1981] Mac Kay — Nest Phenologies of Pogonomyrmex 
47 
Table 2. Analysis of variance comparisons of the positions of males and females in 
17 nests of P. montanus collected in 1978 and 1979, 4 nests of P. subnitidus collected 
in 1980, and one P. rugosus nest collected in 1979. (The data were subjected to an 
arcsin transformation before analysis.) 
Source 
df 
MS 
F 
P. montanus 
Different nests 
16 
0.007 
0.538ns 
Males and females 
1 
0.000 
0.000ns 
Levels in nests 
7 
0.232 
17.846*** 
Nests X sexuals 
16 
0.005 
0.385ns 
Nests X levels 
112 
0.072 
5.538*** 
Sexuals X levels 
7 
0.062 
4.769*** 
error 
111 
0.013 
P. subnitidus 
Different nests 
3 
0.000 
0.044ns 
Males and females 
1 
0.002 
0.231ns 
Levels in nests 
7 
0.455 
45.083*** 
Nests X sexuals 
3 
0.001 
0.065ns 
Nests X levels 
21 
0.006 
0.630ns 
Sexuals X levels 
7 
0.040 
3.924** 
error 
20 
0.010 
P. rugosus 
Males and females 
1 
0.002 
1.000ns 
Levels in nest 
17 
0.006 
3.000* 
error 
16 
0.002 
rain, possibly because the upper levels of the nest had become 
waterlogged. A considerable number of workers guarded the brood 
during this time and when disturbed, the workers immediately 
moved the brood back into the nest. This behavior has not been 
observed in the other two species. 
The positions of the males and females were compared with an 
analysis of variance (Table 2). Although it appears from Figures 6, 
7, and 8 and our impressions in the field, that females are in deeper 
levels of the nest than the males, there is no statistical support 
(Table 2). There were significant differences between the levels. 
Figures 6, 7, and 8 illustrate that the reproductives tend to be in the 
upper levels of the nests. 
In Pogonomyrmex spp. there is evidence that little mixing of 
adult workers occurs within the nests (Chew 1960; Golley and 
