Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

23 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Colour learning when foraging for nectar and pollen: bees learn two colours at once.

ABSTRACT: Bees are model organisms for the study of learning and memory, yet nearly all such research to date has used a single reward, nectar. Many bees collect both nectar (carbohydrates) and pollen (protein) on a single foraging bout, sometimes from different plant species. We tested whether individual bumblebees could learn colour associations with nectar and pollen rewards simultaneously in a foraging scenario where one floral type offered only nectar and the other only pollen. We found that bees readily learned multiple reward-colour associations, and when presented with novel floral targets generalized to colours similar to those trained for each reward type. These results expand the ecological significance of work on bee learning and raise new questions regarding the cognitive ecology of pollination.

SUBMITTER: Muth F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4614436 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Colour learning when foraging for nectar and pollen: bees learn two colours at once.

Muth Felicity F Papaj Daniel R DR Leonard Anne S AS

Biology letters 20150901 9

Bees are model organisms for the study of learning and memory, yet nearly all such research to date has used a single reward, nectar. Many bees collect both nectar (carbohydrates) and pollen (protein) on a single foraging bout, sometimes from different plant species. We tested whether individual bumblebees could learn colour associations with nectar and pollen rewards simultaneously in a foraging scenario where one floral type offered only nectar and the other only pollen. We found that bees rea ...[more]

PMID: 26423070

Similar Datasets

Differences in the phototaxis of pollen and nectar foraging honey bees are related to their octopamine brain titers.

Project description:The biogenic amine octopamine is an important neuromodulator, neurohormone and neurotransmitter in insects. We here investigate the role of octopamine signaling in honey bee phototaxis. Our results show that groups of bees differ naturally in their phototaxis. Pollen forgers display a lower light responsiveness than nectar foragers. The lower phototaxis of pollen foragers coincides with higher octopamine titers in the optic lobes but is independent of octopamine receptor gene expression. Increasing octopamine brain titers reduces responsiveness to light, while tyramine application enhances phototaxis. These findings suggest an involvement of octopamine signaling in honey bee phototaxis and possibly division of labor, which is hypothesized to be based on individual differences in sensory responsiveness.

| S-EPMC3975121 | biostudies-literature

Linking pollen foraging of megachilid bees to their nest bacterial microbiota.

Project description:Solitary bees build their nests by modifying the interior of natural cavities, and they provision them with food by importing collected pollen. As a result, the microbiota of the solitary bee nests may be highly dependent on introduced materials. In order to investigate how the collected pollen is associated with the nest microbiota, we used metabarcoding of the ITS2 rDNA and the 16S rDNA to simultaneously characterize the pollen composition and the bacterial communities of 100 solitary bee nest chambers belonging to seven megachilid species. We found a weak correlation between bacterial and pollen alpha diversity and significant associations between the composition of pollen and that of the nest microbiota, contributing to the understanding of the link between foraging and bacteria acquisition for solitary bees. Since solitary bees cannot establish bacterial transmission routes through eusociality, this link could be essential for obtaining bacterial symbionts for this group of valuable pollinators. Open Research Badges:This article has earned an Open Data Badge for making publicly available the digitally-shareable data necessary to reproduce the reported results. The data is available at https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB27223, https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB31610, and https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.qk36k8q.

| S-EPMC6787775 | biostudies-literature

Honey bees increase their foraging performance and frequency of pollen trips through experience.

Project description:Honey bee foragers must supply their colony with a balance of pollen and nectar to sustain optimal colony development. Inter-individual behavioural variability among foragers is observed in terms of activity levels and nectar vs. pollen collection, however the causes of such variation are still open questions. Here we explored the relationship between foraging activity and foraging performance in honey bees (Apis mellifera) by using an automated behaviour monitoring system to record mass on departing the hive, trip duration, presence of pollen on the hind legs and mass upon return to the hive, during the lifelong foraging career of individual bees. In our colonies, only a subset of foragers collected pollen, and no bee exclusively foraged for pollen. A minority of very active bees (19% of the foragers) performed 50% of the colony's total foraging trips, contributing to both pollen and nectar collection. Foraging performance (amount and rate of food collection) depended on bees' individual experience (amount of foraging trips completed). We argue that this reveals an important vulnerability for these social bees since environmental stressors that alter the activity and reduce the lifespan of foragers may prevent bees ever achieving maximal performance, thereby seriously compromising the effectiveness of the colony foraging force.

| S-EPMC6494865 | biostudies-other

Patterns of pollen and nectar foraging specialization by bumblebees over multiple timescales using RFID.

Project description:The ecological success of social insects is frequently ascribed to improvements in task performance due to division of labour amongst workers. While much research has focused on improvements associated with lifetime task specialization, members of colonies can specialize on a given task over shorter time periods. Eusocial bees in particular must collect pollen and nectar rewards to survive, but most workers appear to mix collection of both rewards over their lifetimes. We asked whether bumblebees specialize over timescales shorter than their lifetime. We also explored factors that govern such patterns, and asked whether reward specialists made more foraging bouts than generalists. In particular, we described antennal morphology and size of all foragers in a single colony and related these factors to each forager's complete foraging history, obtained using radio frequency identification (RFID). Only a small proportion of foragers were lifetime specialists; nevertheless, >50% of foragers specialized daily on a given reward. Contrary to expectations, daily and lifetime reward specialists were not better foragers (being neither larger nor making more bouts); larger bees with more antennal olfactory sensilla made more bouts, but were not more specialized. We discuss causes and functions of short and long-term patterns of specialization for bumblebee colonies.

| S-EPMC5299450 | biostudies-literature

Differences in color learning between pollen- and sucrose-rewarded bees.

Project description:What bees learn during pollen collection, and how they might discriminate between flowers on the basis of the quality of this reward, is not well understood. Recently we showed that bees learn to associate colors with differences in pollen rewards. Extending these findings, we present here additional evidence to suggest that the strength and time-course of memory formation may differ between pollen- and sucrose-rewarded bees. Color-naïve honeybees, trained with pollen or sucrose rewards to discriminate colored stimuli, were found to differ in their responses when recalling learnt information after reversal training. Such differences could affect the decision-making and foraging dynamics of individual bees when collecting different types of floral rewards.

| S-EPMC4594533 | biostudies-other

The evolution of floral sonication, a pollen foraging behavior used by bees (Anthophila).

Project description:Over 22,000 species of biotically pollinated flowering plants, including some major agricultural crops, depend primarily on bees capable of floral sonication for pollination services. The ability to sonicate ("buzz") flowers is widespread in bees but not ubiquitous. Despite the prevalence of this pollinator behavior and its importance to natural and agricultural systems, the evolutionary history of floral sonication in bees has not been previously studied. Here, we reconstruct the evolutionary history of floral sonication in bees by generating a time-calibrated phylogeny and reconstructing ancestral states for this pollen extraction behavior. We also test the hypothesis that the ability to sonicate flowers and thereby efficiently access pollen from a diverse assemblage of plant species, led to increased diversification among sonicating bee taxa. We find that floral sonication evolved on average 45 times within bees, possibly first during the Early Cretaceous (100-145 million years ago) in the common ancestor of bees. We find that sonicating lineages are significantly more species rich than nonsonicating sister lineages when comparing sister clades, but a probabilistic structured rate permutation on phylogenies approach failed to support the hypothesis that floral sonication is a key driver of bee diversification. This study provides the evolutionary framework needed to further study how floral sonication by bees may have facilitated the spread and common evolution of angiosperm species with poricidal floral morphology.

| S-EPMC5873439 | biostudies-literature

Ovary activation does not correlate with pollen and nectar foraging specialization in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens.

Project description:Social insect foragers may specialize on certain resource types. Specialization on pollen or nectar among honeybee foragers is hypothesized to result from associations between reproductive physiology and sensory tuning that evolved in ancestral solitary bees (the Reproductive Ground-Plan Hypothesis; RGPH). However, the two non-honeybee species studied showed no association between specialization and ovary activation. Here we investigate the bumblebee B. impatiens because it has the most extensively studied pollen/nectar specialization of any bumblebee. We show that ovary size does not differ between pollen specialist, nectar specialist, and generalist foragers, contrary to the predictions of the RGPH. However, we also found mixed support for the second prediction of the RGPH, that sensory sensitivity, measured through proboscis extension response (PER), is greater among pollen foragers. We also found a correlation between foraging activity and ovary size, and foraging activity and relative nectar preference, but no correlation between ovary size and nectar preference. In one colony non-foragers had larger ovaries than foragers, supporting the reproductive conflict and work hypothesis, but in the other colony they did not.

| S-EPMC5824676 | biostudies-literature

Sonicating bees demonstrate flexible pollen extraction without instrumental learning.

Project description:Pollen collection is necessary for bee survival and important for flowering plant reproduction, yet if and how pollen extraction motor routines are modified with experience is largely unknown. Here, we used an automated reward and monitoring system to evaluate modification in a common pollen-extraction routine, floral sonication. Through a series of laboratory experiments with the bumblebee, Bombus impatiens, we examined whether variation in sonication frequency and acceleration is due to instrumental learning based on rewards, a fixed behavioral response to rewards, and/or a mechanical constraint. We first investigated whether bees could learn to adjust their sonication frequency in response to pollen rewards given only for specified frequency ranges and found no evidence of instrumental learning. However, we found that absence versus receipt of a pollen reward did lead to a predictable behavioral response, which depended on bee size. Finally, we found some evidence of mechanical constraints, in that flower mass affected sonication acceleration (but not frequency) through an interaction with bee size. In general, larger bees showed more flexibility in sonication frequency and acceleration, potentially reflecting a size-based constraint on the range over which smaller bees can modify frequency and acceleration. Overall, our results show that although bees did not display instrumental learning of sonication frequency, their sonication motor routine is nevertheless flexible.

| S-EPMC6688570 | biostudies-literature

Foraging responses of bumble bees to rewardless floral patches: importance of within-plant variance in nectar presentation.

Project description:Spatiotemporal variation in nectar distribution is a key factor affecting pollinator movements between flowers and plants within a population. Pollinators having systematic searching ability can flexibly respond to the reward condition of floral patches, and they tend to revisit rewarding patches. However, foraging behaviour may be influenced by the nectar distribution within populations. To evaluate the effects of unrewarding experiences and plant distribution, we compared bumble bee foraging behaviours between naturally rewarding and artificially rewardless (by nectary removal) patches in two aconite populations with different plant densities. Visitation frequency to the patches, number of successive flower visits within inflorescences, and successive inflorescence visits within patches were recorded. Nectar production and standing crop were also measured. Bumble bees increased the movements between neighbouring inflorescences instead of leaving the patches when they faced rewardless flowers. A large variance in nectar production existed among flowers within plants. This might explain the observed bumble bee behaviour, because they could be rewarded by moving to the adjacent inflorescences even after a rewardless experience. Our results imply that a highly variable nectar reward in a population might mask the disadvantage of completely rewardless individuals.

| S-EPMC4940503 | biostudies-literature

Honey pollen: using melissopalynology to understand foraging preferences of bees in tropical South India.

Project description:The aim of the study was to use melissopalynology to delineate the foraging preferences of bees in tropical environs. This was done by comparing pollen spectra obtained from the same hives every three months for three years at four sampling locations (in two sites) within a confined landscape mosaic. If melissopalynology is highly replicable, the spatial variation of the pollen spectrum from the honey samples would be much more than the temporal (inter-annual) variations. In other words, given the three factors, Month, Year and Location, honey pollen from different Locations, in a given Year and Month, would be much less similar than samples from different Years, in a given Location and Month. We then determined how the factors, Month, Year and Location, influenced the pollen influx of honey. The pollen analyses of the 42 honey samples collected during the three years yielded 80 pollen taxa/types: 72 dicotyledonous and 8 monocotyledonous, encompassing 41 botanical families spread into seven life forms namely, trees, shrubs, epiphytes, herbs, climbers, grasses, and sedges. Our results showed that pollen spectra were equally comparable between Locations and between Months and Years; the importance of this result is that it helped to demonstrate the complexity of ecological/environmental phenomena involved in the process of foraging by bees in a heterogeneous and complex landscape.

| S-EPMC4086892 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data