How the social parasitic bumblebee Bombus bohemicus sneaks into power of reproduction
- 484 Downloads
Social parasitism is widespread in many groups of social living hymenopteran species and has also evolved in the genus Bombus. Cuckoo bumblebees (subgenus Psithyrus) are obligate brood parasites in nests of other bumblebee species. After nest usurpation and the killing of the host queen, the parasite female has to control worker reproduction in order to accomplish and maintain reproductive dominance and to ensure her reproductive success. The aim of our study was to examine whether the generalist parasitic bumblebee Bombus bohemicus monopolizes and prevents worker reproduction by physical or chemical means and to identify possible odor compounds involved therein. We performed bioassays with callow workers of the host Bombus terrestris and have shown that B. bohemicus females are able to suppress host worker ovarian development, when these host workers are under the direct influence of the parasite female. Furthermore, by chemical analyses, we have demonstrated that the parasite females adjust to the odor profiles of their host queens in order to maintain the level of fertility signaling inside the host colony although the host queen is absent. We also found that host workers change their odor profile after nest usurpation by the parasite female and consequently, we suggest that the host and parasite are caught up in a chemical arms race.
KeywordsSocial parasitism Regulation of reproduction Ovarian development Chemical mimicry Fertility signals Bombus terrestris Bombus bohemicus
We thank the German Science Foundation for financial support (AY 12/2-1; AY 12/2-2; FR 507 17/1). Additionally, we thank Theresa Jones for linguistic advice, Mirjam Knörnschild for statistic advice, Stefan Jarau for critical reading of the manuscript and helpful comments, and Madeleine Beekman and three anonymous reviewers for suggestions on an earlier version of the manuscript.
The experiments performed comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Benton T (2006) Bumblebees. Harper Collins, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) Primer v6: user manual/tutorial. Primer-E Ltd., PlymouthGoogle Scholar
- Fisher RM (1983) Inability of the social parasite Psithyrus ashtoni to suppress ovarian development in workers of Bombus affinis (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 56:69–73Google Scholar
- Free JB (1987) Pheromones of social bees. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Goulson D (2003) Bumblebees: behaviour, ecology and conservation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Springer Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Kearns CA, Thomson JD (2001) The natural history of bumblebees: a sourcebook for investigations. University Press of Colorado, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
- Lückemeyer A (2009) The role of chemical communication in the reproductive biology of bumblebees and cuckoo bumblebees. Dissertation, University of UlmGoogle Scholar
- Michener CD (1974) The social behavior of the bees. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Nash DR, Boomsma JJ (2008) Communication between hosts and social parasites. In: Hughes DP (ed) Sociobiology of communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. Oxford University Press, USA, pp 55–79Google Scholar
- Röseler PF, Van Honk C (1990) Castes and reproduction in bumblebees. In: Engels W (ed) Social insects: an evolutionary approach to castes and reproduction. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 147–166Google Scholar
- Sladen FWL (1912) The humblebee, its life history and how to domesticate it. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Smith BH, Breed MD (1995) The chemical basis for nestmate recognition and mate discrimination in social insects. In: Cardé RT, Bell WJ (eds) Chemical Ecology of Insects 2. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 287–317Google Scholar
- Van Doorn A (1988) Reproductive dominance in bumblebees: an etho-physiological study. Dissertation, Universtiy of UtrechtGoogle Scholar
- Williams PH (1998) An annotated checklist of bumble bees with an analysis of patterns of description (Hymenoptera: Apidae, Bombini). Bull nat Hist Mus Lond (Ent) 67:79–152Google Scholar
- Zimma BO, Ayasse M, Tengö J, Ibarra F, Francke W (2004) The role of semiochemicals in the reproductive biology of parasitic bumblebees. Mitt dtsch Ges allg angew Ent 14:195–198Google Scholar