Advertisement

Naturwissenschaften

, Volume 92, Issue 9, pp 440–443 | Cite as

Non-random nectar unloading interactions between foragers and their receivers in the honeybee hive

  • Joaquín Goyret
  • Walter M. Farina
Short Communication

Abstract

Nectar acquisition in the honeybee Apis mellifera is a partitioned task in which foragers gather nectar and bring it to the hive, where nest mates unload via trophallaxis (i.e. mouth-to-mouth transfer) the collected food for further storage. Because forager mates exploit different feeding places simultaneously, this study addresses the question of whether nectar unloading interactions between foragers and hive-bees are established randomly, as it is commonly assumed. Two groups of foragers were trained to exploit a different scented food source for 5 days. We recorded their trophallaxes with hive-mates, marking the latter ones according to the forager group they were unloading. We found non-random probabilities for the occurrence of trophallaxes between experimental foragers and hive-bees, instead, we found that trophallactic interactions were more likely to involve groups of individuals which had formerly interacted orally. We propose that olfactory cues present in the transferred nectar promoted the observed bias, and we discuss this bias in the context of the organization of nectar acquisition: a partitioned task carried out in a decentralized insect society.

Keywords

Eugenol Honeybee Coloni Food Transfer Nectar Source Nonanol 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are in debt with P. Fernández and M. Gil for attending the feeders during the experiments and H. Verna for technical assistance. We also thank J. Núñez, R. De Marco, R. Raguso and three anonymous referees for valuable comments on early versions of this manuscript; especially to R. De Marco, whose contribution to the discussion was substantial. We also thank Monika Shehi for language editing. This study was partially supported by funds from ANPCYT (01-12319), CONICET (02049), University of Buenos Aires (X036) and Fundación Antorchas to WMF. The present study complies with the current laws of the state country in which experiments were performed.

References

  1. Anderson C, Ratnieks FLW (1999) Task partitioning in insect societies. I. Effect of colony size on queueing delay and ergonomic efficiency. Am Naturalist 154:521–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Farina WM, Grüter C, Díaz PC (2005) Social learning of floral odours inside the honeybee hive. Proc R Soc B (in press)Google Scholar
  3. von Frisch K (1967) The dance language and orientation in honey bees. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Gregson AM, Hart AG, Holcombe M, Ratnieks FLW (2003) Partial nectar loads as a cause of multiple nectar transfer in the honey bee (Apis mellifera): a simulation model. J Theor Biol 222:1–8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Gil M, De Marco R (2005) Olfactory learning by means of trophallaxis in Apis mellifera. J Exp Biol 208:671–680CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gil M, Farina WM (2003) Crop scents affect the occurrence of trophallaxis among forager honeybees. J Comp Physiol A 189:379–382Google Scholar
  7. Johnson DL (1967) Communication among honey bees with field experience. Anim Behav 15:487–492CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson DL, Wenner AM (1966) A relationship between conditioning and communication in honey bees. Anim Behav 14:261–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ratnieks FLW, Anderson C (1999) Task partitioning in insect societies. II. Use of queueing delay information in recruitment. Am Naturalist 154:536–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Reinhard J, Srinivasan MV, Guez D, Zhang SW (2004) Floral scents induce recall of navigational and visual memories in honeybees. J Exp Biol 207:4371–4381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ribbands CR (1954) The defense of the honeybee community. Proc R Soc B 142:514–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Seeley TD (1995) The Wisdom of the Hive. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Seeley TD, Tovey CA (1994) Why search time to find a food-storer bee accurately indicates the relative rates of nectar collecting and nectar processing in honey bee colonies. Anim Behav 47:311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Vogel S (1983) Ecophysiology of zoophilic pollination In: Lange O.L., Nobel P.S., Osmond C.B., Ziegier H. (eds) Physiological plant ecology III, Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 559–624Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Grupo de Estudio de Insectos Sociales, Departamento de Fisiología, Biología Molecular y Celular, IFIBYNE-CONICET, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y NaturalesUniversidad de Buenos Aires, Pabellón II, Ciudad Universitaria (C1428EHA)Buenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of South CarolinaSouth CarolinaUSA

Personalised recommendations