Journal of Ethology

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 61–66

Male production by non-natal workers in the bumblebee, Bombus deuteronymus (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

  • Jun-ichi Takahashi
  • Stephen J. Martin
  • Masao Ono
  • Isamu Shimizu
Article

Abstract

Social insect societies are considered to be composed of many extremely cooperative individuals. While workers are traditionally believed to behave altruistically, recent studies have revealed behaviors that are more selfish. One such example is intraspecific social parasitism, where workers invade conspecific colonies and produce male offspring that are reared by unrelated host workers. Such intraspecific parasitism has been reported in honeybees (Apis cerana, and A. florea) and “semi-wild” bumblebee colonies of Bombus terrestris. Here we report on intraspecific social parasitism by workers in “wild” colonies of the bumblebee B. deuteronymus. Three of the 11 B. deuteronymus colonies studied were invaded by non-natal workers, of which 75% became reproductive and produced 19% of the adult males. The invading non-natal workers produced significantly more males than resident natal workers and the non-natal brood was not discriminated against by the natal workers.

Keywords

Bombus deuteronymus Bumblebee Social parasitism Social Hymenoptera Worker reproduction 

References

  1. Alaux C, Savarit F, Jaisson P, Hefez A (2004) Does the queen with it all? Queen-worker conflict over male production in the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris. Naturwissenschaften 91:400–403CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Asada S, Ono M (2000) Difference in colony development of two Japanese bumblebees, Bombus hypocrita and B. ignitus (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Appl Entomol Zool 35:597–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beekman M, Oldroyd BP (2008) When workers disunite: intraspecific parasitism by eusocial bees. Annu Rev Entomol 53:19–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Birmingham AL, Winston ML (2004) Orientation and drifting behaviour of bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in commercial tomato greenhouses. Can J Zool 82:52–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Birmingham AL, Hoover SE, Winston ML, Ydenberg RC (2004) Drifting bumble bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) workers in commercial greenhouses may be social parasites. Can J Zool 82:1843–1853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boomsma JJ, Ratnieks FLW (1996) Paternity in eusocial Hymenoptera. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 351:947–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourke AFG, Ratnieks FLW (1991) Kin-selected conflict in the bumble-bee Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Proc R Soc Lond B 268:347–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown MJF, Bear B, Schmid-Hempel R (2002) Dynamics of multiple mating in the bumble bee Bombus hypnorum. Insect Soc 49:315–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown MJF, Schmid-Hempel R, Schimd-Hempel P (2003) Queen-controlled sex ratios and worker reproduction in the bumble bee Bombus hyponorum, as revealed by microsatellites. Mol Ecol 12:1599–1605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cnaani J, Schmid-Hempel R, Schmidt JO (2002) Colony development, larval development and worker reproduction in Bombus impatiens Cresson. Insectes Soc 49:158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crozier RH, Page RE (1985) On being the right size: male contributions and multiple mating in the social Hymenoptera. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crozier RH, Pamilo P (1996) Evolution of social insect colonies. Sex allocation and kin selection. University of Oxford Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Estoup A, Scholl A, Pouvreau A, Solignac M (1995) Monoandry and polyandry in bumble bees (Hymenoptera-Bombinae) as evidenced by highly variable microsatellites. Mol Ecol 4:89–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Foster KR, Ratnieks FLW (2001) Paternity, reproduction and conflict in vespine wasps: a model system for testing kin selection predictions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foster KR, Seppa P, Ratnieks FLW, Thorén PA (1999) Low paternity in the hornet Vespa crabro indicates that multiple mating by queens is derived in vespine wasps. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:252–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foster KR, Ratnieks FLW, Raybould AF (2000) Do hornets have zombie workers? Mol Ecol 9:735–742CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodnight KF, Queller DC (1994) Relatedness 4.2. Goodnight Software, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  18. Hughes WOH, Oldroyd BP, Beekman M, Ratnieks FLW (2008) Ancestral monogamy shows kin selection is key to the evolution of eusociality. Science 320:1213–1216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jay SC (1965) Drifting of honeybees in commercial apiaries. I. Effects of various environmental factors. J Apic Res 4:167–175Google Scholar
  20. Katayama E, Takamizawa K, Ochiai H (1993) Supplementary notes on the nests of some Japanese bumblebees III. Bombus (Thoracobombus) deuteronymus maruhanabachi. Jpn J Entomol 61:749–761Google Scholar
  21. Kikuta N, Tsuji K (1999) Queen and worker policing in the monogynous and monandrous ant, Diacamma sp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:180–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lopez-Vaamonde C, Koning JW, Brown RM, Jordan WC, Bourke AFG (2004) Social parasitism by male-producing reproductive workers in a eusocial insect. Nature 430:557–560CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lopez-Vaamonde C, Brown RM, Lucas ER, Pereboom JJM, Jordan WC, Bourke AFG (2007) Effect of the queen on worker reproduction and new queen production in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris. Apidologie 38:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martin SJ, Beekman M, Wossler TC, Ratnieks FLW (2002) Parasitic Cape honeybee workers, Apis mellifera capensis, evade policing. Nature 415:163–165PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Miller DG, Ratnieks FLW (2001) The timing of worker reproduction and breakdown of policing behaviour in queenless honeybee (Apis mellifera) societies. Insect Soc 48:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nanork P, Parr J, Chapman NC, Wongsiri S, Oldroyd BP (2005) Asian honeybees parasitize the future dead. Nature 437:829CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Nanork P, Chapman NC, Wongsiri S, Lim J, Gloag RS, Oldroyd BP (2007) Social parasitism by workers in queen-less and queen-right Apis cerana colonies. Mol Ecol 16:1107–1114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Owen RE, Plowright RC (1982) Worker-queen conflict and male parentage in bumble bees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Paar J, Oldroyd BP, Huettinger E, Kastberger G (2002) Drifting of workers in nest aggregations of the giant honeybee Apis dorsata. Apidologie 33:553–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Paxton RJ, Thorén PA, Estoup A, Tengö J (2001) Queen-worker conflict over male production and the sex ratio in a facultatively polyandrous bumblebee, Bombus hyponorum: the consequences of nest usurpation. Mol Ecol 10:2489–2498CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Paxton RJ, Ayasse M, Field J, Soro A (2002) Complex sociogenetic organization and reproductive skew in a primitively eusocial sweat bee, Lasioglossum malachurum, as revealed by microsatellites. Mol Ecol 11:2405–2416CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Payne CM, Laverty TM, Lachance MA (2003) The frequency of multiple paternity in bumble bee (Bombus) colonies based on microsatellite DNA at the B10 locus. Insect Soc 50:375–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pfeiffer KJ, Crailsheim K (1998) Drifting of honeybees. Insect Soc 45:151–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ratnieks FLW (1988) Reproductive harmony via mutual policing by workers in eusocial Hymenoptera. Am Nat 132:217–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sakagami SF, Katayama E (1977) Notes of some Japanese bumblebees (hymenoptera, Apidae). J Fac Sci Hokkaido Univ Ser VI Zool 21:92–153Google Scholar
  36. Schmid-Hempel R, Schmid-Hempel P (2000) Female mating frequencies in Bombus spp. from Central Europe. Insect Soc 47:36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sumner S, Lucas E, Barker J, Isaac NJB (2007) Radio-tagging technology reveals extreme nest drifting in a eusocial insect. Curr Biol 17:140–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Takahashi J, Akimoto S, Hasegawa E, Nakamura J (2002) Queen mating frequencies and genetic relatedness between workers in the hornet Vespa ducalis (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Appl Entomol Zool 37:481–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Takahashi J, Ayabe T, Mitsuhata M, Shimizu I, Ono M (2008a) Diploid male production in a rare and locally distributed bumblebee, Bombus florilegus (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Insect Soc 55:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Takahashi J, Itoh M, Shimizu I, Ono M (2008b) Male parentage and queen mating frequency in the bumblebee Bombus ignitus (Hymenoptera: Bombinae). Ecol Res 23:937–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Visscher PK (1996) Reproductive conflict in honey bees: a stalemate of worker egg-laying and policing. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Walsh PS, Metzger DA, Higuchi R (1991) Chelex 100 as a medium for simple extraction of DNA for PCR-based typing from forensic material. Biotechniques 10:506–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wenseleers T, Ratnieks FLW (2006) Enforced altruism in insect societies. Nature 444:50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Woyciechowski M, Lomnicki A (1987) Multiple mating queens and the sterility of workers among eusocial Hymenoptera. J Theol Biol 128:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jun-ichi Takahashi
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Stephen J. Martin
    • 4
  • Masao Ono
    • 3
  • Isamu Shimizu
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Ecological ResearchKyoto UniversityOtsuJapan
  2. 2.Laboratory of Systematic Entomology, Department of Ecology and SystematicsHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan
  3. 3.Honeybee Science Research CenterTamagawa UniversityTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Animal and Plant SciencesUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations