The repellent scent-mark of the honeybeeApis mellifera tigustica and its role as communication cue during foraging

Summary Experimental evidence for flower-marking in honeybees (Apis mellifera ligustica), using pairs of workers from the same colony foraging on an artificial patch of flowers, is reported. Workers marked artificial flowers with scent and strongly rejected all flowers they had recently visited. The same rejection behavior, in a lower although significant proportion, was observed when bees visited flowers just abandoned by the other individual of the pair. The repellent nature of this scent-mark was demonstrated with the use of an air extractor connected to the patch of artificial flowers. When the apparatus was turned on, the rejection behavior disappeared and bees accepted both flowers just abandoned by themselves and flowers just abandoned by the other bee. Differences in the response level of bees to their own marks or to the partner's marks suggest that the repellent scent-mark applied by a bee during foraging would basically be a self-use signal, although it certainly has value in communicating with other workers.     

Discrimination of Unrewarding Flowers by Bees; Direct Detection of Rewards and Use of Repellent Scent Marks

Bumblebees and honeybees deposit short-lived scent marks on flowers that they visit when foraging. Conspecifics use these marks to distinguish those flowers that have recently been emptied and, so, avoid them. The aim of this study was to assess how widespread this behavior is. Evidence for direct detection of reward levels was found in two bee species: Agapostemon nasutus was able to detect directly pollen availability in flowers with exposed anthers, while Apis mellifera appeared to be able to detect nectar levels of tubular flowers. A third species, Trigona fulviventris, avoided flowers that had recently been visited by conspecifies, regardless of reward levels, probably by using scent marks. Three further bee/flower systems were examined in which there was no detectable discrimination among flowers. We argue that bees probably rely on direct detection of rewards where this is allowed by the structure of the flower and on scent marks when feeding on flowers where the rewards are hidden. However, discrimination does not always occur. We suggest that discrimination may not always make economic sense; when visiting flowers with a low handling time, or flowers that are scarce, it may be more efficient to visit every flower that is encountered.     

Odour and colour information in the foraging choice behaviour of the honeybee

1. Honeybees Apis mellifera ligustica were trained to work on a patch with artificial rewarding and non-rewarding flowers, coupled to an air extractor. The perceptual colour distance between the rewarding and the non-rewarding flowers was varied and the flower choice and the repellent scent-marking behaviour of the bees were recorded. 2. The discrimination between rewarding and non-rewarding flowers depended on their colour distance, improving with a greater colour difference. This task was guided thus visually and was not affected by activating the air extractor. 3. The scent-marking activity was only observable when the colour information of both groups of flowers was the same or very similar. This thus represents the first reported case of a modulation of an olfactory activity through the visual input provided by colour distances. When the air extractor was activated, rejections associated with the scent-marking behaviour disappeared, thus confirming the olfactory nature of this behaviour. 4. Honeybees are thus capable of using one or more sensory cues to enhance their foraging efficiency, according to the environmental situation. This great plasticity allows them to attain an enhanced efficiency while foraging. 5. We successfully applied the model of colour choice behaviour of the honeybee. Since the original theory was developed for Apis mellifera carnica, this work also constitutes the first attempt to describe the behaviour of the honeybee race, Apis mellifera ligustica, using the postulated model, and reaffirms thus its generality.     

Individually recognizable scent marks on flowers made by a solitary bee

The marking of flowers with ephemeral scent is an underappreciated but vital element in the foraging behaviour of social bees. Using observational and experimental data, we tested whether a solitary bee (female Anthophora plumipes) uses scent marking while foraging on flowers of Cerinthe major in Portugal. Females used scent marks with at least two components that differed in their volatility and, furthermore, recognized the marks of different individuals. A very short-term component (<3 min) was attractive, resulting in the observed high level of immediate revisits: this component appeared to be adjusted according to the foraging needs of the moment. A longer-term component (<30 min) was initially repellent and matched the rate of nectar renewal; it, or the response to it, also appeared to be adjusted to the perceived level of nectar reward. There may be even longer-term effects associated with the specific foraging areas of individual bees. Observed differences in the way in which individuals responded to scent marks indicate that they may play a role as part of a dominance or exclusion mechanism among females. Copyright 2001 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Recognition of scent marks in solitary bees to avoid previously visited flowers

Knowing how floral visitors forage efficiently among flowers is important to understanding plant-pollinator interactions. When bees search for rewarding flowers, they use several visual cues to detect the available floral resources. In addition to these cues, bees can recognize scent marks, which are olfactory cues left on flowers foraged by previous visitors. This behavior is well known in social bees, such as honeybees and bumblebees. Although solitary bees do not need to give information about which flowers were foraged to conspecifics, several pieces of evidence have indicated the use of scent marks. However, it is unknown whether the behavior is widely used in many different bee species. We investigated whether four different solitary bees, Colletes patellatus (Colletidae), Andrena prostomias (Andrenidae), Osmia orientalis (Megachilidae), and Tetralonia mitsukurii (Apidae), can recognize flowers that have been foraged previously by visitors within 3 min. All four bees showed rejection responses to flowers foraged by conspecifics. However, our results showed that responses to foraged flowers varied among bee species. The tendency of A. prostomias and T. mitsukurii to reject the foraged flowers was pronounced, while in C. patellatus and O. orientalis it was weak. In both A. prostomias and T. mitsukurii, the rejection rate of flowers foraged by conspecifics decreased as the time lag after the last visit increased. Both bees visited the flowers from which pollen or nectar had been artificially removed. We suggest that A. prostomias and T. mitsukurii would recognize scent marks left by previous visitors, while the other two bees would not recognize them so strongly. It is likely that the decision to use scent marks is dependent either on the richness of resources or on the complexity of floral structure.     

Traplining in bumblebees (Bombus impatiens): a foraging strategy’s ontogeny and the importance of spatial reference memory in short-range foraging

To test the relative importance of long-term and working spatial memories in short-range foraging in bumblebees, we compared the performance of two groups of bees. One group foraged in a stable array of six flowers for 40 foraging bouts, thereby enabling it to establish a long-term memory of the array, and adjust its spatial movements accordingly. The other group was faced with an array that changed between (but not within) foraging bouts, and thus had only access to a working memory of the flowers that had been visited. Bees in the stable array started out sampling a variety of routes, but their tendency to visit flowers in a repeatable, stable order (“traplining”) increased drastically with experience. These bees used shorter routes and converged on four popular paths. However, these routes were mainly formed through linking pairs of flowers by near-neighbour movements, rather than attempting to minimize overall travel distance. Individuals had variations to a primary sequence, where some bees used a major sequence most often, followed by a minor less used route, and others used two different routes with equal frequency. Even though bees foraging in the spatially randomized array had access to both spatial working memory and scent marks, this manipulation greatly disrupted foraging efficiency, mainly via an increase in revisitation to previously emptied flowers and substantially longer search times. Hence, a stable reference frame greatly improves foraging even for bees in relatively small arrays of flowers.     

Floral visitors and ant scent marks: noticed but not used?

1. Bee behaviour when visiting flowers is mediated by diverse chemical cues and signals, from the flower itself and from previous visitors to the flower. Flowers recently visited by bees and hoverflies may be rejected for a period of time by subsequent bee visitors. 2. Nectar‐thieving ants also commonly visit flowers and could potentially influence the foraging decisions of bees, through the detection of ant trail pheromones or footprint hydrocarbons. 3. Here we demonstrate that, while naÏve bumblebees in laboratory trials are not inherently repelled by ant scent marks, they can learn to use them as informative signals while foraging on artificial flowers. 4. To test for similar activity in the wild, visitor behaviours at the flowers of Digitalis purpurea Linnaeus, Bupleurum fruticosum Linnaeus, and Brassica juncea (Linnaeus) Czernajew were compared between flowers that had been in contact with ants and those that had not. No differences were found between the two treatments. 5. The use of chemical foraging cues by bees would appear to be strongly dependent on previous experience and in the context of these plant species bees did not associate ant scent mark cues with foraging costs.     

People's study time allocation and its relation to animal foraging

In this article we suggest a relation between people's metacognitively guided study time allocation strategies and animal foraging. These two domains are similar insofar as people use specific metacognitive cues to assist their study time allocation just as other species use cues, such as scent marking. People decline to study items that they know they already know, just as other species use a win-shift strategy - avoiding already visited and depleted patches - in foraging. People selectively study the easiest as-yet-unlearned items first, before turning to more difficult items just as other species take the ‘just right’ size and challenge of prey—the so-called Goldilocks principle. People use a stop rule by which they give up on one item and turn to another when the returns diminish just as others species use a stop rule that guides shifting from one patch to another. The value that each item is assigned on the criterion test, if known during study, influences which items people choose to study and how long they study them just as knowledge of the nutritional or energy value of the food influences choices and perseverance in foraging. Finally, study time allocation strategies can differ in their effectiveness depending upon the expertise of the student just as some species forage close to optimally while others do not.     

Windows of opportunity and the temporal structuring of foraging activity in a desert solitary bee

1. Females of the desert solitary bee Anthophora pauperata collect nectar and pollen almost exclusively from Alkanna orientalis (Boraginaceae). The bee and plant are found together in the early spring, living in the bottom of steep-sided wadis (dry river valleys) at an altitude of 1500 m in Egyptian Sinai. 2. Female A. pauperata showed clear morning and afternoon peaks in foraging activity, separated by a 2–3 h midday period spent in their underground nests. This study analyses the following in order to identify the factors structuring this daily pattern: thermal aspects of the bee and its environment, temporal patterns of resource provision by the plant, and female nectar and pollen foraging behaviour. 3. Although A. pauperata can generate substantial heat endothermically, morning and evening ambient temperatures well below 10 °C defined a thermal window within which foraging occurred. Maximum air temperatures were moderate (25–30 °C), and examination of the physiology and behaviour of A. pauperata suggests that the midday reduction in flight activity was not due to thermal constraints. 4. Alkanna orientalis produces protandrous hermaphroditic flowers. Female A. pauperata collected pollen from male-phase flowers and harvested nectar preferentially from female-phase flowers. Although the nectar standing crop was relatively constant throughout the day, pollen availability peaked strongly in the early afternoon. 5. Female A. pauperata visited young male-phase flowers as soon as they opened, generating an early afternoon peak in pollen foraging activity and depleting the pollen standing crop rapidly. A morning peak in pollen foraging occurred when females gleaned remnant pollen from flowers that had opened the previous day. Pollen availability in the morning was far lower than in the early afternoon, and the time taken to collect a full pollen load in the morning was significantly longer. Collection of pollen in the morning despite very low resource availability suggests that pollen may be a limiting resource for A. pauperata. 6. In contrast to many existing examples of bimodal activity patterns in highly endothermic bees, the bimodal activity patterns of female A. pauperata appear to be driven not by thermal considerations but by daily patterns of pollen release from its principal food source.     

Foraging and predator avoidance: a test of a patch choice model with juvenile bluegill sunfish

Summary In situations where foraging sites vary both in food reward and predation risk, conventional optimal foraging models based on the criterion of maximizing net rate of energy intake commonly fail to predict patch choice by foragers. Recently, an alternative model based on the simple rule when foraging, minimize the ratio of mortality rate (u) to foraging rate (f) was successful in predicting patch preference under such conditions (Gilliam and Fraser 1987). In the present study, I compare the predictive ability of these two models under conditions where available patches vary both in predation hazard and foraging returns. Juvenile bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) were presented with a choice between two patches of artificial vegetation differing in stem density (i.e. 100, 250, and 500 stems/m²) in which to forage. Each combination (100:250, 250:500, or 100:500) was presented in the absence, presence, and after exposure to a bass predator (Micropterus salmoides). Which patch of vegetation bluegills chose to forage in, and foraging rate within each patch were recorded. Independent measurements of bluegill foraging rate and risk of mortality in the three stem densities provided the data for predicting patch choice by the two models. With no predator, preference between plots was consistent with the maximize energy intake per unit time rule of conventional optimality models. However, with a predator present, patch preference switched to match a minimize u/f criterion. Finally, when tested shortly after exposure to a predator (i.e. 15 min), bluegill preference appeared to be in a transitional phase between these two rules. Results are discussed with respect to factors determining the distribution of organisms within beds of aquatic vegetation.     

An agent-based model to investigate the roles of attractive and repellent pheromones in ant decision making during foraging

Pharaoh's ants organise their foraging system using three types of trail pheromone. All previous foraging models based on specific ant foraging systems have assumed that only a single attractive pheromone is used. Here we present an agent-based model based on trail choice at a trail bifurcation within the foraging trail network of a Pharaoh's ant colony which includes both attractive (positive) and repellent (negative) trail pheromones. Experiments have previously shown that Pharaoh's ants use both types of pheromone. We investigate how the repellent pheromone affects trail choice and foraging success in our simulated foraging system. We find that both the repellent and attractive pheromones have a role in trail choice, and that the repellent pheromone prevents random fluctuations which could otherwise lead to a positive feedback loop causing the colony to concentrate its foraging on the unrewarding trail. An emergent feature of the model is a high level of variability in the level of repellent pheromone on the unrewarding branch. This is caused by the repellent pheromone exerting negative feedback on its own deposition. We also investigate the dynamic situation where the location of the food is changed after foraging trails are established. We find that the repellent pheromone has a key role in enabling the colony to refocus the foraging effort to the new location. Our results show that having a repellent pheromone is adaptive, as it increases the robustness and flexibility of the colony's overall foraging response.     

The foraging behaviour of a nectar feeding marsupial,Petaurus australis

Summary The foraging behaviour of non-flying nectar feeding mammals has been examined rarely. The exudivorous yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis) was observed to feed extensively (70% of the total feeding observation time) on the nectar of all species of Eucalyptus present at a site in southeastern Australia. Gliders harvested nectar, and presumably pollen also, whenever eucalypt flowers were available and selected trees with 2–3 times as many flowers as that on trees randomly selected along a transect. The abundance of flowering trees varied temporally and, at times when few flowering trees were present, gliders chose trees with fewer flowers than at times when flowering trees were abundant. When flowering trees were superabundant or scarce, there was no relationship between the number of flowers in a tree and the duration of visits by gliders. However, at intermediate levels of abundance, the amount of time a glider spent in a tree was related to the number of flowers in a tree. Gliders devoted 90% of the time outside their dens to foraging and the above relationship is suggested to reflect two foraging options which maximize net energy gain for different abundances of flowering trees. Although gliders spent considerable lengths of time in individual trees feeding, initial deposition of cross pollen when gliders first arrive in a tree may be substantial and thus, may provide significant amounts of outcrossing for these eucalypts.     

Why do honeybees reject certain flowers?

Summary Honeybees often approach flowers of Lotus corniculatus and then fly away without attempting to extract nectar. These rejected flowers contained 41% less nectar than my random sample. The accepted flowers contained 24% more nectar than my random sample. The differences among these three flower-groups were due to differences in the percent of empty flowers in each group rather than the differences in the absolute amount of nectar. Honeybees increased their foraging efficiency by accepting less empty flowers and rejecting more empty flowers than would be expected if they foraged randomly. There are two possible mechanisms for this discrimination-behavior: either the bees are smelling nectar odor or they are smelling bee scent left by previous visitors to the flower. My results are inconsistent with the hypothesis that bees are basing their decision on nectar smell and suggest that they are using bee scent as a means of identifying empty flowers.     

Do cattle egrets gain information from conspecifics when foraging?

Summary We examined whether individual cattle egrets (Bubulcus ibis) base their decisions of where to forage, and how long to stay in a patch, on the behavior of other flock members. Cattle egrets commonly forage in flocks associated with cattle and capture prey at higher rates when they do not share a cow with another egret. Foraging egrets provide cues of the location of prey and their success in capturing prey. Therefore, there is the possibility of information transfer between egrets in a flock. We predicted that egrets should only move to occupied patches when the resident was capturing enough prey that it is profitable for the invader to share the patch or take over the patch. However, egrets did not seem to decide where to forage based on neighbors' rates of energy intake, but rather on the presence or absence of conspecifics in a patch. We also predicted that an egret should remain in a patch until its rate of energy intake dropped to or below the average rate for other egrets within the flock. However, egrets that were foraging more efficiently than the average rate for the flock switched patches sooner than less efficient foragers. Egrets did not appear to increase foraging success by gaining information on patch quality from neighbors.     

Caste-specific patterns of flower visitation in bumble bees (Bombus kirbyellus) collecting nectar from Polemonium viscosum

ABSTRACT.

• 1 Foraging routes of worker and queen bumble bees (Bombus kirbyellus Curtis) collecting nectar from flowers of the alpine sky pilot, Polemonium viscosum Nutt., were followed and the corolla tube length, corolla diameter, floral scent, and number of flowers on plants visited or bypassed by bees were monitored. Additionally, the number and proportion of flowers visited per inflorescence and distance flown from each to the next were recorded. Queens and workers differed significantly in choice of flowers. However, intra-inflorescence visitation rates and departure distances were similar between castes. Castes differed in the extent to which visitation reflected patch quality versus individual floral traits.
• 2 Both queens and workers failed to visit skunky-flowered plants more often than they failed to visit sweet-flowered ones, and preferred large over small inflorescences. However, queens visited large-flowered plants more often than small-flowered ones, while workers preferred flowers with shorter corolla tubes, regardless of their diameter. Although a number of studies have documented caste specialization on alternate species of host plants, ours is one of the first to show that morphological preferences promote comparable foraging differences between castes on monospecific plant resources.
• 3 Queens, once on a plant, responded to floral traits by probing more flowers on large inflorescences, as well as on those with broader floral form. Workers did not alter intra-inflorescence visitation rate in response to floral traits.
• 4 For workers, no significant relationship was demonstrated between the likelihood of passing by a plant and the number of flowers probed on the previous inflorescence visited. Thus, workers appeared to accept or reject each plant of P. viscosum independently. However, queens passed by fewer plants when leaving rich inflorescences than poor ones. These results suggest that workers use only individual plant acceptability in choosing which plants to visit, whereas queens base plant choice on patch and individual attributes. Such differences between castes in foraging rules when exploiting the same floral resource have received little attention, and provide insights into the heterogeneity of harvestable reward distributions from the perspective of the forager population.

     

Floral scent and intrafloral scent differentiation inMoneses andPyrola (Pyrolaceae)

Floral scent was collected by headspace methods from intact flowers, petals, and stamens of four species ofPyrolaceae. The scent samples were analyzed by coupled gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The floral scent inPyrola spp. is differentiated into a characteristic petal scent—phenyl propanoids and a characteristic stamen scent—methoxy benzenes. InMoneses the scent is characterized by isoprenoids and benzenoids, with a larger proportion of benzenoids in the stamens compared to the petals. Specific anther scents may promote foraging efficiency in buzz-pollinated species and enhance flower fidelity. Variation in floral scent composition is consistent with the taxonomic relationships among the genera and species examined.     

Flower choice by honey bees (Apis mellifera L.): sex-phase of flowers and preferences among nectar and pollen foragers

Bees foraging for nectar should choose different inflorescences from those foraging for both pollen and nectar, if inflorescences consist of differing proportions of male and female flowers, particularly if the sex phases of the flowers differ in nectar content as well as the occurrence of pollen. This study tested this prediction using worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) foraging on inflorescences of Lavandula stoechas. Female flowers contained about twice the volume of nectar of male flowers. As one would predict, bees foraging for nectar only chose inflorescences with disproportionately more female flowers: time spent on the inflorescence was correlated with the number of female flowers, but not with the number of male flowers. Inflorescence size was inversely correlated with the number of female flowers, and could be used as a morphological cue by these bees. Also as predicted, workers foraging for both pollen and nectar chose inflorescences with relatively greater numbers of both male and female flowers: time spent on these inflorescences was correlated with the number of male flowers, but not with the number of females flowers. A morphological cue inversely associated with such inflorescences is the size of the bract display. Choice of flowers within inflorescences was also influenced predictably, but preferences appeared to be based upon corolla size rather than directly on sex phase.     

Insect pollinators show constancy for different flower traits between the most- and less-preferred plants: a case study of the long-proboscid tangle-veined fly

• The coevolution of insect pollinators and their host plants is a typical example of natural selection; however, how insect pollinators avoid overdependence on one peculiar plant remains unclear. As most insect pollinators exhibit a diet breadth when showing flower constancy, determining the difference and similarity of most and less preferred flowers by insect pollinators may be helpful to understand their trade-off between flower constancy and overdependence.
• This was addressed using the long-proboscid tangle-veined fly (Nemetrinus spp.). Dietary investigation indicates that the flies show constancy for the morphological characteristic of the Delphinium caeruleum, which is the most preferred plant for this Nemestrinidae fly that has blue, long-tubed flowers.
• In a colour selection experiment, focal individuals showed obvious preference for white, which is the colour of less preferred flowers by the fly in the natural environment. In a scent selection experiment, focal individuals showed obvious preference for D. caeruleum and Dracocephalum heterophyllum but avoidance to Dasiphora fruticosa and Dasiphora davurica. This indicates that long-proboscid tangle-veined flies can forage on other flowers, despite the existing constancy for D. caeruleum, as long as they do not hate the scent. It seems that long-proboscid tangle-veined flies can maximise foraging efficiency by showing constancy for the morphological characteristic of the most preferred plant and for the scent and colour of less-preferred plants.
• The trade-off of long-proboscid tangle-veined flies in the selection of nectar sources may be an adaptation to the risk of overdependence on one plant in evolution.

     

Honeybee (Apis mellifera ligustica) Response to Differences in Handling Time, Rewards and Flower Colours

Free flying honeybees were tested outdoors on blue–white and blue–yellow dimorphic artificial flower patches to examine the influence of reward difference, flower handling‐time difference and flower colour choice on foraging decisions. We employed different flower‐well depths to vary handling times (costs), and differences in sucrose molarity to vary reward quality. Tests were performed with 2 and 6 μl rewards to vary quantity. We show that when handling time is correlated with flower‐colour morphs on a pedicellate artificial flower patch, a honeybee's foraging behaviour is dependent on the flower colours used in the choice tests. This supports a honeybee foraging model where constraints are a significant factor in decision making. Bees visiting blue–yellow flower patches exhibited flower constancy to colour, where they restricted most visits to a single flower colour, some bees to blue and others to yellow, irrespective of handing time differences. When offered a choice of equally rewarding blue or white flowers, bees were not constrained by flower colour and chose to visit flowers with a lower handling time. When reward molarity varied with well depth between blue and white flowers, foragers chose shallow‐well flowers (short‐handling time) with a smaller net harvest rate over deep‐well flowers (long‐handling time) with a greater net harvest rate. Results using the blue–white dimorphic flower patch suggest that when foraging options simultaneously involve reward and handling‐time choices, honeybee forager behaviour is inconsistent with an absolute method of evaluating profit.     

Feeding time strategies of the fringe-toed lizard,Uma inornata,during breeding and non-breeding seasons

Summary I examined the foraging behavior during the breeding and non-breeding seasons, May and July 1986, of the fringe-toed lizard Uma inornata (Iguanidae). During the breeding season males differ from females in their diet and in their foraging time strategy, males exhibiting time minimization and females energy maximization. In May, plant associated foods were selectively eaten. Males concentrated on flowers, a readily available quick energy food, which reduced foraging time and increased time for reproductive activities. Time budgets indicate that males spend over twice as much time in the open and in movement in May than do females. Females at this time restrict their activities to the cover of perennial bushes, and feed primarily on plant foods (flowers and arthropods). Energy maximization appears to be maintained by both sexes in the non-breeding season when food resources diminished to one-half of those in the breeding season. The lizards were less selective in their July feeding habits, broadening their diets to include ground-dwelling arthropods and foliage. Predation by these lizards follows a wait-ambush mode of foraging.