute numbers of pairwise differences among 55 mitochondrial COX1 haplotypes from 6 Solenopsis species: S. geminata, S. xyloni, S. amblychila, S. aurea, S. invicta, and S. saevissima. All positions containing gaps and missing data were eliminated. Bootstrap values greater than 70% are located below or above nodes. The scale bar distance is shown at the top right corner of the tree indicating number of nucleotide differences. Each sequence was identified by their GenBank number and species name, except for the Oahu sample (GenBank OK071254) marked as Oahu 2018* and the haplotype from the 2019 samples (GenBank OK071253) labelled Ltu19_03**.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2019View details →

Fig. 1 in Actions of the fire ant Solenopsis saevissima (Smith) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) on a big-eared opossum carcass

Fig. 1. Carcass of big-eared opossum (Didelphis aurita) colonized by fire ants Solenopsis saevissima (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and other insects on 12 Nov 2017, Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil. (A) Fire ants initially monopolized the carcass, constructing a dirt mound on the muzzle, thus displaying the burying behavior of the ants. (B) Circled are ants beginning construction of a soil mound near the tail. (C) Diptera depositing eggs on the carcass. Afer the carcass was moved to the periphery of the roadway, the ants lost their dominance to other necrophagous insects. (D) Skeletonized carcass; ants and other necrophagous insects remained until the end of the decomposition process.

opencc-by-4.0May 2021View details →

Fig. 2 in Examining the prevalence of Solenopsis invicta virus 3 (Solinviviridae: Invictavirus) in Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) alates collected in North Florida

Fig. 2. Representative agarose gel depicting detection of Solenopsis invicta virus 3 as determined by polymerase chain reaction using cDNA generated from RNA purified from female alates of Solenopsis invicta. Arrow represents the 258 bp amplicon from Solenopsis invicta virus 3. Lane 1 is a 1 kb DNA ladder and lane 12 is non-template control.

opencc-by-4.0May 2021View details →

Fig. 1 in Examining the prevalence of Solenopsis invicta virus 3 (Solinviviridae: Invictavirus) in Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) alates collected in North Florida

Fig. 1. Map of Florida illustrating the collection locations and distribution of Solenopsis invicta virus 3 infection rate of female alates of Solenopsis invicta colonies in urban and rural cities of North Florida. Black portions of the pie charts represent the proportion of alates infected with Solenopsis invicta virus 3.

Fig. 4 in Light affects the homing ability of Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) foraging workers

Fig. 4. The effect of white, blue, yellow, and red light, as well as total darkness (black) on time-to-trail-formation of workers of red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta (mean + standard error). Results for time-to-trail-formation in yellow light were significantly faster than for black (dark) and by inference white and blue are also faster than black. Time-to-trail-formation under white light was significantly different from red and by inference white was also faster than black. Red and black time-to-trail-formation results were not significantly different. *P <0.01 and **P <0.001.

Fig. 2 in Light affects the homing ability of Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) foraging workers

Fig. 2. The importance of a fixed light source to foraging red imported fire ants, Solenopsis invicta. Time-to-trail-formation was recorded with a light source that changed sequentially to 1 of 4 symmetrically placed light sources or a single light source that was moved in a circle planar to the colony tray in 90° increments at 1 rpm. Bars represent mean time-to-trail-formation + standard error, ***P <0.0001. By inference, the mean time-to-trail-formation for the single light rotation was longer than the fixed light control.

Fig. 1 in Light affects the homing ability of Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) foraging workers

Fig. 1. Effect of light on the time-to-trail-formation by the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. The time-to-trail-formation is shown for a single light source in a light sealed room versus the same room with no light. Bars represent mean time-to-trail-formation + standard error, ***P <0.0001.

Fig. 3 in Light affects the homing ability of Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) foraging workers

Fig. 3. The effect of illumination intensity on time-to-trail-formation is shown for workers of red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta. The time-to-trail-formation (mean + standard error, N = 6) of the 22 Lux light intensity was significantly shorter than the time-to-trail-formation in the dark. The 3 other light intensities evaluated had lower mean and SE values than the 22 Lux intensity. Therefore, by inference, time-to-trail-formation for light intensities, 312, 140, and 1 Lux were also shorter than the time-to-trail-formation in the dark. ***P <0.0001.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2021View details →

Fig. 1. Cumulative Solenopsis invicta worker ant mortality among Solenopsis invicta virus 3 in Diet with sucrose ameliorates Solenopsis invicta virus 3 (Solinviviridae: Invictavirus) infection in Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) worker ants

Fig. 1. Cumulative Solenopsis invicta worker ant mortality among Solenopsis invicta virus 3-infected and -uninfected colonies provided a diet of crickets (Acheta domesticus) and either supplemented (open symbols) or not supplemented (solid symbols) with a 10% sucrose solution. Analysis of Variance by treatment was conducted for d 21 values and found to be significant (F = 10.0; df = 3,14; P <0.0009). Scheffe's multiple comparison procedure was used to separate the means. Symbols with the same letter are not statistically different.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2021View details →

Fig. 2. Solenopsis invicta virus 3 in Diet with sucrose ameliorates Solenopsis invicta virus 3 (Solinviviridae: Invictavirus) infection in Solenopsis invicta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) worker ants

Fig. 2. Solenopsis invicta virus 3 genome equivalents per ng RNA from dead Solenopsis invicta worker ants among Solenopsis invicta virus 3-infected and -uninfected colonies provided a diet of crickets (Acheta domesticus) and either supplemented (open symbols) or not supplemented (solid symbols) with a 10% sucrose solution. Solenopsis invicta virus 3 was not detected in the Solenopsis invicta virus 3-uninfected group. Student's t-test was conducted to compare the virus quantity in colonies with and without the sucrose supplement by d. Solenopsis invicta virus 3 genome equivalents per ng RNA was greater significantly in colonies without sugar supplementation on d 12 (t = 2.5; df = 9; P <0.033) and 19 (t = 2.4; df = 9; P <0.037).

Fig. 4 in The good side of the bad guys: predation of lepidopteran pests by Solenopsis invicta Buren (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Florida Panhandle

Fig. 4. Occurrence of Solenopsis invicta in different peanut phenological stages during the 2018 crop season. West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, Florida, USA. Means with different letters are significantly different P <0.05 (Tukey's mean separation test).

Fig. 2 in The good side of the bad guys: predation of lepidopteran pests by Solenopsis invicta Buren (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Florida Panhandle

Fig. 2. Occurrence of Solenopsis invicta in hotdog-baited flip-top tubes placed on the ground and on the canopy of peanut fields during the 2017 crop season (log scale). West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, Florida, USA. P- values from Pearson's Chi Square analysis (χ2 = 48.69; df = 5; P = 2.7 × 10−9).

Fig. 3 in The good side of the bad guys: predation of lepidopteran pests by Solenopsis invicta Buren (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Florida Panhandle

Fig. 3. Comparison of mean Solenopsis invicta between cotton canopy zones during different phenological stages, 2018 crop season. West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, Florida, USA. Means with different letters are significantly different P <0.05 (Tukey's mean separation test).

Fig. 1 in The good side of the bad guys: predation of lepidopteran pests by Solenopsis invicta Buren (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the Florida Panhandle

Fig. 1. Occurrence of Solenopsis invicta in hotdog-baited flip-top tubes placed on the ground and on the canopy of cotton fields during the 2017 crop season (log scale). West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, Florida, USA. P- values from Pearson's Chi Square analysis (χ2 = 20.68; df = 6; P = 0.0021).