Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Collective decision-making in honey bees: how colonies choose among nectar sources

  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

A honey bee colony can skillfully choose among nectar sources. It will selectively exploit the most profitable source in an array and will rapidly shift its foraging efforts following changes in the array. How does this colony-level ability emerge from the behavior of individual bees? The answer lies in understanding how bees modulate their colony's rates of recruitment and abandonment for nectar sources in accordance with the profitability of each source. A forager modulates its behavior in relation to nectar source profitability: as profitability increases, the tempo of foraging increases, the intensity of dancing increases, and the probability of abandoning the source decreases. How does a forager assess the profitability of its nectar source? Bees accomplish this without making comparisons among nectar sources. Neither do the foragers compare different nectar sources to determine the relative profitability of any one source, nor do the food storers compare different nectar loads and indicate the relative profitability of each load to the foragers. Instead, each forager knows only about its particular nectar source and independently calculates the absolute profitability of its source. Even though each of a colony's foragers operates with extremely limited information about the colony's food sources, together they will generate a coherent colonylevel response to different food sources in which better ones are heavily exploited and poorer ones are abandoned. This is shown by a computer simulation of nectar-source selection by a colony in which foragers behave as described above. Nectar-source selection by honey bee colonies is a process of natural selection among alternative nectar sources as foragers from more profitable sources “survive” (continue visiting their source) longer and “reproduce” (recruit other foragers) better than do foragers from less profitable sources. Hence this colonial decision-making is based on decentralized control. We suggest that honey bee colonies possess decentralized decision-making because it combines effectiveness with simplicity of communication and computation within a colony.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baird DH, Seeley TD (1983) An equilibrium theory of queen production in honeybee colonies preparing to swarm. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:221–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Boch R (1956) Die Tanze der Bienen bei nahen und fernen Trachtquellen. Z Vergl Physiol 38:136–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler CG (1945) The influence of various physical and biological factors of the environment on honeybee activity. An examination of the relationship between activity and nectar concentration and abundance. J Exp Biol 21:5–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Camazine S, Sneyd J (1991) A mathematical model of colony-level nectar source selection by honey bees: self-organization through simple individual rules. J Theor Biol (in press)

  • Darwin CR (1877) The effects of cross and self fertilization in the vegetable kingdom. Appleton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Deneubourg JL, Goss S, Franks N, Pasteels JM (1989) The blind leading the blind: modelling chemically mediated army ant raid patterns. J Insect Behav 2:719–725

    Google Scholar 

  • Esch HA, Bastian JA (1970) How do newly recruited honey bees approach a food site? Z Vergl Physiol 68:175–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Franks NR (1989) Army ants: a collective intelligence. Am Sci 77:138–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Franks NR, Fletcher CR (1983) Spatial patterns in army ant foraging and migration: Eciton burchelli on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 12:261–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisch K von (1967) The dance language and orientation of bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Haken H (1978) Synergetics — an introduction. Springer, New York Berlin Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek FA (1945) The use of knowledge in society. Am Econ Rev 35:519–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1985) The social physiology of temperature regulation in honeybees. Fortschr Zool 31:393–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter DR (1979) Gödel, Escher, Bach: an eternal golden braid. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holldobler B (1981) Foraging and spatiotemporal territories in the honey ant Myrmecocystus mimicus Wheeler (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9:301–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeanne RL (1986) The organization of work in Polybia occidentalis: costs and benefits of specialization in a social wasp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:333–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindauer M (1948) Über die Einwirkung von Duft- und Geschmacksstoffen sowie anderer Faktoren auf die Tänze der Bienen. Z Vergl Physiol 31:348–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindauer M (1955) Schwarmbienen auf Wohnungssuche. Z Vergl Physiol 37:263–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindauer M (1961) Communication among social bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindauer M (1975) Verständigung im Bienenstaat. Fischer, Stuttgart New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumsden CJ, Holldobler B (1983) Ritualized combat and intercolony communication in ants. J Theor Biol 100:81–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Markl H (1985) Manipulation, modulation, information, cognition: some of the riddles of communication. Fortschr Zool 31:163–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Mautz D (1971) Der Kommunikationseffekt der Schwänzeltänze bei Apis mellifica carnica (Pollm.). Z Vergl Physiol 72:197–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolis G, Prigogine I (1977) Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Núñez JA (1966) Quantitative Beziehungen zwischen den Eigenschaften von Futterquellen und dem Verhalten von Sammelbienen. Z Vergl Physiol 53:142–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Núñez JA (1970) The relationship between sugar flow and foraging and recruiting behaviour of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) Anim Behav 18:527–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Núñez JA (1982) Honeybee foraging strategies at a food source in relation to its distance from the hive and the rate of sugar flow. J Apic Res 21:139–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L, Goss S (1987a) Self-organization mechanisms in ant societies (1): Trail recruitment to newly discovered food sources. In: Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L (eds) From individual to collective behavior in social insects. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 155–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L, Goss S (1987b) Transmission and amplification of information in a changing environment: the case of insect societies. In: Prigogine I, Sanglier M (eds) Law of nature and human conduct. G.O.R.D.E.S., Bruxelles, pp 129–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattee HH (1976) Physical theories of biological co-ordination. In: Grene M, Mendelsohn E (eds) Topics in the philosophy of biology, vol 27. Boston studies in philosophy of science. Reidel, Boston, pp 153–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeve HK, Gamboa GJ (1983) Colony activity integration in primitively eusocial wasps: the role of the queen (Polistes fuscatus, Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:63–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuá L (1952) Untersuchungen über die Einfluß meteorologische Elemente auf das Verhalten der Bienen. Z Vergl Physio1 34:258–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD (1982) How honeybees find a home. Sci Am 247(Oct):158–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD (1985) Honeybee ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD (1986) Social foraging by honeybees: how colonies allocate foragers among patches of flowers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:343–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD (1989) Social foraging in honey bees: how nectar foragers assess their colony's nutritional status. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24:181–199

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD, Levien RA (1987) A colony of mind. The beehive as thinking machine. The Sciences 27:38–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD, Visscher PK (1988) Assessing the benefits of cooperation in honeybee foraging: search costs, forage quality, and competitive ability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:229–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1981) The sciences of the artificial, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry, 2nd edn. Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Visscher PK, Seeley TD (1982) Foraging strategy of honeybee colonies in a temperate deciduous forest. Ecology 63:1790–1801

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Waddington KD (1982) Honey bee foraging profitability and round dance correlates. J Comp Physiol 148:297–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington KD (1985) Cost-intake information used in foraging. J Insect Physiol 31:891–897

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver N (1979) Possible recruitment of foraging honeybees to high-reward areas of the same plant species. J Apic Res 18:179–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (1962) Chemical communication among workers of the fire ant Solenopsis saevissima (Fr. Smith). 1. The organization of mass-foraging. Anim Behav 10:134–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (1971) The insect societies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO, Hölldobler B (1988) Dense heterarchies and mass communication as the basis of organization in ant colonies. Trends Ecol Evol 3:65–68

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. James Sneyd

    Present address: Department of Biomathematics, UCLA School of Medicine, 10833 La Conte Avenue, 90024, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Neurobiology and Behavior, Mudd Hall, Cornell University, 14853, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Thomas D. Seeley & Scott Camazine

  2. Centre for Mathematical Biology, Mathematical Institute, 24-29 St. Giles', OX1 3LB, Oxford, UK

    James Sneyd

Authors
  1. Thomas D. Seeley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott Camazine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James Sneyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Offprint requests to: T.D. Seeley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seeley, T.D., Camazine, S. & Sneyd, J. Collective decision-making in honey bees: how colonies choose among nectar sources. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 28, 277–290 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175101

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175101

Keywords

Search

Navigation