Literature DB >> 30289166

Individual differences in learning and biogenic amine levels influence the behavioural division between foraging honeybee scouts and recruits.

Chelsea N Cook1, Thiago Mosqueiro2, Colin S Brent3, Cahit Ozturk1, Jürgen Gadau4, Noa Pinter-Wollman2, Brian H Smith1.   

Abstract

Animals must effectively balance the time they spend exploring the environment for new resources and exploiting them. One way that social animals accomplish this balance is by allocating these two tasks to different individuals. In honeybees, foraging is divided between scouts, which tend to explore the landscape for novel resources, and recruits, which tend to exploit these resources. Exploring the variation in cognitive and physiological mechanisms of foraging behaviour will provide a deeper understanding of how the division of labour is regulated in social insect societies. Here, we uncover how honeybee foraging behaviour may be shaped by predispositions in performance of latent inhibition (LI), which is a form of non-associative learning by which individuals learn to ignore familiar information. We compared LI between scouts and recruits, hypothesizing that differences in learning would correlate with differences in foraging behaviour. Scouts seek out and encounter many new odours while locating novel resources, while recruits continuously forage from the same resource, even as its quality degrades. We found that scouts show stronger LI than recruits, possibly reflecting their need to discriminate forage quality. We also found that scouts have significantly elevated tyramine compared to recruits. Furthermore, after associative odour training, recruits have significantly diminished octopamine in their brains compared to scouts. These results suggest that individual variation in learning behaviour shapes the phenotypic behavioural differences between different types of honeybee foragers. These differences in turn have important consequences for how honeybee colonies interact with their environment. Uncovering the proximate mechanisms that influence individual variation in foraging behaviour is crucial for understanding the ecological context in which societies evolve.
© 2018 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  exploration-exploitation trade-off; foraging; honeybee; latent inhibition; non-associative learning; scout; tyramine

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30289166      PMCID: PMC6379132          DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12911

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  43 in total

1.  Multiple sites of associative odor learning as revealed by local brain microinjections of octopamine in honeybees.

Authors:  M Hammer; R Menzel
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  1998 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.460

2.  Molecular determinants of scouting behavior in honey bees.

Authors:  Zhengzheng S Liang; Trang Nguyen; Heather R Mattila; Sandra L Rodriguez-Zas; Thomas D Seeley; Gene E Robinson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 3.  Collective cognition in animal groups.

Authors:  Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 20.229

4.  Comparative brain transcriptomic analyses of scouting across distinct behavioural and ecological contexts in honeybees.

Authors:  Zhengzheng S Liang; Heather R Mattila; Sandra L Rodriguez-Zas; Bruce R Southey; Thomas D Seeley; Gene E Robinson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  The effect of genotype on response thresholds to sucrose and foraging behavior of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.).

Authors:  R E Page; J Erber; M K Fondrk
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 1.836

6.  Heritable variation for latent inhibition and its correlation with reversal learning in honeybees (Apis mellifera).

Authors:  S B Chandra; J S Hosler; B H Smith
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.231

7.  Biogenic amines and division of labor in honey bee colonies.

Authors:  C Wagener-Hulme; J C Kuehn; D J Schulz; G E Robinson
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Octopamine modulates responsiveness to foraging-related stimuli in honey bees (Apis mellifera).

Authors:  A B Barron; D J Schulz; G E Robinson
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2002-09-07       Impact factor: 1.836

Review 9.  Behavioral genomics of honeybee foraging and nest defense.

Authors:  Greg J Hunt; Gro V Amdam; David Schlipalius; Christine Emore; Nagesh Sardesai; Christie E Williams; Olav Rueppell; Ernesto Guzmán-Novoa; Miguel Arechavaleta-Velasco; Sathees Chandra; M Kim Fondrk; Martin Beye; Robert E Page
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2006-12-15

10.  The Biogenic Amine Tyramine and its Receptor (AmTyr1) in Olfactory Neuropils in the Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Brain.

Authors:  Irina T Sinakevitch; Sasha M Daskalova; Brian H Smith
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2017-10-24
View more
  11 in total

1.  Individual learning phenotypes drive collective behavior.

Authors:  Chelsea N Cook; Natalie J Lemanski; Thiago Mosqueiro; Cahit Ozturk; Jürgen Gadau; Noa Pinter-Wollman; Brian H Smith
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Octopamine and dopamine mediate waggle dance following and information use in honeybees.

Authors:  Melissa Linn; Simone M Glaser; Tianfei Peng; Christoph Grüter
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Context specificity of latent inhibition in the snail Cornu aspersum.

Authors:  Judit Muñiz-Moreno; Ignacio Loy
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.084

4.  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

5.  Heritable Cognitive Phenotypes Influence Appetitive Learning but not Extinction in Honey Bees.

Authors:  Eda Sezen; Emily Dereszkiewicz; Alvin Hozan; Meghan M Bennett; Cahit Ozturk; Brian H Smith; Chelsea N Cook
Journal:  Ann Entomol Soc Am       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 2.727

6.  Individual differences in learning and biogenic amine levels influence the behavioural division between foraging honeybee scouts and recruits.

Authors:  Chelsea N Cook; Thiago Mosqueiro; Colin S Brent; Cahit Ozturk; Jürgen Gadau; Noa Pinter-Wollman; Brian H Smith
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 5.091

Review 7.  A Multiscale Review of Behavioral Variation in Collective Foraging Behavior in Honey Bees.

Authors:  Natalie J Lemanski; Chelsea N Cook; Brian H Smith; Noa Pinter-Wollman
Journal:  Insects       Date:  2019-10-25       Impact factor: 2.769

8.  Leadership - not followership - determines performance in ant teams.

Authors:  Nathalie Stroeymeyt; Laurent Keller; Thomas O Richardson; Andrea Coti
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2021-05-06

9.  Early olfactory, but not gustatory processing, is affected by the selection of heritable cognitive phenotypes in honey bee.

Authors:  Meghan M Bennett; Chelsea N Cook; Brian H Smith; Hong Lei
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 1.836

10.  Multidisciplinary analysis of Italian Alpine wildflower honey reveals criticalities, diversity and value.

Authors:  Valeria Leoni; Luca Giupponi; Radmila Pavlovic; Carla Gianoncelli; Francisco Cecati; Elia Ranzato; Simona Martinotti; Davide Pedrali; Annamaria Giorgi; Sara Panseri
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.