Does the Flower Constancy of Bumble Bees Reflect Foraging Economics?

Ethology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 110 (10) ◽  
pp. 793-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Gegear ◽  
James D. Thomson
Keyword(s):  
1995 ◽  
Vol 73 (11) ◽  
pp. 2052-2058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Gegear ◽  
Terence M. Laverty

Pollinators often forage sequentially among the flowers of the same plant species while bypassing flowers of other rewarding species. Darwin proposed that it is more efficient for pollinators to remain constant to one plant species because switching to a second species interferes with their ability to recall a previously learned flower-handling technique. This interference hypothesis was tested using Bombus impatiens workers. Bees that had learned to handle one type of flower (species A) were retested on species A after they had learned to handle a second type of flower (species B). Interference effects were detected by comparing flower access times (time to insert the tongue into the flower) during the retesting period with initial access times on species A. Bees retested on both simple (red clover, Trifolium pratense) and complex (toadflax, Linaria vulgaris) flowers showed no evidence of interference after learning simple-flowered plant species (blueweed, Echium vulgare; purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria). However, bees relearning the complex flowers of toadflax showed a 2.2-s (81%) increase over their initial access time after switching to a second complex-flowered species (orange touch-me-not, Impatiens capensis). These results suggest that the interference effects incurred by bees switching between toadflax and orange touch-me-not under biologically realistic conditions are relatively small, and are unlikely to account for flower constancy in bumble bees.


2004 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 587-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J Gegear ◽  
Terence M Laverty

We assessed the flower constancy of Italian honey bees (Apis mellifera ligustica Spinelli, 1808) and bumble bees (Bombus impatiens Cresson, 1863) by presenting individual foragers with a mixed array of equally rewarding yellow and blue flowers after they were trained to visit each colour in succession. All honey bees showed a high degree of flower constancy to one colour and rarely visited the alternate colour, whereas most bumble bees indiscriminately visited both colours. Foraging rates (flowers visited per minute) and flower handling times did not differ between honey bee and bumble bee foragers; however, bumble bees tended to fly farther between consecutive flower visits and make fewer moves to nearest neighbouring flowers than honey bees. When bees were forced to specialize on one of two previously rewarding flower colours by depleting one colour of reward, honey bees required almost twice as many flower visits to specialize on the rewarding flower colour as bumble bees. Together, these results suggest that the relationship between individual flower constancy and colour differences is not a general behavioural phenomenon in honey and bumble bees, perhaps because of differences in the ability of each group to effectively manage multiple colours at the same time and location.


2011 ◽  
Vol 278 (1719) ◽  
pp. 2806-2813 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathilde Baude ◽  
Étienne Danchin ◽  
Marianne Mugabo ◽  
Isabelle Dajoz

Conspecifics are usually considered competitors negatively affecting food intake rates. However, their presence can also inform about resource quality by providing inadvertent social information. Few studies have investigated whether foragers perceive conspecifics as informers or competitors. Here, we experimentally tested whether variation in the density of demonstrators (‘none’, ‘low’ and ‘high’), whose location indicated flower profitability, affected decision-making of bumble-bees Bombus terrestris . Bumble-bees foraged on either ‘simple’ (two colours) or ‘complex’ (four colours) artificial floral communities. We found that conspecifics at low density may be used as sources of information in first flower choices, whereas they appeared as competitors over the whole foraging sequence. Low conspecific densities improved foragers' first-visit success rate in the simple environment, and decreased time to first landing, especially in the complex environment. High conspecific densities did not affect these behavioural parameters, but reduced flower constancy in both floral communities, which may alter the efficiency of pollinating visits. These results suggest that the balance of the costs and benefits of conspecific presence varies with foraging experience, floral community and density. Spatio-temporal scales could thus be an important determinant of social information use. This behavioural flexibility should allow bumble-bees to better exploit their environment.


1994 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence M. Laverty

Many pollinators tend to move between flowers of the same species of plant even when flowers of other species are available. Reasons for this behaviour (known as flower constancy) are unclear. One possible explanation (proposed by Darwin) is that flower handling methods learned on one plant species interfere with previously learned handling methods of other plant species. Darwin's hypothesis was tested by measuring the constancy of bumble bees (Bombus fervidus) foraging in the field and looking for evidence of interference (increased handling times and flower handling errors) when bees switched among four species with relatively simple flowers (Prunella vulgaris, Trifolium pratense, T. hybridum, and Vicia cracca) and two species with more complex flowers (Aconitum napellus and Impatiens capensis). Bees foraging on simple flowers showed no tendency towards flower constancy, and switching between species did not increase handling times or handling errors. Foragers displayed strong constancy when visiting the species with more complex flowers and there was also some evidence of increased handling times and error frequencies following switches. However, the time costs of switching were small (about 1 s over the first flower visit after a switch) and are unlikely to account for flower constancy by bumble bees foraging under natural conditions.


2005 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Otterstatter ◽  
Robert J. Gegear ◽  
Sheila R. Colla ◽  
James D. Thomson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document