A Game Theoretical Analysis of the Mating Sign Behavior in the Honey Bee
- 191 Downloads
Queens of the honey bee, Apis mellifera (L.), exhibit extreme polyandry, mating with up to 45 different males (drones). This increases the genetic diversity of their colonies, and consequently their fitness. After copulation, drones leave a mating sign in the genital opening of the queen which has been shown to promote additional mating of the queen. On one hand, this signing behavior is beneficial for the drone because it increases the genetic diversity of the resulting colony that is to perpetuate his genes. On the other hand, it decreases the proportion of the drone’s personal offspring among colony members which is reducing drone fitness. We analyze the adaptiveness and evolutionary stability of this drone’s behavior with a game-theoretical model. We find that theoretically both the strategy of leaving a mating sign and the strategy of not leaving a mating sign can be evolutionary stable, depending on natural parameters. However, the signing strategy is not favored for most scenarios, including the cases that are biologically plausible in reference to empirical data. We conclude that leaving a sign is not in the interest of the drone unless it serves biological functions other than increasing subsequent queen mating chances. Nevertheless, our analysis can also explain the prevalence of such a behavior of honey bee drones by a very low evolutionary pressure for an invasion of the nonsigning strategy.
KeywordsMating behavior ESS Game theory Strategy Social insects Multiple mating Mating plug
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Baudry, E., Solignac, M., Garnery, L., Gries, M., Cornuet, J. M., & Koeniger, N. (1998). Relatedness among honeybees (Apis mellifera) of a drone congregation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265, 2009–2014. Google Scholar
- Hayworth, M. K., Johnson, N. G., Wilhelm, M. E., Gove, R. P., Metheny, J. M., & Rueppell, O. (2009). Added weights lead to reduced flight behavior and mating success in polyandrous honey bee queens (Apis mellifera). Ethology, 115, 698–706. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2009.01655.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Koeniger, G., Koeniger, N., & Fabritius, M. (1979). Some detailed observations of mating in the honeybee. Bee World, 60, 53–57. Google Scholar
- Loper, G. M., Wolf, W. W., & Taylor, O. R. (1992). Honey-Bee drone flyways and congregation areas—radar observations. J. Kans. Entomol. Soc., 65, 223–230. Google Scholar
- Maynard Smith, J. (1982). In Evolution and the theory of games (p. 204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
- Oldroyd, B. P., & Wongsiri, S. (2006). Asian honey bees: biology, conservation and human interactions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
- Ruttner, F. (1954). Mehrfache Begattung der Bienenkönigin. Zool. Anz., 153, 99–105. Google Scholar
- Winston, M. L. (1987). The biology of honey bees (pp. 202, 209–210). First Harvard University Press Paperback edition (1991). Google Scholar
- Woyke, J. (1964). Causes of repeated mating flights by queen honeybees. J. Apic. Res., 3, 17–23. Google Scholar
- Woyke, J., & Ruttner, F. (1958). An anatomical study of the mating process in the honeybee. Bee World, 39, 3–18. Google Scholar