Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 229–237 | Cite as

Assessing the benefits of cooperation in honeybee foraging: search costs, forage quality, and competitive ability

  • Thomas D. Seeley
  • P. Kirk Visscher
Article

Summary

The foragers in honeybee colonies cooperate by sharing information about rich sources of food. This study examines three hypotheses about the benefits of this cooperation: (H1) it decreases foragers' costs in finding new food sources, (H2) it increases the quality of the food sources located by foragers, and (H3) it increases the ability of a colony's foragers to compete for high-quality food sources. To test each hypothesis, we identified a critical pattern in the foraging process which, if observed, would cast doubt on that hypothesis, and then gathered data to check for these patterns. Our observations do not support the first hypothesis, but do support the second and third. These results, in addition to helping us understand the functional significance of the honeybee's dance language, provide insights into the colonial organization of foraging by honeybees.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boden GT (1977) The vascular flora of Appledore Island. Shoals Marine Laboratory, Cornell University, Ithaca, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Buskirk RE (1981) Sociality in the Arachnida. In: Hermann HR (ed) Social insects, Vol 2. Academic Press, New York, pp 281–367Google Scholar
  3. Esch H, Bastian JA (1970) How do newly recruited honeybees approach a food site? Z Vergl Physiol 68:175–181Google Scholar
  4. Frisch K von (1967) The dance language and orientation of bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  5. Gould JL (1975a) Honey bee recruitment: the dance-language controversy. Science 189:685–693Google Scholar
  6. Gould JL (1975b) Communication of distance information by honey bees. J Comp Physiol 104:161–173Google Scholar
  7. Gould JL (1976) The dance-language controversy. Q Rev Biol 51:211–244Google Scholar
  8. Gould JL, Henerey M, MacLeod MC (1970) Communication of direction by the honey bee. Science 169:544–554Google Scholar
  9. Howard RA (1968) Flowers of Star Island, the Isles of Shoals. Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  10. Kacelnik A, Houston AI, Schmid-Hempel P (1986) Centralplace foraging in honey bees: the effect of travel time and nectar flow on crop filling Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:19–24Google Scholar
  11. Kremer F (1981) Zur Steuerung der Abflugmagenfüllung bei der Honigbiene (Apis mellifica). Zool Jb Physiol 85:249–265Google Scholar
  12. Lindauer M (1952) Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Arbeisteilung im Bienenstaat. Z Vergl Physiol 34:299–345Google Scholar
  13. Lindauer M (1954) Temperaturregulierung und Wasserhaushalt im Bienenstaat. Z Vergl Physiol 36:391–432Google Scholar
  14. Mackie GO (1986) From aggregates to integrates: physiological aspects of modularity in colonial animals. Phil Trans R Soc London B 313:175–196Google Scholar
  15. Markl H (1985) Manipulation, modulation, information, cognition: some of the riddles of communication. In: Hölldobler B, Lindauer M (eds) Experimental behavioral ecology and sociobiology. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, pp 163–194Google Scholar
  16. Mautz D (1971) Der Kommunikationseffekt der Schwänzeltänze bei Apis mellifica carnica (Pollm.). Z Vergl Physiol 72:197–220Google Scholar
  17. Meyer WH, Plusnin BA (1945) The Yale Forest in Tolland and Windham Counties, Connecticut. Yale Univ School For Bull 55:1–126Google Scholar
  18. Michener CD (1974) The social behavior of the bees. A comparative study. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  19. Núñez JA (1966) Quantitative Bezichungen zwischen den Eigenschaften von Futterquellen und dem Verhalten von Sammelbienen. Z Vergl Physiol 53:142–164Google Scholar
  20. Núñez JA (1970) The relationship between sugar flow and foraging and recruiting behaviour of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Anim Behav 18:527–538Google Scholar
  21. 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 21:139–150Google Scholar
  22. Oettingen-Spielberg T zu (1949) Über das Wesen der Suchbiene. Z Vergl Physiol 31:454–489Google Scholar
  23. Park OW (1922) Time and labor factors involved in gathering pollen and nectar. J Econ Entomol 15:129–134Google Scholar
  24. Pellett FC (1976) American honey plants. Dadant and Sons, Hamilton, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  25. Pflumm W (1977) Welche Größen beeinflussen die Menge der von Bienen und Wespen an der Futterquelle aufgenommenen Zuckerlösung? Apidologie 8:401–412Google Scholar
  26. Roubik DW (1980) Foraging behavior of competing Africanized honeybees and stingless bees. Ecology 61:836–845Google Scholar
  27. Schmid-Hempel P, Kacelnik A, Houston AI (1985) Honeybees maximize efficiency by not filling their crop. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:61–66Google Scholar
  28. Seeley TD (1983) Division of labor between scouts and recruits in honeybee foraging. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 12:253–259Google Scholar
  29. Seeley TD (1985) Honeybee ecology. A study of adaptation in social life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  30. Seeley TD (1986) Social foraging by honeybees: how colonies allocate foragers among patches of flowers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:343–354Google Scholar
  31. Seeley TD (1988) The effectiveness of information collection about food sources by honeybee colonies. Anim BehavGoogle Scholar
  32. Seeley TD, Levien RA (1987) Social foraging by honeybees: how a colony tracks rich sources of nectar. In: Menzel R, Mercer A (ed) Neurobiology and behavior in honeybees. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 38–53Google Scholar
  33. Seeley TD, Morse RA, Visscher PK (1979) The natural history of the flight of honey bee swarms. Psyche 86:103–113Google Scholar
  34. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1969) Biometry. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  35. Visscher PK, Seeley TD (1982) Foraging strategy of honeybee colonies in a temperature deciduous forest. Ecology 63:1790–1801Google Scholar
  36. Wells PH, Giacchino J Jr (1968) Relationship between the volume and the sugar concentration of loads carried by honey bees. J Apic Res 7:77–82Google Scholar
  37. Wiley RH (1983) The evolution of communication: information and manipulation. In: Halliday TR, Slater PJB (eds) Animal behaviour, vol. 2. Communication, Freeman, New York, pp 156–189Google Scholar
  38. Wilson EO (1971) The insect societies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilson EO (1975) Sociobiology. The new synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson EO (1985) The sociogenesis of insect colonies. Science 228:1489–1495Google Scholar
  41. Wittenberger JF (1981) Animal social behavior. Duxbury, BostonGoogle Scholar
  42. Wittenberger JF, Hunt GL (1985) The adaptive significance of coloniality in birds. In: Farner DS, King JR, Parkes KC (eds) Avian biology, Vol. 8. Academic Press, New York, pp 1–78Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas D. Seeley
    • 1
  • P. Kirk Visscher
    • 1
  1. 1.Section of Neurobiology and BehaviorCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations