Literature DB >> 23179111

The psychophysics of sugar concentration discrimination and contrast evaluation in bumblebees.

Vladislav Nachev1, James D Thomson, York Winter.   

Abstract

The capacity to discriminate between choice options is crucial for a decision-maker to avoid unprofitable options. The physical properties of rewards are presumed to be represented on context-dependent, nonlinear cognitive scales that may systematically influence reward expectation and thus choice behavior. In this study, we investigated the discrimination performance of free-flying bumblebee workers (Bombus impatiens) in a choice between sucrose solutions with different concentrations. We conducted two-alternative free choice experiments on two B. impatiens colonies containing some electronically tagged bumblebees foraging at an array of computer-automated artificial flowers that recorded individual choices. We mimicked natural foraging conditions by allowing uncertainty in the probability of reward delivery while maintaining certainty in reward concentration. We used a Bayesian approach to fit psychometric functions, relating the strength of preference for the higher concentration option to the relative intensity of the presented stimuli. Psychometric analysis was performed on visitation data from individually marked bumblebees and pooled data from unmarked individuals. Bumblebees preferred the more concentrated sugar solutions at high stimulus intensities and showed no preference at low stimulus intensities. The obtained psychometric function is consistent with reward evaluation based on perceived concentration contrast between choices. We found no evidence that bumblebees reduce reward expectations upon experiencing non-rewarded visits. We compare psychometric function parameters between the bumblebee B. impatiens and the flower bat Glossophaga commissarisi and discuss the relevance of psychophysics for pollinator-exerted selection pressures on plants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23179111      PMCID: PMC3625420          DOI: 10.1007/s10071-012-0582-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Cogn        ISSN: 1435-9448            Impact factor:   3.084


  28 in total

1.  Non-verbal numerical cognition: from reals to integers.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Fitting the psychometric function.

Authors:  B Treutwein; H Strasburger
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1999-01

3.  Converting between measures of slope of the psychometric function.

Authors:  H Strasburger
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2001-11

4.  Nectar feeding by the hovering hawk moth Macroglossum stellatarum: intake rate as a function of viscosity and concentration of sucrose solutions.

Authors:  R B Josens; W M Farina
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Coding of cognitive magnitude: compressed scaling of numerical information in the primate prefrontal cortex.

Authors:  Andreas Nieder; Earl K Miller
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2003-01-09       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  The neural basis of the Weber-Fechner law: a logarithmic mental number line.

Authors:  Stanislas Dehaene
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Electrophysiological responses of galeal contact chemoreceptors of Apis mellifera to selected sugars and electroylytes.

Authors:  A T Whitehead; J R Larsen
Journal:  J Insect Physiol       Date:  1976       Impact factor: 2.354

8.  Foraging in a complex naturalistic environment: capacity of spatial working memory in flower bats.

Authors:  York Winter; Kai Petra Stich
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.312

9.  Bayesian inference for psychometric functions.

Authors:  Malte Kuss; Frank Jäkel; Felix A Wichmann
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-05-27       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Context-dependent foraging decisions in rufous hummingbirds.

Authors:  Melissa Bateson; Susan D Healy; T Andrew Hurly
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-06-22       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  8 in total

1.  Measuring foraging preferences in bumble bees: a comparison of popular laboratory methods and a test for sucrose preferences following neonicotinoid exposure.

Authors:  Sarah K Richman; Felicity Muth; Anne S Leonard
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2021-07-11       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  The mechanics of nectar offloading in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris and implications for optimal concentrations during nectar foraging.

Authors:  Jonathan G Pattrick; Hamish A Symington; Walter Federle; Beverley J Glover
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 3.  Getting to the start line: how bumblebees and honeybees are visually guided towards their first floral contact.

Authors:  L L Orbán; C M S Plowright
Journal:  Insectes Soc       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 1.643

4.  Principles of Economic Rationality in Mice.

Authors:  Marion Rivalan; York Winter; Vladislav Nachev
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-12-12       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Responsiveness to Sugar Solutions in the Moth Agrotis ipsilon: Parameters Affecting Proboscis Extension.

Authors:  Camille Hostachy; Philippe Couzi; Melissa Hanafi-Portier; Guillaume Portemer; Alexandre Halleguen; Meena Murmu; Nina Deisig; Matthieu Dacher
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 4.566

6.  Weber's law, the magnitude effect and discrimination of sugar concentrations in nectar-feeding animals.

Authors:  Vladislav Nachev; Kai Petra Stich; York Winter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Modality-specific attention in foraging bumblebees.

Authors:  Vivek Nityananda; Lars Chittka
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 2.963

8.  Patterns of floral nectar standing crops allow plants to manipulate their pollinators.

Authors:  Graham H Pyke; John R M Kalman; Dayanne M Bordin; Lucas Blanes; Philip A Doble
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.