Dataset Information

Learning performance and brain structure of artificially-reared honey bees fed with different quantities of food.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Artificial rearing of honey bee larvae is an established method which enables to fully standardize the rearing environment and to manipulate the supplied diet to the brood. However, there are no studies which compare learning performance or neuroanatomic differences of artificially-reared (in-lab) bees in comparison with their in-hive reared counterparts. METHODS:Here we tested how different quantities of food during larval development affect body size, brain morphology and learning ability of adult honey bees. We used in-lab rearing to be able to manipulate the total quantity of food consumed during larval development. After hatching, a subset of the bees was taken for which we made 3D reconstructions of the brains using confocal laser-scanning microscopy. Learning ability and memory formation of the remaining bees was tested in a differential olfactory conditioning experiment. Finally, we evaluated how bees reared with different quantities of artificial diet compared to in-hive reared bees. RESULTS:Thorax and head size of in-lab reared honey bees, when fed the standard diet of 160 µl or less, were slightly smaller than hive bees. The brain structure analyses showed that artificially reared bees had smaller mushroom body (MB) lateral calyces than their in-hive counterparts, independently of the quantity of food they received. However, they showed the same total brain size and the same associative learning ability as in-hive reared bees. In terms of mid-term memory, but not early long-term memory, they performed even better than the in-hive control. DISCUSSION:We have demonstrated that bees that are reared artificially (according to the Aupinel protocol) and kept in lab-conditions perform the same or even better than their in-hive sisters in an olfactory conditioning experiment even though their lateral calyces were consistently smaller at emergence. The applied combination of experimental manipulation during the larval phase plus subsequent behavioral and neuro-anatomic analyses is a powerful tool for basic and applied honey bee research.

SUBMITTER: Steijven K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5657415 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Learning performance and brain structure of artificially-reared honey bees fed with different quantities of food.

Steijven Karin K Spaethe Johannes J Steffan-Dewenter Ingolf I Härtel Stephan S

PeerJ 20171023

<h4>Background</h4>Artificial rearing of honey bee larvae is an established method which enables to fully standardize the rearing environment and to manipulate the supplied diet to the brood. However, there are no studies which compare learning performance or neuroanatomic differences of artificially-reared (in-lab) bees in comparison with their in-hive reared counterparts.<h4>Methods</h4>Here we tested how different quantities of food during larval development affect body size, brain morphology ...[more]

PMID: 29085743

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpray adjuvants are often applied to crops in conjunction with agricultural pesticides in order to boost the efficacy of the active ingredient(s). The adjuvants themselves are largely assumed to be biologically inert and are therefore subject to minimal scrutiny and toxicological testing by regulatory agencies. Honey bees are exposed to a wide array of pesticides as they conduct normal foraging operations, meaning that they are likely exposed to spray adjuvants as well. It was previously unknown whether these agrochemicals have any deleterious effects on honey bee behavior.Methodology/principal findingsAn improved, automated version of the proboscis extension reflex (PER) assay with a high degree of trial-to-trial reproducibility was used to measure the olfactory learning ability of honey bees treated orally with sublethal doses of the most widely used spray adjuvants on almonds in the Central Valley of California. Three different adjuvant classes (nonionic surfactants, crop oil concentrates, and organosilicone surfactants) were investigated in this study. Learning was impaired after ingestion of 20 µg organosilicone surfactant, indicating harmful effects on honey bees caused by agrochemicals previously believed to be innocuous. Organosilicones were more active than the nonionic adjuvants, while the crop oil concentrates were inactive. Ingestion was required for the tested adjuvant to have an effect on learning, as exposure via antennal contact only induced no level of impairment.Conclusions/significanceA decrease in percent conditioned response after ingestion of organosilicone surfactants has been demonstrated here for the first time. Olfactory learning is important for foraging honey bees because it allows them to exploit the most productive floral resources in an area at any given time. Impairment of this learning ability may have serious implications for foraging efficiency at the colony level, as well as potentially many social interactions. Organosilicone spray adjuvants may therefore contribute to the ongoing global decline in honey bee health.

Project description:We measured the distribution of sugar solution within groups of caged honey bees (Apis mellifera) under standard in vitro laboratory conditions using 14C polyethylene glycol as a radioactive marker to analyze ingestion by individual bees after group feeding. We studied the impact of different experimental setups by varying the number of bees, age of bees, origin of bees, duration of experiment, the amount of available diet, and the influence of the neurotoxic pesticide imidacloprid in the diet on the feeding and food sharing behavior (trophallaxis). Sugar solution was non-uniformly distributed in bees in 36 out of 135 cages. As a measure of the extent to which the sugar diet was equally distributed between caged bees, we calculated the (inner 80%) intake ratio by dividing the intake of the 90th percentile bee by the intake of the 10th percentile bee. This intake ratio ranged from 1.3 to 94.8 in 133 individual cages, further supporting a non-uniform distribution of food among caged bees. We can expect a cage with 10 or 30 bees containing one bee that ingests, on average, the 8.8-fold of the bee in the same cage ingesting the smallest quantity of food. Inner 80% intake ratios were lower in experiments with a permanent or chronic offering of labelled sugar solution compared to temporary or acute feedings. After pooling the data of replicates to achieve a higher statistical power we compared different experimental setups. We found that uniform food distribution is best approached with 10 newly emerged bees per cage, which originate from a brood comb from a single colony. We also investigated the trophallaxis between caged honey bees which originally consumed the diet and newly added bees. Color marked bees were starved and added to the cages in a ratio of 10:5 or 20:20 after the initial set of bees consumed all the labelled sugar solution. The distribution of the labelled sugar solution by trophallaxis within 48 hours to added bees was 25% (10:5) or 45% (20:20) of the initial sugar solution. Imidacloprid at its median lethal dose (LD50) in the sugar solution reduced this post-feeding food transmission to 27% (20:20). Our results show that differences in food intake exist within caged bees that may lead to differential exposure that can influence the interpretation of toxicity tests.

Dataset Information

Learning performance and brain structure of artificially-reared honey bees fed with different quantities of food.

Publications

Learning performance and brain structure of artificially-reared honey bees fed with different quantities of food.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets