Advertisement

Journal of Comparative Physiology A

, Volume 159, Issue 2, pp 251–256 | Cite as

Conditioning honeybees to discriminate between heritable odors from full and half sisters

  • Wayne M. Getz
  • Dorothea Brückner
  • Katherine B. Smith
Article

Summary

Differential conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex in honeybees is used to assess whether worker honeybees can be trained to discriminate between volatile odors emanating from different kin groups consisting of 2 or 20 workers. These odor source group workers are all reared and maintained under identical environmental conditions. They are the progeny of a queen that has been instrumentally inseminated so that eclosing adult workers can be sorted into colormorph full sister patrilines (workers are half sisters across patrilines). We demonstrate that workers are able to discriminate between the odors from groups of 20 individuals only if the groups represent individuals from different patrilines. However, discrimination occurs between groups of 2 individuals even if groups do not represent different patrilines. A number of environmental control experiments are also conducted. From our results we infer that there is heritable variation in the production of volatile odors by worker honeybees at a level that can be detected by the workers.

Keywords

Group Worker Control Experiment Environmental Control Odor Source Heritable Variation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beecher IM, Beecher MD (1983) Sibling recognition in bank swallows (Riparia riparia) Z Tierpsychol 62:145–150Google Scholar
  2. Bermant G, Gary NE (1966) Discrimination training and reversal in groups of honey bees. Psychon Sci 5:179–180Google Scholar
  3. Bitterman ME, Menzel R, Fietz A, Schäfer S (1983) Classical conditioning of proboscis extension in honeybees (Apis mellifera). J Comp Psychol 97:107–119Google Scholar
  4. Boch R, Morse RA (1982) Genetic factor in queen recognition odors of honey bees. Ann Entomol Soc Am 75:654–656Google Scholar
  5. Breed MD (1983) Nestmate recognition in honey bees. Anim Behav 31:86–91Google Scholar
  6. Breed MD, Butler L, Stiller TM (1985) Kin discrimination by worker honey bees in genetically mixed groups. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82:3058–3061Google Scholar
  7. Buckle GR, Greenberg L (1981) Nestmate recognition in sweat bees (Lasioglossum zephyrum): does an individual recognize its own odour or only the odours of its nestmates? Anim Behav 29:802–809Google Scholar
  8. Carlin NF, Hölldobler B (1983) Nestmate and kin recognition in interspecific mixed colonies of ants. Science 222:1027–1029Google Scholar
  9. Crozier RH, Dix MW (1979) Analysis of two genetic models for the innate components of colony odor in social Hymenoptera. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 4:217–224Google Scholar
  10. Frisch K von (1965) Tanzsprache und Orientierung der Bienen. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Gamboa GJ, Reeve HK, Ferguson ID, Wacker TL (in press) Nestmate recognition in social wasps: the origin and acquisition of recognition odours. Anim BehavGoogle Scholar
  12. Getz WM (1981) Genetically based kin recognition systems. J Theor Biol 92:209–226Google Scholar
  13. Getz WM (1982) An analysis of learned kin recognition in Hymenoptera. J Theor Biol 99:585–597Google Scholar
  14. Getz WM, Smith KB (1983) Genetic kin recognition: honey bees discriminate between full and half-sisters. Nature 302:147–148Google Scholar
  15. Getz WM, Smith KB (in press) Honey bee kin recognition: learning self and nestmate phenotypes. Anim BehavGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenberg L (1979) Genetic component of bee odor in kin recognition. Science 206:1095–1097Google Scholar
  17. Hölldobler B, Michener CD (1980) Mechanisms of identification and discrimination in social Hymenoptera. Dahlem Konferenzen, Evolution of Social Behavior: 35–58Google Scholar
  18. Holmes WG (1984) Sibling recognition in thirteen-lined ground squirrels: effects of genetic relatedness, rearing association, and olfaction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 14:225–233Google Scholar
  19. Kalmus H, Ribbands CR (1952) The origin of the odours by which honeybees distinguish their companions. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 140:50–59Google Scholar
  20. Kukuk PF, Breed MB, Sobti A, Bell WJ (1977) The contributions of kinship and conditioning to nestmate recognition and colony member recognition in a primitively eusocial beeLasioglossum zephyrum (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2:319–327Google Scholar
  21. Lacy RC, Sherman PW (1983) Kin recognition by phenotype matching. Am Naturalist 121:489–512Google Scholar
  22. Linsenmair KE (1985) Individual and family recognition in subsocial arthropods, in particular in the desert isopodHemilepistus reamuri. In: Hölldobler B, Lindauer M (eds) Experimental behavioral ecology and sociobiology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 411–436Google Scholar
  23. Menzel R, Erber J, Masuhr T (1974) Learning and memory in the honeybee. In: Browne LB (ed) Experimental analysis of insect behaviour. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 195–217Google Scholar
  24. Mintzer A, Vinson SB (1985) Kinship and incompatibility between colonies of the acacia antPseudomyrmex ferruginea. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:75–78Google Scholar
  25. Porter RH, Wyrick M, Pankey J (1978) Sibling recognition in spiny mice (Acomys cahirinus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 3:61–68Google Scholar
  26. Sachs L (1982) Applied statistics: a handbook of techniques. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith B (1983) Recognition of female kin by male bees through olfactory signals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 80:4551–4553Google Scholar
  28. Vareschi E (1971) Duftunterscheidung bei der Honigbiene. Einzelzell-Ableitungen und Verhaltensreaktionen. Z Vergl Physiol 75:143–173Google Scholar
  29. Waldman B (1985) Olfactory basis of kin recognition in toad tadpoles. J Comp Physiol A 156:565–597Google Scholar
  30. Wills GD, Wesley AL, Sisenmore DA, Anderson HN, Banks LM (1983) Discrimination by olfactory cues in albino rats reflecting familiarity and relatedness among conspecifics. Behav Neural Biol 38:139–143Google Scholar
  31. Wu HMN, Holmes WG, Medina SR, Sackett GP (1980) Kin preference in infantMacaca nemestrina. Nature 285:225–227Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne M. Getz
    • 1
  • Dorothea Brückner
    • 2
  • Katherine B. Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Biological ControlUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of BremenBremen 33Germany

Personalised recommendations