Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 59–69 | Cite as

Tactics of dance choice in honey bees: do foragers compare dances?

  • Thomas D. Seeley
  • William F. Towne
Article

Summary

(1) When a honey bee follows recruitment dances to locate a new food source, does she sample multiple dances representing different food sources and selectively respond to the strongest dance? (2) Several initial findings suggested that foragers might indeed compare dances. First, dance information is arrayed in the hive in a way that facilitates comparison-making: dances for different flower patches are performed close together in time and space. Second, food-source quality is coded in the dances, in terms of dance length (number of circuits per dance). Third, dances to natural food sources vary in length by more than 2 orders of magnitude, indicating that the quality of natural food sources varies greatly. Fourth, foragers seeking a new food source follow several dances before exiting the hive (though only one dance is followed closely). (3) Nevertheless, a critical test for comparison-making revealed that foragers evidently do not compare dances. A colony was given two feeders that were equidistant from the hive but different in profitability. If foragers do not compare dances, then the proportion of recruits arriving at the richer feeder should match the proportion of dance circuits for the richer feeder. This is the pattern that we found in all 11 trials of the experiment. (4) We suggest that the reason foragers do not compare dances is that a colony's foraging success is greater if its foragers distribute themselves among the various food sources being advertised in the hive than if they crowd themselves on the one, best source. (5) Food-source selection by honey bee colonies is a democratic decision-making process. This study reveals that this selection process is organized to function effectively even though each member of the democracy possesses incomplete information about the available choices.

Keywords

Food Source Selection Process Incomplete Information Initial Finding Critical Test 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartholdi JJ, Seeley TD, Tovey CA, Vande Vate JH (1992) The pattern and effectiveness of forager allocation among flower patches by honey bee colonies. J Theor Biol (in press)Google Scholar
  2. Beckers R, Deneubourg JL, Goss S, Pasteels JM (1990) Collective decision making through food recruitment. Insect Soc 37:258–267Google Scholar
  3. Boch R (1956) Die Tänze der Bienen bei nahen Und fernen Trachtquellen. Z Vergl Physiol 38:136–167Google Scholar
  4. Butler CG (1945) The influence of various physical and biological factors of the environment on honeybee activity. An examination of the relationship between activity and nectar concentration and abundance. J Exp Biol 21:5–12Google Scholar
  5. Camazine S, Sneyd J (1991) A mathematical model of colony-level nectar source selection by honey bees: self-organization through simple individual rules. J Theor Biol 149:547–571Google Scholar
  6. Deneubourg JL, Goss S, Franks N, Pasteels JM (1989) The blind leading the blind: modeling chemically mediated army ant raid patterns. J Insect Behav 2:719–725Google Scholar
  7. Eaton RC (1984) Neural mechanisms in startle behaviour. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Esch H (1961) Über die Schallerzeugung beim Werbetanz der Honigbiene. Z Vergl Physiol 45:1–11Google Scholar
  9. Esch H (1963) Über die Auswirkung der Futterplatzqualitdt auf die Schallerzeugung im Werbetanz der Honigbiene (Apis mellifica). Zool Anzeig 26 (Suppl): 302–309Google Scholar
  10. Ferry G (1986) The egalitarian brain. New Scient 109 (no. 1490):41–43Google Scholar
  11. Franks NR (1989) Army ants: a collective intelligence. Am Scient 77:138–145Google Scholar
  12. Frisch K von (1967) The dance language and orientation of bees. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Heiligenberg W, Baker C, Matsubara J (1978) The jamming avoidance response in Eigenmannia revisited: the structure of a neuronal democracy. J Comp Physiol 127:267–286Google Scholar
  14. Heinrich B (1978) The economics of insect sociality. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass, pp 97–128Google Scholar
  15. Hofstadter DR (1979) Gödel, Escher, Bach: an eternal golden braid. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Hopfield JJ (1982) Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 79:2554–2558Google Scholar
  17. Kirchner WH, Dreller C, Towne WF (1991) Hearing in honeybees: operant conditioning and spontaneous reactions to airborne sound. J Comp Physiol 168:85–89Google Scholar
  18. Körner I (1939) Zeitgeddchtnis und Alarmierung bei den Bienen. Z Vergl Physiol 27:445–459Google Scholar
  19. Lindauer M (1948) Über die Einwirkung von Duft- und Geschmacksstoffen sowie anderer Faktoren auf die Tdnze der Bienen. Z Vergl Physiol 31:348–412Google Scholar
  20. Lindauer M (1955) Schwarmbienen auf Wohnungssuche. Z Vergl Physiol 37:263–324Google Scholar
  21. Lumsden CJ, Hölldobler B (1985) Ritualized combat and intercolony communication in ants. J Theor Biol 100:81–98Google Scholar
  22. Markl H (1985) Manipulation, modulation, information, cognition: some of the riddles of communication. Fortschr Zool 31:163–194Google Scholar
  23. McCall JJ (1970) Economics of information and job search. Q J Econ 84:113–126Google Scholar
  24. Michelsen A, Towne WF, Kirchner WH, Kryger P (1987) The acoustic near field of a dancing honeybee. J Comp Physiol 161:633–643Google Scholar
  25. Núñez JA (1966) Quantitative Beziehungen zwischen den Eigenschaften von Futterquellen und dem Verhalten von Sammelbienen. Z Vergl Physiol 53:142–164Google Scholar
  26. Núñez JA (1970) The relationship between sugar flow and foraging and recruiting behaviour of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Anim Behav 18:527–538Google Scholar
  27. Parker GA (1983) Mate quality and mating decisions. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 141–166Google Scholar
  28. Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L, Goss S (1987a) Self-organization mechanisms in ant societies (1): Trail recruitment to newly discovered food sources. In: Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L (eds) From individual to collective behavior in social insects. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 155–175Google Scholar
  29. Pasteels JM, Deneubourg J-L, Goss S (1987b) Transmission and amplification of information in a changing environment: the case of insect societies. In: Prigogine I, Sanglier M (eds) Law of nature and human conduct. G.O.R.D.E.S., Bruxelles, pp 129–156Google Scholar
  30. Ptashne M (1986) A genetic switch: gene control and phage λ. Blackwell, BostonGoogle Scholar
  31. Real L (1990) Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of singlesex discrimination. Am Nat 136:376–404Google Scholar
  32. Seeley TD (1985) Honeybee ecology. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  33. Seeley TD (1986) Social foraging by honeybees: how colonies allocate foragers among patches of flowers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:343–354Google Scholar
  34. Seeley TD (1989) Social foraging in honey bees: how nectar foragers assess their colony's nutritional status. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24:181–199Google Scholar
  35. Seeley TD, Levien RA (1987) A colony of mind. The beehive as thinking machine. The Sciences 27:38–43Google Scholar
  36. Seeley TD, Visscher PK (1988) Assessing the benefits of cooperation in honeybee foraging: search costs, forage quality, and competitive ability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:229–237Google Scholar
  37. Seeley TD, Camazine S, Sneyd J (1991) Collective decision-making in honey bees: how colonies choose among nectar sources. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 28:277–290Google Scholar
  38. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. Second edition. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  39. Stigler GJ (1961) The economics of information. J Polit Econ 69:213–225Google Scholar
  40. Stigler GJ (1962) Information in the labor market. J Polit Econ 70:94–105Google Scholar
  41. Towne WF (1985) The spatial precision and mechanisms of the dance communication of honey bees: experimental and comparative studies. PhD Thesis, Princeton University, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  42. Visscher PK, Seeley TD (1982) Foraging strategy of honeybee colonies in a temperate deciduous forest. Ecology 63:1790–1801Google Scholar
  43. Waddington KD (1982) Honey bee foraging profitability and round dance correlates. J Comp Physiol 148:297–301Google Scholar
  44. Waddington KD (1990) Foraging profits and thoracic temperature of honey bees (Apis mellifera). J Comp Physiol B 160:325–329Google Scholar
  45. Weaver N (1979) Possible recruitment of foraging honeybees to high-reward areas of the same plant species. J Apic Res 18:179–183Google Scholar
  46. Wenner AM (1962) Sound production during the waggle dance of the honey bee. Anim Behav 10:79–95Google Scholar
  47. Wenner AM, Wells PH, Rohlf FJ (1967) An analysis of the waggle dance and recruitment in honey bees. Physiol Zool 40:317–344Google Scholar
  48. Williams GC (1966) Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson DS, Sober E (1989) Reviving the superorganism. J Theor Biol 136:337–356PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson EO (1971) The insect societies. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Winston ML (1987) The biology of the honey bee. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas D. Seeley
    • 1
  • William F. Towne
    • 2
  1. 1.Section of Neurobiology and Behavior, Seeley G. Mudd HallCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyKutztown UniversityKutztownUSA

Personalised recommendations