Literature DB >> 25218105

Contrasting styles in cognition and behaviour in bumblebees and honeybees.

David F Sherry1, Caroline G Strang2.   

Abstract

Bumblebees and honeybees have been the subjects of a great deal of recent research in animal cognition. Many of the major topics in cognition, including memory, attention, concept learning, numerosity, spatial cognition, timing, social learning, and metacognition have been examined in bumblebees, honeybees, or both. Although bumblebees and honeybees are very closely related, they also differ in important ways, including social organization, development, and foraging behaviour. We examine whether differences between bumblebees and honeybees in cognitive processes are related to differences in their natural history and behaviour. There are differences in some cognitive traits, such as serial reversal learning and matching-to-sample, that appear related to differences between bumblebees and honeybees in foraging and social behaviour. Other cognitive processes, such as numerosity, appear to be very similar. Despite the wealth of information that is available on some aspects of bumblebee and honeybee cognition and behaviour, there are relatively few instances, however, in which adequate data exist to make direct comparisons. We highlight a number of phenomena, including concept learning, spatial cognition, timing, and metacognition, for which targeted comparative research may reveal unexpected adaptive variation in cognitive processes in these complex animals. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: In Honor of Jerry Hogan.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bumblebee; Honeybee; Memory; Numerosity; Orientation; Timing

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25218105     DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2014.09.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  8 in total

1.  Interaction of memory systems is controlled by context in both food-storing and non-storing birds.

Authors:  Emily Kathryn Brown; Caroline G Strang; David F Sherry; Robert R Hampton
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Intra-specific differences in cognition: bumblebee queens learn better than workers.

Authors:  Felicity Muth
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 3.812

3.  Is behavioural flexibility evidence of cognitive complexity? How evolution can inform comparative cognition.

Authors:  Irina Mikhalevich; Russell Powell; Corina Logan
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 3.906

4.  Brain size does not predict learning strategies in a serial reversal learning test.

Authors:  Annika Boussard; Séverine D Buechel; Mirjam Amcoff; Alexander Kotrschal; Niclas Kolm
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.312

5.  The search for invertebrate consciousness.

Authors:  Jonathan Birch
Journal:  Nous       Date:  2020-08-30

6.  Learned Use of Picture Cues by Bumblebees (Bombus impatiens) in a Delayed Matching Task.

Authors:  Emma Thompson; Catherine Plowright
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2016-10-14

7.  Hummingbirds modify their routes to avoid a poor location.

Authors:  Maria C Tello-Ramos; T Andrew Hurly; Mabel Barclay; Susan D Healy
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  A micro-CT-based standard brain atlas of the bumblebee.

Authors:  Lisa Rother; Nadine Kraft; Dylan B Smith; Basil El Jundi; Richard J Gill; Keram Pfeiffer
Journal:  Cell Tissue Res       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 5.249

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.