These 'crazy' invasive Florida pests attack mammals, birds and create giant supercolonies
Meet tawny crazy ants.
They get their name from their erratic movements, especially while foraging, and are native to South America but spread to the southern U.S. in the late 1990s.
According to the USDA, tawny crazy ants in Florida are part of a super colony that spreads across the southern U.S. They lack territorial behavior, which enables the creation of gigantic supercolonies, whose need for resources drives out local wildlife and brings them into direct conflict with humans.
They can invade homes where they are drawn to and damage electrical equipment, and can make yards uncomfortable for residents to enjoy.
In areas of the country with severe tawny crazy ant infestations, they kill or displace local wildlife, including other ant species, even fire ants. 'There's no insect noise and there's no bird noise,' University of Texas ecologist Edward LeBrun told Science.
According to Texas A&M University's Urban and Structural Entomology Program, after experiencing the tawny crazy ant, most residents prefer the fire ant.
Tawny crazy ants bite and excrete formic acid
Tawny crazy ants bite and excrete formic acid, which they use like venom.
What do tawny crazy ants in Florida eat?
According to the University of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), tawny crazy ants prey on live animals, and scavenge from dead animals. They eat caterpillars, beetles, termites, wasps and spiders, or even small animals such as rabbits, birds, lizards, and domestic animals, which usually die due to asphyxia.
Tawny crazy ants are capable of forcing birds from their nests and blinding young rabbits with their acid, Smithsonian Magazine reported.
They can attack crops, domestic animals and honeybee hives, and take over the nesting sites of other ant species, including fire ants.
Where in Florida are tawny crazy ants found? See map
According to IFAS, by 2012, tawny crazy ants were found in 24 counties in Florida listed below, with infestations spreading. This can be expected in any county in Florida, IFAS reported.
Alachua
Brevard
Broward
Clay
Collier
DeSoto
Duval
Hardee
Hillsborough
Indian River
Lee
Manatee
Marion
Martin
Miami-Dade
Orange
Palm Beach
Pasco
Pinellas
Polk
Saint Johns
Saint Lucie
Sarasota
What do tawny crazy ants look like?
The Urban and Structural Entomology Program at Texas A&M University describes tawny crazy ants as follows:
Coloration: Adult colony members, including queens, males and workers, are reddish-brown (although lightness or darkness of their body color may vary)
Size: Worker ants are all similar in size (they are monomorphic), with a body length of 1/8 inch.
Worker ants have long legs and antennae and their bodies have numerous, long, coarse hairs. The antenna have 12-segments with no club.
There is a small circle of hairs (acidopore) present at tip of the abdomen (as opposed to the typical stinger found in many ants), a characteristic of formicine ants (found within the Formicinae subfamily).
How to get rid of tawny crazy ants around your home
Management of this ant will most likely require the services of a professional pest control company that practices integrated pest management (IPM).
According to UF, 100% eradication of this ant is not probable in areas where it is established. However, population suppression is possible.
Tawny crazy ant prevention
Schedule regular trash pick-up. Keep trash cans clean and stored away from the home.
Remove leaf litter, fallen branches, and other yard debris.
Keep hedges and trees trimmed so that they do not touch the home.
Eliminate or reduce possible food, water, and nesting sources.
Remove trash regularly and keep trash receptacles clean.
Do not leave dirty dishes in the sink.
Clean up spills immediately.
Place food items in the refrigerator or in sealed containers.
Pick up pet food bowls when your pet is not eating.
Exclusion
To prevent ants from entering a home:
Walk around the outside of the home and locate potential entry points (cracks, crevices, spaces around windows and doors).
Locate indoor entry points, paying particular attention to windows, doors, and plumbing and utility penetrations.
Use an appropriate sealant.
Replace door thresholds and weather stripping as needed.
If you can see light from the outside while you are standing inside, it is enough of a gap for ants and other pests to enter.
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Fire ant vs tawny ants: invasive species in Florida. Map, how to kill
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
16 hours ago
- Axios
Bat found at UT returns home to West Texas
Hubble, a big free-tailed bat that made a rare visit to Austin, is going back to West Texas after being rehabilitated. Why it matters: Hubble became the first big free-tailed bat documented in Travis County when he accidentally hitched a ride from the McDonald Observatory in Fort Davis to the University of Texas, according to the Austin Bat Refuge. Flashback: UT called Dianne Odegard, executive director of Austin Bat Refuge, and her co-founder Lee Mackenzie after discovering Hubble inside the physics, math, and astronomy building. Hubble had rubbed his thumb claws completely off while trying to escape, and struggled to climb during his recovery. "It makes us pretty happy," Odegard says of Hubble's rehabilitation. "There was no guarantee that he was going to be able to grow those thumb claws back." Zoom in:" Mexican free tailed-bats that are common around Central Texas are about one-third of the size of the species that Hubble belongs to," Odegard tells Axios. Austin Bat Refuge handled over 400 bats in need of rehabilitation last year, with a vast majority of those being Mexican free-tailed bats. "We were really surprised to see him," Odegard adds.
Fast Company
16 hours ago
- Fast Company
Comic-Con 2025 has arrived. Here's what to expect
Tens of thousands of fans — many in costumes — will descend Thursday on Comic-Con International, the four day pop culture spectacle that will feature updates on the new 'Predator' movie, 'Alien' series and a special appearance by George Lucas. Just don't expect major news about the future of Marvel's movie slate or what's next for the hit relaunch of DC's high-flying 'Superman' franchise. Both studios are sitting out Comic-Con 2025, as far as their film slates go. An estimated 135,000 people will attend the convention, which will greet Lucas on Sunday for his first Comic-Con appearance. The 'Star Wars' creator will discuss his new Lucas Museum of Narrative Art that will open next year in Los Angeles. Fans of the 'Alien' and 'Predator' franchises will have plenty to cheer. Elle Fanning, star of 'Predator: Badlands,' will discuss the film at Comic-Con's massive Hall H this week. FX will also bring the stars and creators of 'Alien: Earth,' a series that will unleash the Xenomorph species on Earth next month. 'Alien: Earth' will be one of the projects that brings a massive interactive experience to San Diego, with a replica of spacecraft from the series. The attraction will feature what's described as a terrifying mission at night. Marvel may not be presenting new movies, but it will have a 'Fantastic Four: First Steps' attraction near the convention, a tie-in to Friday's release of the latest attempt to successfully launch its 'first family' in theaters. Thousands of fans got a sneak peek at the convention's 460,000 square foot (42,700 square meter) exhibitor section, which features exclusive merchandise, comic book art and exhibits from brands like Star Wars, Lego, Nickelodeon, Paramount and more.
Medscape
17 hours ago
- Medscape
ASCO 2025: Melanoma TILs, Toxicity, and Diet Insights
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Welcome, everybody. My name is Teresa Amaral. Today I'm here with you to follow up on my presentation on the best of ASCO 2025. Today, we'll have two different sections. The first one is dedicated to the rapid oral communications, and the second one is dedicated to the oral communications that took place on the last day of the congress. For the rapid oral communications, we'll focus on one topic that came through three presentations, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy. Then we will look into a very interesting aspect: the reduction in toxicity associated with immunotherapy that we know is an important aspect for patients that need to receive immunotherapy. And finally, we'll look into a potential modifiable factor that might be associated with better outcomes in patients receiving immunotherapy, which is a diet rich in fiber. In the oral communications, we'll focus on the adjuvant trials — two of them that were quite important to be presented in this session. Then [I'll discuss] a trial that dealt with an unanswered question, which is how long should we treat patients in the metastatic setting. And finally, we will look into two different trials. The first one was on sequencing therapy, which was the DREAMseq trial on the final analysis, and then [there was] a specific analysis for patients that have symptomatic brain metastases, which are still a population of patients that unfortunately are excluded from the majority of clinical trials despite the fact that they do not a very good outcome. Starting with the TIL therapy, the first trial or the first presentation that I want to show you is a new way of applying TIL therapy. Basically, this is a new engineered TIL cell therapy that is intended to be given to patients that already received immune checkpoint inhibitors — so [patients] that are resistant to this therapy. But the interesting part of this type of therapy is that it doesn't require giving interleukin-2, and it also is possible to be given with a low dose of lymphodepletion. This is one of the reasons why I decided to bring this study because we know that TIL therapy might have a good outcome in the long run and these are the results that we are going to discuss in the next presentation. One of the problems is the toxicity that is associated with the pre-therapy and the after-therapy that we need to give to these patients, which includes this lymphodepleting chemotherapy and then the interleukin-2. What these very preliminary data showed is that it is indeed feasible to do this type of therapy by not giving interleukin-2 and reducing the lymphodepleting chemotherapy, and that the overall response rate was quite reassuring because we have an overall response rate that is around 67%. The median duration of response was not reached. Of course, we will need to wait for further data because this phase 1/2 trial is recruiting and we will need to confirm this data further in a broader population with more patients. But I think these results are quite reassuring and will maybe allow us to give this type of therapy to a broader spectrum of patients, as we don't need to have fitter patients to receive this therapy because we have low toxicity. The next discussion, or the next work, that was presented was indeed quite interesting because it looked into the 5-year-old outcome of another TIL product that is called lifileucel. Basically, what the authors showed was that this one-time therapy that was given was able to demonstrate durable and deepening responses in patients with advanced melanoma. It was also interesting to see the long-term toxicity is not more than what we saw before, because the toxicity is mostly associated with the interleukin-2 and lymphodepleting chemotherapy that is necessary to give with this product. So in line with what we discussed in the previous work, this is one of the reasons why most patients, or some patients, cannot receive this type of therapy. What we saw was that after 5 years, approximately 20% of the patients remained alive. Obviously, the best outcomes are seen in the patients that do respond. If the patient responds, the chances that they have a long-term outcome are significant, which is expected. So, the other side shows that this might be feasible, at least for approximately one fifth of the population. Another point that I would like to go through with you is that we saw two works looking into TILs that are definitely a potential therapeutic option for patients that received therapy in the first line, or patients that did not benefit from immunotherapy in the first line. The third work that I would like to discuss with you is the fact — and it was also presented in these rapid oral communications — that indeed not all TILs that we give to patients are the same. What the authors from this work looked into are the infusion product characteristics that are able to predict the response of patients that are treated with TILs. What they showed is the TIL persistence and also the distinctive TIL population in terms of immunophenotypic features, in terms of the proportion of CD8+ T cells, and the high surface expression of LAG3+. All of these characteristics are associated with improved TIL outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma, meaning that not everything that we infuse that are called TILs work exactly the same and have the same influence, let's say, on the patient's response. This is obviously important because in the future, we might need to concentrate on some strategies, or on other strategies, that modulate ex vivoTIL expansion, so that we have the optimal TIL phenotype associated with better outcomes and we make sure the TILs that we are giving to our patients are the ones that will most likely produce a better outcome — a longer response, but a more durable response. I found this work quite interesting because it's always nice and important to look into these details and understand exactly what we are treating our patients with and how these treatment characteristics influence the patient's outcomes. The second point I would like to discuss with you is the toxicity that I mentioned in the very beginning. We treat a significant amount of patients with immunotherapy, but we know that one of the problems of immunotherapy is the toxicity associated with the therapy. Several strategies are being investigated to reduce the toxicity associated with immunotherapy. One of the strategies that was presented this year is looking into interleukin-6 receptor blocking with an antibody called sarilumab. This was tested in patients that received a combination of ipilimumab, nivolumab, and relatlimab — patients with resectable stage III or stage IV melanoma. Basically, what the author showed was that indeed it was possible to reduce the toxicity associated with this triple combination. Not only did this reduce the grade 3 to grade 5 immune-related adverse events to 12% when we use this interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, but it also resulted in the best overall response rate being more than 60% — 64%, approximately. This means that it might not only be able to reduce the severe toxicity, so grade 3 and grade 4 adverse events, but also allow patients to have a long-term benefit — especially because this is one of the highest overall response rates that we saw recently in terms of combination of immunotherapy. Obviously, these data need to be confirmed by a larger trial looking into whether this triple combination with, or without, this interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor allows lower toxicity and the high response rate we saw in this smaller trial. Finally, for the rapid oral communications, I would like to show you a trial that looks into acting on some potential modulated factors, including the diet of the patients that we treat with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This was a randomized phase 2 trial that looked into a high-fiber diet intervention in patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. What they showed is that it is feasible to do these kinds of studies, but it's quite challenging, especially because some patients progressed earlier or abandoned the study due to other aspects that did not really have to do with the diet itself. Giving this high-fiber diet is safe and it's also well tolerated, and it seems that this high-fiber diet might lead to improved responses in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. I must say that it might lead [to these responses], only because these are very preliminary data and they need some kind of confirmation before we start prescribing high fiber diets to all patients that are receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. I think it's very interesting that these types of factors are being analyzed and are being discussed and investigated because these might be, I would say, simple changes that we can make in order to improve the patient's outcomes to the current therapies that we offer them anyhow. Moving into oral communications, I will start by looking into the adjuvant trials. Two important adjuvant trials were discussed. The first one was RELATIVITY-098. This was a trial that investigated programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) monotherapy vs PD-1 plus a LAG-3 inhibitor in the adjuvant setting. Unfortunately, the trial was negative, but I think it's very important that we show these negative trials because it allows us to understand what happened and prevents other companies or other groups from looking at the same question exactly the same way, because the reasons, or the potential reasons, for the failure of the trial were not known or were not published. I think it's very important that these negative data are presented so that we can all learn and avoid repetition of the same issues. Basically, the combination did not improve relapse-free survival compared to the monotherapy, although there were no new safety data. Interestingly enough, from the biomarker analysis and the preliminary analysis that was presented, the message came out that for this combination to work, it may be necessary for some tumor cells to be present and not completely excised, as was [the case] in this setting. These comparisons were made with the same combination in the metastatic setting, where the combination was better than immunotherapy. This kind of analysis is always interesting to look into because it might give us some hints on where we can move with this combination in the future.
