Naturwissenschaften

, Volume 101, Issue 6, pp 523–526 | Cite as

The innate responses of bumble bees to flower patterns: separating the nectar guide from the nectary changes bee movements and search time

  • Eben Goodale
  • Edward Kim
  • Annika Nabors
  • Sara Henrichon
  • James C. Nieh
Short Communication

Abstract

Nectar guides can enhance pollinator efficiency and plant fitness by allowing pollinators to more rapidly find and remember the location of floral nectar. We tested if a radiating nectar guide around a nectary would enhance the ability of naïve bumble bee foragers to find nectar. Most experiments that test nectar guide efficacy, specifically radiating linear guides, have used guides positioned around the center of a radially symmetric flower, where nectaries are often found. However, the flower center may be intrinsically attractive. We therefore used an off-center guide and nectary and compared “conjunct” feeders with a nectar guide surrounding the nectary to “disjunct” feeders with a nectar guide separated from the nectary. We focused on the innate response of novice bee foragers that had never previously visited such feeders. We hypothesized that a disjunct nectar guide would conflict with the visual information provided by the nectary and negatively affect foraging. Approximately, equal numbers of bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) found nectar on both feeder types. On disjunct feeders, however, unsuccessful foragers spent significantly more time (on average 1.6-fold longer) searching for nectar than any other forager group. Successful foragers on disjunct feeders approached these feeders from random directions unlike successful foragers on conjunct feeders, which preferentially approached the combined nectary and nectar guide. Thus, the nectary and a surrounding nectar guide can be considered a combination of two signals that attract naïve foragers even when not in the floral center.

Keywords

Nectar guides Bee foraging Orientation Navigation Pollination Floral constancy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank A. S. Leonard for her helpful comments during project conception, Tess Benjamin for her hard work on these experiments, and three anonymous reviewers for improving the manuscript. Stephen Mayfield kindly loaned us a light meter to measure nectary darkness. This research was supported by a Blasker Science and Technology grant from the San Diego Science Foundation and the 1000 Plan Recruitment Program from the People’s Republic of China to EG, and by a UC Academic Senate Grant to JCN.

Supplementary material

114_2014_1188_Fig3_ESM.gif (47 kb)
Fig. S1

Sample paths (digitized from videos) taken by bumble bee (B. impatiens) foragers searching for the nectary on the feeders. White and black stars, respectively, mark the beginning and end of a bee’s path. Each nectar guideline is 1 cm long. The nectary and nectar guide are shown as in Fig 1. (GIF 47 kb)

114_2014_1188_MOESM1_ESM.eps (676 kb)
High resolution image (EPS 675 kb)
114_2014_1188_MOESM2_ESM.doc (43 kb)
Table S1 (DOC 43 kb)
114_2014_1188_MOESM3_ESM.doc (52 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 52 kb)

References

  1. Biesmeijer JC, Giurfa M, Koedam D, Potts SG, Joel DM, Dafni A (2005) Convergent evolution: floral guides, stingless bee nest entrances, and insectivorous pitchers. Naturwissenschaften 92:444–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dafni A, Giurfa M (1999) The functional ecology of nectar guides in relation to insect behaviour and vision. In: Wasser S (ed) Evolutionary theory and processes—modern perspectives. Kluwer Academic, Dortrecht, pp 363–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dinkel T, Lunau K (2001) How drone flies (Eristalis tenx L., Syrphidae, Diptera) use floral guides to locate food resources. J Insect Physiol 47:1111–1118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dötterl S, Jürgens A (2005) Spatial fragrance patterns in flowers of Silene latifolia: lilac compounds as olfactory nectar guides? Plant Syst Evol 255:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Free JB (1970) Effect of flower shapes and nectar guides on the behaviour of foraging honeybees. Behaviour 37:269–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kulahci IG, Dornhaus A, Papaj DR (2008) Multimodal signals enhance decision making in foraging bumble-bees. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:797–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kunze J, Gumbert A (2001) The combined effect of color and odor on flower choice behavior of bumble bees in flower mimicry systems. Behav Ecol 12:447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leonard AS, Papaj DR (2011) ‘X’marks the spot: the possible benefits of nectar guides to bees and plants. Funct Ecol 25:1293–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leonard AS, Dornhaus A, Papaj DR (2011) Flowers help bees cope with uncertainty: signal detection and the function of floral complexity. J Exp Biol 214:113–121PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leonard AS, Brent J, Papaj DR, Dornhaus A (2013) Floral nectar guide patterns discourage nectar robbing by bumble bees. PLoS ONE 8:e55914PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lunau K (1991) Innate flower recognition in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris, B. lucorum; Apidae): optical signals from stamens as landing reaction releasers. Ethology 88:203–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lunau K, Fieselmann G, Heuschen B, van de Loo A (2006) Visual targeting of components of floral colour patterns in flower-naive bumblebees (Bombus terrestris; Apidae). Naturwissenschaften 93:325–328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Manning A (1956) The effect of honey-guides. Behaviour 9:114–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Neal PR, Dafni A, Giurfa M (1998) Floral symmetry and its role in plant-pollinator systems: terminology, distribution, and hypotheses. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:345–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pyke GH (1980) Optimal foraging in bumblebees: calculation of net rate of energy intake and optimal patch choice. Theor Popul Biol 17:232–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sprengel CK (1793) Das entdeckte Geheimniss dem Natur im Bau und in der Befruchtung der Blumen. Friedrich Vieweg der Ältere, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thomson JD (1986) Pollen transport and deposition by bumble bees in Erythronium: influences of floral nectar and bee grooming. J Ecol 74:329–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Thomson JD, Plowright RC (1980) Pollen carryover, nectar rewards, and pollinator behavior with special reference to Diervilla lonicera. Oecologia 46:68–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Waser NM, Price MV (1983) Pollinator behaviour and natural selection for flower colour in Delphinium nelsonii. Nature 302:422–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eben Goodale
    • 1
  • Edward Kim
    • 2
  • Annika Nabors
    • 2
  • Sara Henrichon
    • 2
  • James C. Nieh
    • 2
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Tropical Forest Ecology, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical GardenChinese Academy of SciencesMenglaChina
  2. 2.Section of Ecology, Behavior, and Evolution, Division of Biological SciencesUniversity of California, San DiegoSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations