Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 14–21 | Cite as

Assured fitness returns favor sociality in a mass-provisioning sweat bee, Megalopta genalis (Hymenoptera: Halictidae)

  • Adam R. Smith
  • William T. Wcislo
  • Sean O'Donnell
Original Article

Abstract

Assured fitness returns models for the evolution of sociality emphasize the selective value of ensuring that offspring receive adequate parental care to reach maturity. If a member of a social group dies, it can accrue returns on investment in offspring through the efforts of surviving social partners. We provide evidence that in the mass-provisioning, facultatively social sweat bee Megalopta genalis, adult presence in the nest throughout brood development provides protection from ant predation. Nests with adults present were well protected, and brood in nests with adults removed suffered higher predation. Females in observation nests showed effective defensive behavior against experimentally introduced ants, and bees in natural nests repulsed naturally occurring ant raids. Megalopta nest architecture and behavior are such that the brood of several cooperating females can be defended with little additional cost relative to solitary nesting. The benefits of cooperative defense may favor group living in mass provisioning bees. Our observations and experiments suggest that parental care throughout brood development can be adaptive in mass provisioning species, supporting the predictions of assured fitness returns models.

Keywords

Assured fitness returns Social evolution Ant predation Brood defense 

Notes

Acknowledgements

A.R.S. was supported by a Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) short-term fellowship and by general research funds from STRI to W.T.W. S.O'D. was supported by NSF grant IBN-9904885. Additional general research funds from STRI to W.T.W. are also acknowledged, including the Baird Restricted Endowment. Victor Gonzalez and Kari Roche helped with fieldwork through the STRI Behind the Scenes Volunteer Program; Edgardo Garrido provided additional field assistance. Sabine Spehn, Alexander Lang, and Ingeborg Tuppener loaned equipment. Scott Powell provided army ant advice, Almut Kelber gave constructive criticism, and the staff of STRI provided logistical support. Two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments. Research was conducted under INRENARE scientific permit no. 75-99 in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Panamá.

References

  1. Arneson L, Wcislo WT (2003) Dominant-subordinate relationships in a facultatively social, nocturnal bee, Megalopta genalis (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). J Kans Entomol Soc (in press)Google Scholar
  2. Bull NJ, Schwarz MP (1996) The habitat saturation hypothesis and sociality in an allodapine bee: cooperative nesting is not "making the best of a bad situation". Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bull NJ, Schwarz MP (1997) Rearing of non-descendent offspring in an allodapine bee, Exoneura bicolor Smith (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Xylocopinae). Aust J Entomol 36:391–394Google Scholar
  4. Bull NJ, Schwarz MP (2001) Brood insurance via protogyny: a source of female-biased sex allocation. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:1869–1874CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgett DM, Sukumalanand P (2000) Flight activity of Xylocopa (Nyctomelitta) tranquebarica: a night flying carpenter bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J Apic Res 39:75–83Google Scholar
  6. Cane JH (1986) Predator deterrence by mandibular gland secretions of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). J Chem Ecol 12:1295–1309Google Scholar
  7. Cane JH, Michener CD (1983) Chemistry and function of mandibular gland products of bees of the genus Exoneura (Hymenoptera, Anthophoridae). J Chem Ecol 9:1525–1531Google Scholar
  8. Chadab R (1979) Army-ant predation on social wasps. PhD dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Conn.Google Scholar
  9. Danforth BN (2002) Evolution of sociality in a primitively eusocial lineage of bees. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:286–290.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Danforth BN, Eickwort GC (1997) The evolution of social behavior in the augochlorine sweat bees (Hymenoptera: Halictidae) based on a phylogenetic analysis of the genera. In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) Social behavior in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 270–292Google Scholar
  11. Eickwort GC, Eickwort KR, Eickwort JM, Gordon JM, Eickwort A (1996) Solitary behavior in a high-altitude population of the social sweat bee Halictus rubicundus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Falin ZH, Arneson LC, Wcislo WT (2000) Night-flying sweat bees Megalopta genalis and Me. ecuadoria (Hymenoptera: Halictidae) as hosts of the parasitoid beetle Macrosiagon gracilis (Coleoptera: Rhipiphoridae). J Kans Entomol Soc 73:183–185Google Scholar
  13. Field J, Shreeves G, Sumner S, Casiraghi M (2000) Insurance-based advantage to helpers in a tropical hover wasp. Nature 404:869–870CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gadagkar R (1990) Evolution of eusociality: the advantage of assured fitness returns. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 329:17–25Google Scholar
  15. Gadagkar R (1991) Demographic predisposition to the evolution of eusociality: a hierarchy of models. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88:10993–10997PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gotwald WHJr (1995) Army ants: the biology of social predation. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  17. Hamilton WD (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour, I and II. J Theor Biol 7:1–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hogendoorn K, Watiniasih NL, Schwarz MP (2001) Extended alloparental care in the almost solitary bee Exoneurella eremophila (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  20. Janzen DH (1968) Notes on nesting and foraging behavior of Megalopta (Hymenoptera: Halictidae) in Costa Rica. J Kans Entomol Soc 41:342--350Google Scholar
  21. Jeanne RL (1975) The adaptiveness of social wasp nest architecture. Q Rev Biol 50:267–287Google Scholar
  22. Jeanne RL (1979) A latitudinal gradient in rates of ant predation. Ecology 60:1211–1224Google Scholar
  23. Kaspari M, O'Donnell S, Kercher JR (2000) Energy, density, and constraints to species richness: ant assemblages along a productivity gradient. Am Nat 155:280–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kojima J (1993) A latitudinal gradient in intensity of applying ant-repellent substance to the nest petiole in paper wasps (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Insectes Soc 40:403–421Google Scholar
  25. Kukuk PF (1994) Nutrient transfer and reproduction in primitively social bees. In: Hunt JH, Nalepa CA (eds) Nourishment and evolution in insect societies. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo., pp 329–344Google Scholar
  26. Kukuk PF, Ward SA, Jozwiak A (1998) Mutualistic benefits generate an unequal distribution of risky activities among unrelated group members. Naturwissenschaften 85:445–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leigh EGJr (1999) Tropical forest ecology: A view from Barro Colorado Island. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Michener CD (1974) Social behavior of the bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  29. O'Donnell S, Jeanne RL (1995) Implications of senescence patterns for the evolution of age polyethism in eusocial insects. Behav Ecol 6:269–273Google Scholar
  30. Pickering J (1980) Sex ratio, social behavior and ecology in Polistes (Hymenoptera, Vespidae), Pachysomoides (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae) and Plasmodium (Protozoa, Haemosporida). PhD dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  31. Queller DC (1989) The evolution of eusociality: reproductive head starts of workers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86:3224–3226Google Scholar
  32. Queller DC (1994) Extended parental care and the origin of eusociality. Proc R Soc Lond B 256:105–111Google Scholar
  33. Queller DC (1996) The origin and maintenance of eusociality: the advantage of extended parental care. In: Turillazzi S, West-Eberhard MJ (eds) Natural history and evolution of paper wasps. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 218–234Google Scholar
  34. Queller DC, Strassmann JE (1998) Kin selection and social insects. BioScience 48:165–175Google Scholar
  35. Rau P (1933) Jungle bees and wasps of Barro Colorado Island. Von Hoffmann Press, St. Louis, Mo.Google Scholar
  36. Rettenmeyer CW, Chadab-Crepet R, Naumann MG, Morales L (1983) Comparative foraging by Neotropical army ants. In: Jaisson P (ed) Social insects in the tropics, vol 2. Universite de Paris-Nord, Paris, pp 59–73Google Scholar
  37. Roubik DW (1989) Ecology and natural history of tropical bees. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  38. Roubik DW, Wolda H (2001) Do competing honey bees matter? Dynamics and abundance of native bees before and after honey bee invasion. Popul Ecol 43:53–62Google Scholar
  39. Sakagami SF (1964) Wiederentdeckung des Nestes einer Nachtfurchenbiene, Megalopta sp am Amazonas (Hymenoptera, Halictidae). Kontyû 32:457–463Google Scholar
  40. Schatz B, Wcislo WT (1999) Ambush predation by the ponerine ant Ectatomma ruidum Roger (Formicidae) on a sweat bee, Lasioglossum umbripenne (Halictidae), in Panama. J Insect Behav 12:641–663Google Scholar
  41. Schwarz MP, Silberbauer LX, Hurst PS (1997) Intrinsic and extrinsic factors associated with social evolution in allodapine bees. In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) Social behavior in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 333–346Google Scholar
  42. Schwarz MP, Bull NJ, Hogendoorn K (1998) Evolution of sociality in the allodapine bees: a review of sex allocation, ecology, and evolution. Insectes Soc 45:349–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith AR, O'Donnell S, Jeanne RL (2000) Correlated evolution of colony defense and social structure: a comparative analysis in eusocial wasps (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Evol Ecol Res 3:331–344Google Scholar
  44. Soucy SL, Danforth BN (2002) Phylogeography of the socially polymorphic sweat bee Halictus rubicundus (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Evolution 56:330–341PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Strassmann JE, Queller DC (1989) Ecological determinants of social evolution. In: Breed MD, Page REJr (eds) The genetics of social evolution. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo.Google Scholar
  46. Wcislo WT (1997a) Behavioral environments of sweat bees (Halictinae) in relation to variability in social organization. In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) Social behavior in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 316–332Google Scholar
  47. Wcislo WT (1997b) Invasion of nests of Lasioglossum imitatum by a social parasite, Paralictus asteris (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Ethology 103:1–11Google Scholar
  48. Wcislo WT (2000) Environmental hierarchy, behavioral contexts, and social evolution in insects. In: Martins RP, Lewinsohn TM, Barbeitos MS (eds) Ecologia e comportamento de insetos. Oecol Bras [Suppl] 8:49–84Google Scholar
  49. Wcislo WT, Danforth BN (1997) Secondarily solitary: the evolutionary loss of social behavior. Trends Ecol Evol 12:468–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wcislo WT, Gonzalez VH (2003) Social and ecological contexts of trophallaxis in facultatively social, nocturnal sweat bees, Megalopta genalis and M. ecuadoria (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Ethology (in press)Google Scholar
  51. Wilson EO (1971) The insect societies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  52. Wolda H, Roubik DW (1986) Nocturnal bee abundance and seasonal bee activity in a Panamanian forest. Ecology 67:426–433Google Scholar
  53. Wright SJ, Calderon O (1995) Phylogenetic patterns among tropical flowering phenologies. J Ecol 83:937–948Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam R. Smith
    • 1
  • William T. Wcislo
    • 2
  • Sean O'Donnell
    • 1
  1. 1.Animal Behavior Area, Department of PsychologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Smithsonian Tropical Research InstituteAPO AA 34002Panama

Personalised recommendations