Literature DB >> 9480686

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

.   

Abstract

Honey bees, Apis mellifera, use short-lived repellent scent marks to distinguish and reject flowers that have recently been visited by themselves or by siblings, and so save time that would otherwise be spent in probing empty flowers. Conversely, both honey bees and bumblebees, Bombus spp., can mark rewarding flowers with scent marks that promote probing by conspecifics. We examined detection of recently visited flowers in a mixed community of bumblebees foraging on comfrey, Symphytum officinale, in southern England. When foraging among inflorescences on a plant, three abundant species of Bombus probed fewer inflorescences more than once than would be expected from random foraging. Bees frequently encountered inflorescences but departed without probing them for nectar. Examination of the incidence of such rejections in the two most common species, B. terrestris and B. pascuorum, revealed that the low incidence of multiple probing visits was due to two factors: bees both foraged systematically and selectively rejected inflorescences that they had previously visited. When presented with inflorescences of known history, bees selectively rejected those that had been recently visited by themselves or by conspecifics compared with randomly selected inflorescences. They were also able to distinguish inflorescences that had been visited by other Bombus species. Bees were unable to distinguish and reject inflorescences from which the nectar had been removed artificially. We conclude that these Bombus species are probably using scent marks left by previous visitors. The significance of deposition and detection of interspecific scent marks for competitive interactions between species is discussed. Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Entities:  

Year:  1998        PMID: 9480686     DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0570

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Behav        ISSN: 0003-3472            Impact factor:   2.844


  20 in total

1.  The use of heterospecific scent marks by the sweat bee Halictus aerarius.

Authors:  Tomoyuki Yokoi; Dave Goulson; Kenji Fujisaki
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2007-07-28

2.  Combined effects of inflorescence architecture, display size, plant density and empty flowers on bumble bee behaviour: experimental study with artificial inflorescences.

Authors:  Hiroshi S Ishii; Yuimi Hirabayashi; Gaku Kudo
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.225

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

Authors:  Lina G Kawaguchi; Kazuharu Ohashi; Yukihiko Toquenaga
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Foraging scent marks of bumblebees: footprint cues rather than pheromone signals.

Authors:  Jessica Wilms; Thomas Eltz
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2007-08-28

5.  Background complexity affects colour preference in bumblebees.

Authors:  Jessica Forrest; James D Thomson
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2009-05-15

6.  Stingless bees (Melipona scutellaris) learn to associate footprint cues at food sources with a specific reward context.

Authors:  Ana Carolina Roselino; André Vieira Rodrigues; Michael Hrncir
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  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

8.  Tracing pollinator footprints on natural flowers.

Authors:  Thomas Eltz
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2006-05-19       Impact factor: 2.626

9.  The Stingless Bee Melipona solani Deposits a Signature Mixture and Methyl Oleate to Mark Valuable Food Sources.

Authors:  David Alavez-Rosas; Edi A Malo; Miguel A Guzmán; Daniel Sánchez-Guillén; Rogel Villanueva-Gutiérrez; Leopoldo Cruz-López
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2017-09-16       Impact factor: 2.626

10.  Mating systems and avoidance of inbreeding depression as evolutionary drivers of pollen limitation in animal-pollinated self-compatible plants.

Authors:  Céline Devaux; Emmanuelle Porcher; Russell Lande
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 4.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.