Skip to main content
Log in

Optimal foraging, plant density and the marginal value theorem

  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The stochastic, discrete analogue of the marginal value theorem predicts that as the cost of moving between plants increases, bees should increase the percentage of the available flowers which they visit per plant. This prediction was tested using two populations of Polemonium foliosissimum and their primary pollinators Bombus flavifrons and B. bifarius. The results of these tests were equivocal. Bees did not perform exactly as the marginal value theorem predicted they should to maximize their rate of net energy intake. Instead of visiting more flowers per plant as movement costs increased bees were observed to alter their behavior in other ways in an attempt to maximize their rate of net energy intake. They were demonstrated to be flying randomly with respect to direction, flying short flight distances relative to the plant spacing distances encountered, flying predominately between nearest neighbor plants, and to be visiting flowers of other plant species while enroute from one P. foliosissimum flower to another P. foliosissimum flower. Such behavioral flexibility strongly implies that optimal foraging models which predict a shift in any particular behavior in response to environmental conditions are too simplistic to accurately predict foraging behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anway JC (1968) The systematic botany and taxonomy of Polemonium foliosissimum A. Gray (Polemoniaceae). Am Midl Natur 79:458–475

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: The marginal value theorem. Theor Pop Biol 9:129–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL, Orians GH, Hyatt K (1976) Ecological implications of resource depression. Amer Natur 110:247–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Covich A (1976) Analyzing shapes of foraging areas: Some ecological and economic theories. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 7:235–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowie RJ (1977) Optimal foraging in great tits (Parus major). Nature 268:137–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibb JA (1958) Predation by tits and squirrels on the eucosmid, Ernarmonia conicolana (Heyl). J Anim Ecol 27:376–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibb JA (1962) L. Tinbergen's hypothesis of the role of specific search images. Ibis 104:106–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant V (1950) The flower constancy of bees. Bot Rev 16:379–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1976) The foraging specializations of individual bumblebees. Ecol Monog 46:105–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1979a) “Majoring” and “Minoring” by foraging bumblebees, Bombus vagans: An experimental analysis. Ecology 60:245–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1979b) Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumblebees. Oecologia (Berl) 140:235–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs JR, Ryan JC, Charnov EL (1974) Hunting by expectation or optimal foraging? A study of patch use by chickadees. Anim Behav 22:953–964

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin DA, Anderson WW (1970) Competition for pollinators between simultaneously flowering species. Amer Natur 104:455–467

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin DA, Kerster NW (1969) The dependence of bee-mediated pollen and gene dispersal upon plant density. Evolution 23:560–571

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin DA, Kerster NW, Niedzlek M (1971) Pollinator flight directionality and its effect on pollen flow. Evolution 25:113–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollason JG (1980) Learning to forage-optimally? Theor Pop Biol 18:44–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Pleasants JM (In Press) Competition for bumblebee pollinators in Rocky Mountain plant communities. Ecology

  • Pleasants JM, Zimmerman M (1979) Patchiness in the dispersion of nectar resources: Evidence for hot and cold spots. Oecologia (Berl) 41:283–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH (1978a) Optimal foraging in hummingbirds: Testing the marginal value theorem. Amer Zool 18:739–752

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH (1978b) Optimal foraging: Movement patterns of bumblebees between inflorescences. Theor Pop Biol 13:72–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov EL (1977) Optimal foraging: A selective review of theory and tests. Quart Rev Biol 52:137–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichman OJ, Oberstein D (1977) Selection of seed distribution types by Dipodomys merriami and Perognathus amplus. Ecology 58:636–643

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaal BA (1978) Density dependent foraging on Liatris pycnostachya. Ecolution 32:452–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoener TW (1971) Theory of feeding strategies. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 2:369–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington KD (1980) Flight patterns of foraging bees relative to density of artificial flowers and distribution of nectar. Oecologia (Berl) 44:199–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM (1978a) Competition for hummingbird pollination and sequential flowering in two Colorado wildflowers. Ecology 59:934–944

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM (1978b) Interspecific pollen transfer and competition between cooccurring plant species. Oecologia (Berl) 36:223–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1976) Population responses to patchy environments. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 7:81–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman M (1979a) An analysis of the reproductive strategies of Polemonium in Colorado. PhD Thesis, Washington University, St Louis

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman M (1979b) Optimal foraging: A case for random movement. Oecologia (Berl) 43:261–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman M (1980) Reproduction in Polemonium: Competition for pollinators. Ecology 61:497–501

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zimmerman, M. Optimal foraging, plant density and the marginal value theorem. Oecologia 49, 148–153 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00349181

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00349181

Keywords

Navigation