Free Access
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 19, Number 4, Avril 2003
Page(s) 453 - 458
Section M/S Revues
Published online 15 April 2003
  1. Szathmary E, Maynard Smith J. The major evolutionary transitions. Nature 1995; 374: 227–31. [Google Scholar]
  2. Crespi BJ. The evolution of social behavior in microorganisms. TREE 2001; 16: 178–83. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aron S, Passera L. Les sociétés animales. Évolution de la coopération et organisation sociale, Bruxelles: DeBoeck Université, 2000 : 366 p. [Google Scholar]
  4. Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behavior. I and II. J Theor Biol 1964; 7:1–52. [Google Scholar]
  5. Trivers RL, Hare H. Haplodiploidy and the evolution of the social insects. Science 1976; 191: 249–63. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hasegawa E. Sex allocation in the ant Colobopsis nipponicus (Wheeler).1. Population sex ratio. Evolution 1994; 48: 1121–9. [Google Scholar]
  7. Pearson B, Raybould AF, Clarke RT. Breeding behaviour, relatedness and sex-investment ratios in Leptothorax tuberum Fabricius. Entomol Exp Appl 1995; 75: 165–74. [Google Scholar]
  8. Sundström L. Sex ratio bias, relatedness asymmetry and queen mating frequencies. Nature 1994; 367: 266–7. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sundström L. Sex allocation and colony maintenance in monogyne and polygyne colonies of Formica truncorum (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): the impact of kinship and mating structure. Am Nat 1995; 146: 182–201. [Google Scholar]
  10. Aron S, Passera L, Keller L. Queen-worker conflict over sex ratio: a comparison of primary and secondary sex ratios in the argentine ant, Iridomyrmex humilis, J Evol Biol 1994; 7: 403–8. [Google Scholar]
  11. Keller L, Aron S, Passera L. Internest sex-ratio variation and male brood survival in the ant Pheidole pallidula, Behav Ecol 1996; 7: 292–8. [Google Scholar]
  12. Sundström L, Chapuisat M, Keller L. Conditional manipulation of sex ratios by ant workers: a test of kin selection theory. Science 1996; 274: 993–5. [Google Scholar]
  13. Passera L, Aron S. Early sex discrimination and male brood elimination by workers of the Argentine ant. Proc R Soc Lond B 1996; 263: 1041–6. [Google Scholar]
  14. Helms KR. Colony sex ratios, conflict between queens and workers, and apparent queen control in the ant Pheidole desertorum, Evolution 1999; 53: 1470–8. [Google Scholar]
  15. Vargo EL. Sex investment ratios in monogyne and polygyne populations of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta, J Evol Biol 1996; 9: 783–802. [Google Scholar]
  16. Passera L, Aron S, Vargo E, Keller L. Queen control of sex ratio in fire ants. Science 2001; 293: 1308–10. [Google Scholar]
  17. Aron S, Vargo EL, Passera L. Primary and secondary sex ratios in monogyne colonies of the fire ant. Anim Behav 1995; 49: 749–57. [Google Scholar]
  18. Peeters C, Crewe R. Insemination controls the reproductive division of labour in a ponerine ant. Naturwissenschaften 1984; 71: 50–1. [Google Scholar]
  19. Monnin T, Peeters C. Dominance hierarchy and reproductive conflicts among subordinates in a monogynous queenless ant. Behav Ecol 1999; 10: 323–32. [Google Scholar]
  20. Peeters C, Monnin T, Malosse C. Cuticular hydrocarbons correlated with reproductive status in a queenless ant. Proc R Soc Lond B 1999; 266: 1323–27. [Google Scholar]
  21. Monnin T, Ratnieks FLW. Policing in queenless ponerine ants. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2001; 50: 97–108. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.