Literature DB >> 17698483

Contrasting responses of bumble bees to feeding conspecifics on their familiar and unfamiliar flowers.

Lina G Kawaguchi1, Kazuharu Ohashi, Yukihiko Toquenaga.   

Abstract

Animals exploiting their familiar food items often avoid spatio-temporal aggregation with others by avoiding scents, less rewarding areas or visual contacts, thereby minimizing competition or interference when resources are replenished slowly in patches. When animals are searching or assessing available food sources, however, they may benefit from reducing sampling costs by following others at food sites. Therefore, animals may adjust their responses to others depending on their familiarity with foraging situations. Here, we conducted field experiments to test whether nectar-collecting bumble bees make this adjustment. We allowed free-foraging bees to choose between two inflorescences, one occupied by a conspecific bee and another unoccupied. When bees were presented with flowers of a familiar type, they avoided occupied inflorescences. In contrast, bees visited an occupied inflorescence when the flower type was unfamiliar. To our knowledge, this is the first report suggesting that animals adjust their responses to feeding conspecifics depending on their familiarity with food sources. Such behavioural flexibilities should allow foragers to both explore and exploit their environments efficiently.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17698483      PMCID: PMC2279218          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2007.0860

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  9 in total

1.  Individually recognizable scent marks on flowers made by a solitary bee.

Authors:  Francis Gilbert; Salma Azmeh; Chris Barnard; Jerzy Behnke; Sarah A. Collins; Jane Hurst; David Shuker
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.844

2.  Food exploitation: searching for the optimal joining policy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 17.712

3.  Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon.

Authors:  Thomas J Valone; Jennifer J Templeton
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-29       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 4.  Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution.

Authors:  Etienne Danchin; Luc-Alain Giraldeau; Thomas J Valone; Richard H Wagner
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-07-23       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 5.  Social learning: public information in insects.

Authors:  Lars Chittka; Ellouise Leadbeater
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-11-08       Impact factor: 10.834

6.  A new mode of information transfer in foraging bumblebees?

Authors:  Ellouise Leadbeater; Lars Chittka
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 10.834

7.  Flower choice copying in bumblebees.

Authors:  Bradley D Worden; Daniel R Papaj
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2005-12-22       Impact factor: 3.703

8.  Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology.

Authors:  Sasha R X Dall; Luc-Alain Giraldeau; Ola Olsson; John M McNamara; David W Stephens
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 17.712

9.  Foraging bumblebees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumblebee species

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.844

  9 in total
  18 in total

1.  Bumble-bees learn the value of social cues through experience.

Authors:  Ellouise Leadbeater; Lars Chittka
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Adaptive foraging behaviour of individual pollinators and the coexistence of co-flowering plants.

Authors:  Zhiyuan Song; Marcus W Feldman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Conspecifics as informers and competitors: an experimental study in foraging bumble-bees.

Authors:  Mathilde Baude; Étienne Danchin; Marianne Mugabo; Isabelle Dajoz
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) use social information as an indicator of safety in dangerous environments.

Authors:  Erika H Dawson; Lars Chittka
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Interindividual variation in the use of social information during learning in honeybees.

Authors:  Catherine Tait; Dhruba Naug
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Memory and the value of social information in foraging bumble bees.

Authors:  Benjamin J Abts; Aimee S Dunlap
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 1.926

7.  Negative feedback: ants choose unoccupied over occupied food sources and lay more pheromone to them.

Authors:  Stephanie Wendt; Nico Kleinhoelting; Tomer J Czaczkes
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 4.118

8.  Pollinator experience, neophobia and the evolution of flowering time.

Authors:  Jessica Forrest; James D Thomson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Olfactory eavesdropping between two competing stingless bee species.

Authors:  Elinor M Lichtenberg; Michael Hrncir; Izabel C Turatti; James C Nieh
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 2.980

10.  Conspecific and heterospecific information use in bumblebees.

Authors:  Erika H Dawson; Lars Chittka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.