Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 391–415 | Cite as

Queen substance dispersal by messenger workers in honeybee colonies

  • Thomas D. Seely
Article

Summary

  1. 1.

    Worker honeybees contacting a queen can transport the queen's inhibitory signal, queen substance, to other workers unable to contact the queen. Airborne dispersal of queen substance is at most a minor mechanism for queen substance transmission.

     
  2. 2.

    This worker transport of queen substance is an important supplement to queen substance dispersal by direct queen-worker contacts. For although colonies lose their inhibition against queen rearing within 10 h of queen loss, a queen contacts only approximately 35% of the broodnest workers in 10 h.

     
  3. 3.

    The queen facilitates queen substance dispersal by frequently standing stationary, at which times workers can thoroughly contact her, and by occasionally making a major shift in her position within the nest.

     
  4. 4.

    Queen attendance by workers is strongly age-dependent, with 3–9 days being the age range for intense contact with the queen.

     
  5. 5.

    Workers that have made extensive (>30s) queen contact appear to behave as ‘messengers’ dispersing queen substance. They walk more rapidly, antennate nestmates and receive inspections more frequently, and perform fewer labor acts in the 30 min following queen contact than do randomly chosen broodnest workers of the same age (control bees).

     
  6. 6.

    The following observations support the surface transport model over the food exchange model for queen substance transmission by workers: (1) the higher frequency of antennations with nestmates and of inspections by nestmates for messenger bees relative to control bees, (2) the close correlation (r=0.76) for messenger bees between duration of queen contact and number of inspections by nestmates, and (3) the low frequency of food donations (x=1.8) compared with nestmate antennations (x=56.4) by messenger bees in the 30 min following queen contact.

     
  7. 7.

    There are no messenger bee specialists cycling rapidly between contacts with the queen and workers.

     
  8. 8.

    Messenger bees were analyzed by gas chromatography for (E)-9-oxodec-2-enoic acid. As little as 0.1 ng (=3.3x1011 molecules) of the acid per messenger bee could have been detected, but none was found.

     
  9. 9.

    The evolution of messenger behavior by workers and the significance of the findings to understanding the timing of colony reproduction are discussed.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, M.D.: Observations on honeybees attending their queen. Anim. Behav. 3, 66–69 (1955)Google Scholar
  2. Allen, M.D.: The honeybee queen and her attendants. Anim. Behav. 8, 201–208 (1960)Google Scholar
  3. Allen, M.D.: The role of the queen and males in the social organization of insect communities. Symp. Zool. Soc. London 14, 133–157 (1965)Google Scholar
  4. Barbier, M., Hügel, M.-F.: Synthèse de l'acide céto-9 décène-2 cis oïque, isomère cis de la substance royale. Bull. Soc. Chim. 1324–1326 (1961)Google Scholar
  5. Barbier, M., Lederer, E., Nomura, T.: Synthèse de l'acide céto-9 décène-2 trans oïque (“substance royale”) et de l'acide céto-8 nonène-2 trans oïque. C. R. Acad. Sci. 251, 1133–1135 (1960)Google Scholar
  6. Boch, R., Lensky, Y.: Pheromonal control of queen rearing in honeybee colonies. J. Apic. Res. 15, 59–62 (1976)Google Scholar
  7. Butler, C.G.: The method and importance of the recognition by a colony of honeybees (A. mellifera) of the presence of its queen. Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. London 105, 11–29 (1954)Google Scholar
  8. Butler, C.G.: The significance of queen substance in swarming and supersedure in honey-bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies. Proc. R. Entomol. Soc. London (A) 35, 129–132 (1960)Google Scholar
  9. Butler, C.G.: Chemical communication in insects: Behavioral and ecologic aspects. In: Communication by chemical signals, Vol. 1. Johnston, J.W., Moulton, D.G., Turk, A. (eds.), pp. 35–78. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts 1970Google Scholar
  10. Butler, C.G.: The world of the honey-bee. London: Collins 1974Google Scholar
  11. Butler, C.G., Callow, R.K., Koster, C.G., Simpson, J.: Perception of the queen by workers in the honeybee colony. J. Apic. Res. 12, 159–166 (1973)Google Scholar
  12. Gary, N.E.: A trap to quantitatively recover dead and abnormal honeybees from the hive. J. Econ. Entomol. 53, 782–785 (1960)Google Scholar
  13. Gary, N.E.: Pheromones of the honey bee, Apis mellifera L. In: Control of insect behavior by natural products. Wood, D.L., Silverstein, R.M., Nakajima, M. (eds.), pp. 29–53. New York: Academic 1970Google Scholar
  14. Gary, N.E.: Pheromones that affect the behavior and physiology of honey bees. In: Pheromones. Birch, M.C. (ed.), pp. 200–221. Amsterdam: North-Holland 1974Google Scholar
  15. Groot, A.P. de, Voogd, S.: On the ovary development in queenless worker bees (Apis mellifica L.). Experientia 10, 384–385 (1954)Google Scholar
  16. Huber, F.: Nouvelles observations sur les abeilles. II. Geneva: Barde, Manget and Co. 1814Google Scholar
  17. Lindauer, M.: Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Arbeitsteilung im Bienenstaat. z. Vergl. Physiol. 34, 299–345 (1952)Google Scholar
  18. Lindauer, M.: Schwarmbienen auf Wohnungssuche. Z. Vergl. Physiol. 37, 263–324 (1955)Google Scholar
  19. Michener, C.D.: The social behavior of the bees. A comparative study. Cambridge: Harvard University 1974Google Scholar
  20. Müssbichler, A.: Die Bedeutung äußerer Einflüsse und der Corpora allata bei der Afterweiselentstehung von Apis mellifica. Z. Vergl. Physiol. 34, 207–221 (1952)Google Scholar
  21. Oster, G.F., Wilson, E.O.: Caste and ecology in the social insects. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University 1978Google Scholar
  22. Perepelova, L.: Laying workers, the ovipositing of the queen, and swarming. Bee World 10, 69–71 (1929)Google Scholar
  23. Rösch, G.A.: Untersuchungen über die Arbeitsteilung im Bienenstaat. I. Teil: Die Tätigkeiten im normalen Bienenstaate und ihre Beziehungen zum Alter der Arbeitsbienen. Z. Vergl. Physiol. 2, 571–631 (1925)Google Scholar
  24. Rösch, G.A.: Über die Bautätigkeit im Bienenvolk und das Alter der Baubienen. Weiterer Beitrag zur Frage nach der Arbeitsteilung im Bienenstaat. Z. Vergl. Physiol. 6, 264–298 (1927)Google Scholar
  25. Sakagami, S.F.: Arbeitsteilung der Arbeiterinnen in einem Zwergvolk, bestehend aus gleichaltrigen Volksgenossen. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ. [Ser. 6] 11, 343–400 (1953)Google Scholar
  26. Schlenk, H., Gellerman, J.L.: Esterification of fatty acids with diazomethane on a small scale. Anal. Chem. 32, 1412–1415 (1960)Google Scholar
  27. Seeley, T.D., Morse, R.A.: The nest of the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.). Insectes Soc. 23, 495–512 (1976)Google Scholar
  28. Simpson, J.: The influence of hive-space restriction on the tendency of honeybee colonies to rear queens. J. Apic. Res. 12, 183–186 (1973)Google Scholar
  29. Trivers, R.L., Hare, H.: Haplodiploidy and the evolution of the social insects. Science 191, 249–262 (1976)Google Scholar
  30. Velthuis, H.H.W.: Observations on the transmission of queen substances in the honey bee colony by the attendants of the queen. Behaviour 41, 105–129 (1972)Google Scholar
  31. Verheijen-Voogd, C.: How workers perceive the presence of their queen. Z. Vergl. Physiol. 41, 527–582 (1959)Google Scholar
  32. Vierling, G., Renner, M.: Die Bedeutung des Sekretes der Tergittaschendrüsen für die Attraktivität der Bienenkönigin gegenüber jungen Arbeiterinnen. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2, 185–200 (1977)Google Scholar
  33. Voogd, S.: Inhibition of ovary development in worker bees by extraction fluid of the queen. Experientia 11, 181–182 (1955)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas D. Seely
    • 1
  1. 1.Museum of Comparative ZoologyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations