Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

References

  • Ayasse, M., Paxton, R. J., and Tengo, J. (2001). Mating behaviour and chemical communication in the order Hymenoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 46: 31–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernays, E. A., and Chapman, R. L. (1994). Host -plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects, Chapman and Hall, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branquart, E., and Hemptinne, J. (2000). Selectivity in the exploitation of floral resources by hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphinae). Ecography 23: 732–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, S. A. (1981). Chemical signals in bumble bee foraging. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 9: 257–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dicke, M. (2000). Chemical ecology of host-plant selection by herbivorous arthropods: A multitrophic perspective. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 28: 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich, B. (1979). Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumble bees. Oecologia 40: 235–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kato, M. (1988). Bumble bee visits to Impatiens spp.: pattern and efficiency. Oecologia 76: 364–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marden, J. H. (1984). Remote perception of floral nectar by bumble bees. Oecologia 64: 232–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nufio, C. R., and Papaj, D. R. (2001). Host marking behaviour in phytophagous insects and parasitoids. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 99: 273–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunez, J. A. (1967). Sammelbienen markieren versiegte Futterquellen durch Duft. Naturwissenschaften 54: 322–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, W. R. (1989). Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, U., and Bertsch, A. (1990). Do foraging bumble bees scent-mark food sources and does it matter? Oecologia 82: 137–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry, W. H. Freeman and Co., New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Williams, C. S. (1998). The identity of the previous visitor influences flower rejection by nectar-collecting bees. Anim. Behav. 56: 673–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Reader.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reader, T., MacLeod, I., Elliott, P.T. et al. Inter-Order Interactions Between Flower-Visiting Insects: Foraging Bees Avoid Flowers Previously Visited by Hoverflies. J Insect Behav 18, 51–57 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-005-9346-8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-005-9346-8

Navigation