Journal of Insect Behavior

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 51–57 | Cite as

Inter-Order Interactions Between Flower-Visiting Insects: Foraging Bees Avoid Flowers Previously Visited by Hoverflies

  • Tom Reader
  • Ian MacLeod
  • Philip T. Elliott
  • Oliver J. Robinson
  • Andrea Manica
Short Communication
Bumble bees honey bees hoverflies inter-order interactions foraging competition 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayasse, M., Paxton, R. J., and Tengo, J. (2001). Mating behaviour and chemical communication in the order Hymenoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 46: 31–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernays, E. A., and Chapman, R. L. (1994). Host -plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects, Chapman and Hall, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Branquart, E., and Hemptinne, J. (2000). Selectivity in the exploitation of floral resources by hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphinae). Ecography 23: 732–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cameron, S. A. (1981). Chemical signals in bumble bee foraging. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 9: 257–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dicke, M. (2000). Chemical ecology of host-plant selection by herbivorous arthropods: A multitrophic perspective. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 28: 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferguson, A. W., and Free, J. B. (1979). Production of forage-marking pheromone by the honey bee. J. Apicult. Res. 18: 128–135.Google Scholar
  7. Gilbert, F., Azmeh, S., Barnard, C., Behnke, J., Collins, S. A., Hurst, J., and Shuker, D. (2001). The Behavioural Ecology Field Course. Individually recognisable scent marks on flowers made by a solitary bee. Anim. Behav. 61: 217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goulson, D., Chapman, J. W., and Hughes, W. O. H. (2001). Discrimination of unrewarding flowers by bees: Direct detection of rewards and use of repellent scent marks. J. Insect Behav. 14: 669–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goulson, D., Hawson, S. A., and Stout, J. C. (1998). Foraging bumble bees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumble bee species. Anim. Behav. 55: 199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goulson, D., Allen, J. A., Stout, J. C., Langley, J., and Hughes, W. H. O. (2000). Identity and function of scent marks deposited by foraging bumble bees. J. Chem. Ecol. 26: 2897–2911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heinrich, B. (1979). Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumble bees. Oecologia 40: 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kato, M. (1988). Bumble bee visits to Impatiens spp.: pattern and efficiency. Oecologia 76: 364–370.Google Scholar
  13. Marden, J. H. (1984). Remote perception of floral nectar by bumble bees. Oecologia 64: 232–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nufio, C. R., and Papaj, D. R. (2001). Host marking behaviour in phytophagous insects and parasitoids. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 99: 273–293.Google Scholar
  15. Nunez, J. A. (1967). Sammelbienen markieren versiegte Futterquellen durch Duft. Naturwissenschaften 54: 322–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rice, W. R. (1989). Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.Google Scholar
  17. Schmitt, U., and Bertsch, A. (1990). Do foraging bumble bees scent-mark food sources and does it matter? Oecologia 82: 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry, W. H. Freeman and Co., New York, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Stout, J. C., and Goulson, D. (2001). The use of conspecific and interspecific scent marks by foraging bumble bees and honey bees. Anim. Behav. 62: 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stout, J. C., and Goulson, D. (2002). The influence of nectar secretion rates on the responses of bumble bees (Bombus spp.) to previously visited flowers. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 52: 239–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stout, J. C., Goulson, D., and Allen, J. A. (1998). Repellent scent-marking of flowers by a guild of foraging bumble bees (Bombus spp.). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 43: 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thorp, R. W., Briggs, D. L., Estes, J. R., and Erickson, E. H. (1975). Nectar fluorescence under ultraviolet irradiation. Science 189: 476–478.Google Scholar
  23. Vallet, A., Gassier, P., and Lensky, Y. (1991). Ontogeny of the fine-structure of the mandibular glands of the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) workers and the pheromonal activity of 2-heptanone. J. Insect Physiol. 37: 789–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Van der Meer, R. K., Breed, M. D., Espelie, K. E., and Winton, M. L. (1998). Pheromone Communication in Social Insects, Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, USA.Google Scholar
  25. Williams, C. S. (1998). The identity of the previous visitor influences flower rejection by nectar-collecting bees. Anim. Behav. 56: 673–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Reader
    • 1
  • Ian MacLeod
    • 1
  • Philip T. Elliott
    • 1
  • Oliver J. Robinson
    • 1
  • Andrea Manica
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridge, CB2 3EJUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations