Literature DB >> 9784216

The identity of the previous visitor influences flower rejection by nectar-collecting bees.

.   

Abstract

In the field, recently probed flowers of borage, Borago officinalis, typically contained little or no nectar (and hence were relatively unrewarding), whether probed by a bumblebee, Bombus spp., worker or a honeybee, Apis mellifera. However, a nectar-collecting bee was likely to reject a recently probed flower only if the previous visitor was a conspecific (honeybees) or congener (bumblebees); the effect was especially marked in honeybees. Honeybees rejected more than 80% of flowers probed by conspecifics less than 20 s previously, but less than 20% of flowers probed by bumblebees less than 20 s previously. Only if the previous bee was a conspecific or congener did the probability of a bee probing a flower increase with the time since the last probing visit. Otherwise, the probability of a bee probing was independent of the time elapsed since the last visit. Bees' reactions to flowers whose nectar content had been manipulated independently of prior visits suggested that bees were repelled from flowers by species- or genus-specific chemical cues deposited by previous bees. Laboratory studies elsewhere have reported that honeybees are repelled from artificial feeders by volatile bee-deposited chemicals. My results constitute strong evidence that such cues are used by nectar-collecting honeybees in the field, and also suggest that bumblebees respond to similar cues. Calculations show that the ability to detect recently visited flowers may help bees to make a foraging profit, especially when bee densities are high. Thus, bee-deposited chemicals may confer information and economic advantages to foraging alongside conspecifics or congeners. Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Entities:  

Year:  1998        PMID: 9784216     DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0794

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


  11 in total

1.  Paying for nectar with wingbeats: a new model of honeybee foraging.

Authors:  A D Higginson; F Gilbert
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Variation in highbush blueberry floral volatile profiles as a function of pollination status, cultivar, time of day and flower part: implications for flower visitation by bees.

Authors:  Cesar Rodriguez-Saona; Leonardo Parra; Andrés Quiroz; Rufus Isaacs
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 4.357

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Tracing pollinator footprints on natural flowers.

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

6.  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

7.  Ineffective crypsis in a crab spider: a prey community perspective.

Authors:  Rolf Brechbühl; Jérôme Casas; Sven Bacher
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-11-04       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  A stingless bee (Melipona seminigra) marks food sources with a pheromone from its claw retractor tendons.

Authors:  Stefan Jarau; Michael Hrncir; Manfred Ayasse; Claudia Schulz; Wittko Francke; Ronaldo Zucchi; Friedrich G Barth
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.626

9.  Bumblebees can discriminate between scent-marks deposited by conspecifics.

Authors:  Richard F Pearce; Luca Giuggioli; Sean A Rands
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  The Potential Influence of Bumble Bee Visitation on Foraging Behaviors and Assemblages of Honey Bees on Squash Flowers in Highland Agricultural Ecosystems.

Authors:  Zhenghua Xie; Dongdong Pan; Jonathan Teichroew; Jiandong An
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.