Percent lipid is associated with body size but not task in the bumble bee Bombus impatiens

  • Margaret J. Couvillon
  • Jennifer M. Jandt
  • Jennifer Bonds
  • Bryan R. Helm
  • Anna Dornhaus
Original Paper

Abstract

In some group-living organisms, labor is divided among individuals. This allocation to particular tasks is frequently stable and predicted by individual physiology. Social insects are excellent model organisms in which to investigate the interplay between physiology and individual behavior, as division of labor is an important feature within colonies, and individual physiology varies among the highly related individuals of the colony. Previous studies have investigated what factors are important in determining how likely an individual is, compared to nestmates, to perform certain tasks. One such task is foraging. Corpulence (i.e., percent lipid) has been shown to determine foraging propensity in honey bees and ants, with leaner individuals being more likely to be foragers. Is this a general trend across all social insects? Here we report data analyzing the individual physiology, specifically the percent lipid, of worker bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) from whom we also analyze behavioral task data. Bumble bees are also unusual among the social bees in that workers may vary widely in size. Surprisingly we find that, unlike other social insects, percent lipid is not associated with task propensity. Rather, body size closely predicts individual relative lipid stores, with smaller worker bees being allometrically fatter than larger worker bees.

Keywords

Lipid Size polymorphism Social insects Bumble bees Division of labor 

References

  1. Alford DV (1975) Bumblebees. Davis-Poynter, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann J (1974) Observational Study of Behavior: Sampling Methods. Behaviour 49:227–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Shahar Y, Robichon A, Sokolowski MB, Robinson GE (2002) Influence of gene action across different time scales on behavior. Science 296(5568):741–744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beshers SN, Fewell JH (2001) Models of division of labor in social insects. Annu Rev Entomol 46(1):413–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanchard GB, Orledge GM, Reynolds SE, Franks NR (2000) Division of labour and seasonality in the ant Leptothorax albipennis: worker corpulence and its influence on behaviour. Anim Behav 59(4):723–738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bligh EG, Dyer WJ (1959) A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Can J Physiol Pharm 37(8):911–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Børgesen LW (2000) Nutritional function of replete workers in the pharaoh’s ant, Monomorium pharaonis. Insect Soc 47(2):141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burgett DM, Young RG (1974) Lipid storage by honey ant repletes. Ann Entomol Soc Am 67:743–744Google Scholar
  9. Cameron SA (1989) Temporal patterns of division of labor among workers in the primitively eusocial bumble bee, Bombus griseocollis (Hymenoptera: Apidae)). Ethology 80:137–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Couvillon MJ, Dornhaus A (2009) Location, location, location: larvae position inside the nest is correlated with adult body size in worker bumble bees (Bombus impatiens). P Roy Soc Lond B Bio 276:2411–2418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Couvillon MJ, Dornhaus A (2010) Small worker bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) are hardier against starvation than their larger sisters. Insect Soc 57:193–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Couvillon MJ, Jandt J, Duong N, Dornhaus A (2010) Ontogeny of worker body size distribution in bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) colonies. Ecol Entomol 35:424–435Google Scholar
  13. Dornhaus A, Powell S (2010) Foraging and defence strategies. In: Lach L, Parr CL, Abbott KL (eds) Ant ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 385Google Scholar
  14. Folch J, Lees M, Sloane-Stanley G (1957) A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. J Biol Chem 226:495–509Google Scholar
  15. Gäde G, Auerswald L (1998) Flight metabolism in carpenter bees and primary structure of their hypertrehalosaemic peptide. Exp Biol Online 3(6):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goulson D (2003) Bumblebees—behaviour and ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Goulson D, Peat J, Stout JC, Tucker J, Darvill B, Derwent LC, Hughes WOH (2002) Can alloethism in workers of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, be explained in terms of foraging efficiency? Anim Behav 64:123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hahn DA (2006) Two closely related species of desert carpenter ant differ in individual-level allocation to fat storage. Physiol Biochem Zool 79:847–856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heinrich B (1975) Energetics of pollination. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 6:139–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  21. Jandt J, Dornhaus A (2009) Spatial organization and division of labor in the bumble bee, Bombus impatiens. Anim Behav 77:641–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jandt J, Huang E, Dornhaus A (2009) Weak specialization of workers inside a bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) nest. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63(12):1829–1836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jeanne RL (1986) The organization of work in Polybia occidentalis: costs and benefits of specialization in a social wasp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19(5):333–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jeanne RL (1991) Polyethism. In: Ross KG, Matthews RW (eds) The social biology of wasps. Cornell University, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  25. Katayama E (1973) Observations on the brood development in Bombus ignitus (Hymenoptera, Apidae) II. Brood development and feeding habits. Kontyû 41:203–216Google Scholar
  26. Krebs JR, Davies NB (1997) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Kukuk PF, Ward SA, Jozwiak A (1998) Mutualistic benefits generate an unequal distribution of risky activities among unrelated group members. Naturwissenschaften 85(9):445–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lachaud JP, Passera L, Grimal A, Detrain C, Beugnon G (1992) Lipid storage by major workers and starvation reistance in the ant Pheidole pallidula (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). In: Billen J (ed) Biology and evolution of social insects. Leuven University Press, Leuven (Belgium), pp 153–160Google Scholar
  29. Markiewicz D, O’Donnell S (2001) Social dominance, task performance and nutrition: implications for reproduction in eusocial wasps. J Comp Physiol A 187(5):327–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Michener CD (1974) The social behaviour of the bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Donnell S, Jeanne RL (1995a) Implications of senescence patterns for the evolution of age polyethism in eusocial insects. Behav Ecol 6:269–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Donnell S, Jeanne RL (1995b) The roles of body size and dominance in division of labor among workers of the eusocial wasp Polybia occidentalis (Olivier) (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). J Kansas Entomol Soc 68(1):43–50Google Scholar
  33. O’Donnell S, Jeanne RL (1995c) Worker lipid stores decrease with outside-nest task performance in wasps: implications for the evolution of age polyethism. Cell Mol Life Sci 51(7):749–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. O’Donnell S (1995) Division of labor in post-emergence colonies of the primitively eusocial wasp Polistes instabilis de Saussure (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Insect Soc 42(1):17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Donnell S, Jeanne RL (1992) Lifelong patterns of forager behaviour in a tropical swarm-founding wasp: effects of specialization and activity level on longevity. Anim Behav 44(6):1021–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ojeda-Avila T, Arthur Woods H, Raguso RA (2003) Effects of dietary variation on growth, composition, and maturation of Manduca sexta (Sphingidae: Lepidoptera). J Insect Physiol 49(4):293–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pendrel BA, Plowright RC (1981) Larval feeding by adult bumble bee workers (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8(2):71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pereboom JJM (1997) “…while they banquet splendidly the future mother…”. Utrecht University Google Scholar
  39. Pereboom JJM, Velthuis HHW, Duchateau MJ (2003) The organisation of larval feeding in bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae) and its significance to caste differentiation. Insect Soc 50(2):127–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Plowright RC, Jay SC (1968) Caste differentiation in bumblebees (Bombus latr - Hym) 1. Determination of female size. Insect Soc 15(2):171–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Porter SD, Jorgensen CD (1981) Foragers of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex owyheei: a disposable caste? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9(4):247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Porter SD, Tschinkel WR (1985) Fire ant polymorphism: the ergonomics of brood production. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:323–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Powell S, Tschinkel WR (1999) Ritualized conflict in Odontomachus brunneus and the generation of interaction-based task allocation: a new organizational mechanism in ants. Anim Behav 58:965–972PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pugesek BH (1995) Offspring growth in the California gull: reproductive effort and parental experience hypotheses. Anim Behav 49:641–647Google Scholar
  45. Raguso RA, Ojeda-Avila T, Desai S, Jurkiewicz MA, Arthur Woods H (2007) The influence of larval diet on adult feeding behaviour in the tobacco hornworm moth, Manduca sexta. J Insect Physiol 53(9):923–932PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (1996) Meeting nutrient requirements: the roles of power and efficiency. Entomol Exp Appl 80(1):65–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (1997) Integrative models of nutrient balancing: application to insects and vertebrates. Nutr Res Rev 10:151–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (1999) Integrating nutrition: a geometrical approach. Entomol Exp Appl 91(1):67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ribeiro MF, Velthuis HHW, Duchateau MJ, van der Tweel I (1999) Feeding frequency and caste differentiation in Bombus terrestris larvae. Insect Soc 46:306–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Robinson GE (1987) Regulation of honey bee age polyethism by juvenile hormone. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20(5):329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Robinson GE (1992) Regulation of division-of-labor in insect societies. Annu Rev Entomol 37:637–665PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Robinson E, Richardson T, Sendova-Franks A, Feinerman O, Franks N (2009a) Radio tagging reveals the roles of corpulence, experience and social information in ant decision making. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63(5):627–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Robinson EJH, Feinerman O, Franks NR (2009b) Flexible task allocation and the organization of work in ants. P Roy Soc Lond B Bio 276(1677):4373–4380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rothe U, Nachtigall W (1989) Flight of the honey bee. J Comp Physiol A 158(6):739–749Google Scholar
  55. Shingleton AW, Frankino WA, Flatt T, Nijhout HF, Emlen DJ (2007) Size and shape: the developmental regulation of static allometry in insects. Bioessays 29(6):536–548PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Suhonen J (1993) Predation risk influences the use of foraging sites by tits. Ecology 74(4):1197–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sutcliffe GH, Plowright RC (1988) The effects of food supply on adult size in the bumble bee Bombus terricola Kirby (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Can Entomol 120(12):1051–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sutcliffe GH, Plowright RC (1990) The effects of pollen availability on development time in the bumble bee Bombus terricola K (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Can J Zool 68(6):1120–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tofilski A (2002) Influence of age polyethism on longevity of workers in social insects. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:234–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Toth AL, Robinson GE (2005) Worker nutrition and division of labour in honeybees. Anim Behav 69(2):427–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Toth AL, Kantarovich S, Meisel AF, Robinson GE (2005) Nutritional status influences socially regulated foraging ontogeny in honey bees. J Exp Biol 208(24):4641–4649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tschinkel W (1987) Seasonal life history and nest architecture of a winter-active ant, Prenolepis imparis. Insect Soc 34(3):143–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tschinkel WR (1993) Sociometry and sociogenesis of colonies of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta during one annual cycle. Ecol Monogr 63:425–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tschinkel WR (1998) Sociometry and sociogenesis of colonies of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex badius: worker characteristics in relation to colony size and season. Insect Soc 45(4):385–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Visscher PK, Dukas R (1997) Suvivorship of foraging honey bees. Insect Soc 44:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Warton DI, Wright IJ, Falster DS, Westoby M (2006) Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biol Rev 81:259–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wilson EO (1974) The soldier of the ant Camponotus (Colobopsis) fraxinicola as a trophic caste. Psyche 81:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wilson EO (1980) Caste and division of labor in leaf-cutter ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Atta) I. The overall pattern in A.sexdens. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:143–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Woyciechowski M, Kozlowski J (1998) Division of labor by division of risk according to worker life expectancy in the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.). Apidologie 29:191–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yerushalmi S, Bodenhaimer S, Bloch G (2006) Developmentally determined attenuation in circadian rhythms links chronobiology to social organization in bees. J Exp Biol 209(6):1044–1051PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret J. Couvillon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jennifer M. Jandt
    • 1
  • Jennifer Bonds
    • 1
  • Bryan R. Helm
    • 1
  • Anna Dornhaus
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA
  2. 2.Laboratory of Apiculture and Social InsectsSchool of Life Sciences, University of SussexBrightonUK

Personalised recommendations