Oecologia

, Volume 82, Issue 4, pp 450–460 | Cite as

How and why do nectar-foraging bumblebees initiate movements between inflorescences of wild bergamot Monarda fistulosa (Lamiaceae)?

  • James E. Cresswell
Original Papers

Summary

By experimental manipulation of the nectar in flowers, I characterized the decision-making process used by nectar-gathering bumblebees for initiating movements between inflorescences of wild bergamot. The decision-making process has these characteristics: departure from an inflorescence is less likely as nectar rewards increase; departure decisions are based on the amount of nectar in the last flower probed and are not influenced by the nectar rewards in either the previously probed flower or the previously visited inflorescence; the number of flowers already probed at an inflorescence influences departure decisions weakly; a bees' response (to stay or to depart) to a given size of nectar reward is variable. Since previously proposed foraging rules do not accord with this description, I propose a new rule. I show by experiment that the movements made by bumblebees enhance foraging success.

Key words

Bumblebees Bergamot Foraging Nectar Optimal foraging theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bovet P (1985) The adaptive fitness of randomness in choice and foraging behavior. Beh Brain Sci 8:315–330Google Scholar
  2. Cameron SA (1981) Chemical signals in bumblebee foraging. Beh Ecol Sociobiol 9:257–260Google Scholar
  3. Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: the marginal value theorem. Theor Pop Biol 9:129–136Google Scholar
  4. Cheverton J (1982) Bumblebees may use a suboptimal arbitrary handedness to solve complex foraging decisions. Anim Beh 30:934–935Google Scholar
  5. Cibula DA, Zimmerman M (1986) The effect of plant density on departure decisions: testing the marginal value theorem using bumblebees and Delphinium nelsonii. Oikos 43:154–158Google Scholar
  6. Cowie RJ (1977) Optimal foraging in great tits (Parus major). Nature 268:137–138Google Scholar
  7. Cresswell JE (1989) Optimal foraging theory applied to bumblebees gathering nectar from wild bergamot. Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan, MI, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Cruden RW, Hermanutz L, Shuttleworth J (1984) The pollination biology and breeding system of Monarda fistulosa (Labiatae). Oecologia 64:104–110Google Scholar
  9. Emlen JM (1966) The role of time and energy in food preference. Am Nat 100:611–617Google Scholar
  10. Galen C, Plowright RC (1985) The effects of nectar level and flower development on pollen carry-over in inflorescences of fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) (Onagraceae). Can J Bot 63:488–491Google Scholar
  11. Green RF (1980) Bayesian birds: a simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging. Theor Pop Biol 18:244–256Google Scholar
  12. Hartling LK, Plowright RC (1978) Foraging by bumble bees on patches of artificial flowers: a laboratory study. Can J Zool 57:1866–1870Google Scholar
  13. Hodges CM (1981) Optimal foraging in bumblebees: hunting by expectation. Beh Ecol Sociobiol 9:41–44Google Scholar
  14. Hodges CM (1985a) Bumble bee foraging: the threshold departure rule. Ecology 66:179–187Google Scholar
  15. Hodges CM (1985b) Bumble bee foraging: energetic consequences of using a threshold departure rule. Ecology 66:188–197Google Scholar
  16. Iwasa I, Higashi M, Yamamura N (1981) Prey distribution as a factor determining the choice of optimal foraging strategy. Am Nat 117:710–723Google Scholar
  17. Janetos AC, Cole BJ (1981) Imperfectly optimal animals. Beh Ecol Sociobiol 9:203–209Google Scholar
  18. Kato M (1988) Bumblebee visits to Impatiens spp: pattern and efficiency. Oecologia 76:364–370Google Scholar
  19. Krebs JR, Ryan JC, Charnov EL (1974) Hunting by expectation or optimal foraging? A study of patch use by chickadees. Anim Behav 22:953–964Google Scholar
  20. Lima SL (1984) Downy woodpecker foraging behavior: efficient sampling in simple stochastic environments. Ecology 65:166–174Google Scholar
  21. Lima SL (1985) Sampling behavior of starlings foraging in simple patchy environments. Beh Ecol Sociobiol 16:135–142Google Scholar
  22. MacArthur RH, Pianka ER (1966) On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am Nat 100:603–609Google Scholar
  23. Marden JH (1984) Remote perception of floral nectar by bumblebees. Oecologia 64:232–240Google Scholar
  24. Maynard-Smith J (1978) Optimization theory in evolution. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 9:31–56Google Scholar
  25. Mazur JE (1983) Reply to staddon and Hinson. Science 221:977Google Scholar
  26. McKenna MA, Thomson JD (1988) A technique for sampling and measuring small amounts of floral nectar. Ecology 69:1306–1307Google Scholar
  27. McNair JN (1985) Optimal foraging for operant conditioners. Beh Brain Sci 8:343–344Google Scholar
  28. McNamara J, Houston A (1980) The application of statistical decision theory to animal behavior. J Theor Biol 85:673–690Google Scholar
  29. Ollason JG (1980) Learning to forage- optimally? Theor Pop Biol 18:44–56Google Scholar
  30. Pleasants JD (1983) Nectar production patterns in Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). Am J Bot 70:1468–1475Google Scholar
  31. Pyke GH (1979) Optimal foraging in bumblebees: rule of departure between flowers within inflorescences. Anim Beh 27:1167–1181Google Scholar
  32. Pyke GH (1982) Foraging in bumblebees: rule of departure from an inflorescence. Can J Zool 60:417–428Google Scholar
  33. Real L, Caraco T (1986) Risk and foraging in stochastic environments. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 17:371–390Google Scholar
  34. Real L, Rathcke BJ (1988) Patterns of individual variability in floral resources. Ecology 69:728–735Google Scholar
  35. Schoener TW (1971) Theory of feeding strategies. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 2:369–404Google Scholar
  36. sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry (2nd ed.) W.H. Freeman and Co., NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  37. Staddon JER, Hinson JM (1983) Optimization: a result or a mechanism? Science 221:976–977Google Scholar
  38. Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging Theory. Princeton University Press, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomson JD, Maddison WP, Plowright RC (1982) Behavior of bumbleebee pollinators of Aralia hispida Vent. (Araliaceae). Oecologia 54:326–336Google Scholar
  40. Waddington KD (1981) Factors influencing pollen flow in bumblebee-pollinated Delphiniun virescens. Oikos 37:153–159Google Scholar
  41. Zimmerman M (1983) Plant reproduction and optimal foraging: experimental nectar manipulations in Delphinium nelsonii. Oikos 41:57–63Google Scholar
  42. Zimmerman M, Pyke GH (1986) Reproduction in Polemonium: patterns and implications of floral nectar production and standing crops. Am J Bot 73:1405–1415Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • James E. Cresswell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations