Chromatic and achromatic stimulus discrimination of long wavelength (red) visual stimuli by the honeybee Apis mellifera

It has long been assumed that bees cannot see red. However, bees visit red flowers, and the visual spectral sensitivity of bees extends into wavelengths to provide sensitivity to such flowers. We thus investigated whether bees can discriminate stimuli reflecting wavelengths above 560 nm, i.e., which appear orange and red to a human observer. Flowers do not reflect monochromatic (single wavelength) light; specifically orange and red flowers have reflectance patterns which are step functions, we thus used colored stimuli with such reflectance patterns. We first conditioned honey bees Apis mellifera to detect six stimuli reflecting light mostly above 560 nm and found that bees learned to detect only stimuli which were perceptually very different from a bee achromatic background. In a second experiment we conditioned bees to discriminate stimuli from a salient, negative (un-rewarded) yellow stimulus. In subsequent unrewarded tests we presented the bees with the trained situation and with five other tests in which the trained stimulus was presented against a novel one. We found that bees learned to discriminate the positive from the negative stimulus, and could unambiguously discriminate eight out of fifteen stimulus pairs. The performance of bees was positively correlated with differences between the trained and the novel stimulus in the receptor contrast for the long-wavelength bee photoreceptor and in the color distance (calculated using two models of the honeybee colors space). We found that the differential conditioning resulted in a concurrent inhibitory conditioning of the negative stimulus, which might have improved discrimination of stimuli which are perceptually similar. These results show that bees can detect long wavelength stimuli which appear reddish to a human observer. The mechanisms underlying discrimination of these stimuli are discussed. Handling Editor: Lars Chittka.     

Discrimination of oilseed rape volatiles by the honeybee: combined chemical and biological approaches

Honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) were individually subjected to a classical conditioning procedure in order to obtain an olfactory conditioned proboscis extension response. To relate the behavioural response directly to antennal detection abilities, a technique was developped for coupling proboscis extension responses and electroantennogram recordings, with the stimulation being provided by the effluent of a gas chromatograph (GC). Bees were conditioned with a six-component mixture being part of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) floral volatiles, and tested with the individual components separated by GC. Responses of the conditioned bees were compared to those of unconditioned bees. No behavioural response was obtained in the control group, neither to the individual components nor to the mixture. Conditioning induced behavioural responses for three components, and an increase of electroantennogram responses for all components. A second experiment was conducted with an air entrainment extract of oilseed rape flower volatiles. Behavioural responses of conditioned and unconditioned bees were recorded. Responses obtained from conditioned bees tested with the air entrainment extract showed six groups of behaviourally active GC peaks. Unconditioned bees showed the same pattern of responses but at a lower level. The coupled technique described here appears to be a reliable tool for locating active components in a synthetic as well as in a natural mixture of floral volatiles. The effects of conditioning on odour discrimination and on its sensory correlates are discussed.     

Asymmetrical generalisation between pheromonal and floral odours in appetitive olfactory conditioning of the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.)

The capacity to generalise between similar but not identical olfactory stimuli is crucial for honey bees, allowing them to find rewarding food sources with varying volatile emissions. We studied bees' generalisation behaviour with odours having different biological values: typical floral odours or alarm compounds. Bees' behavioural and peripheral electrophysiological responses were investigated using a combined proboscis extension response conditioning-electroantennogram assay. Bees were conditioned to pure linalool (floral) or to pure isoamyl acetate (alarm) and were tested with different concentrations of both compounds. Electrophysiological responses were not influenced by conditioning, suggesting that the learning of individual compounds does not rely on modulations of peripheral sensitivity. Behaviourally, generalisation responses of bees conditioned to the alarm compound were much higher than those of bees conditioned to the floral odour. We further demonstrated such asymmetrical generalisation between alarm and floral odours by using differential conditioning procedures. Conditioning to alarm compounds (isoamyl acetate or 2-heptanone) consistently induced more generalisation than conditioning to floral compounds (linalool or phenylacetaldehyde). Interestingly, generalisation between the two alarm compounds, which are otherwise chemically different, was extremely high. These results are discussed in relation to the neural representation of compounds with different biological significance for bees.     

Associative learning in ants: Conditioning of the maxilla-labium extension response in Camponotus aethiops

Associative learning has been studied in many vertebrates and invertebrates. In social insects, the proboscis extension response conditioning of honey bees has been widely used for several decades. However, a similar paradigm has not been developed for ants, which are advanced social insects showing different morphological castes and a plethora of life histories. Here we present a novel conditioning protocol using Camponotus aethiops. When the antennae of a harnessed ant are stimulated with sucrose solution, the ant extends its maxilla-labium to absorb the sucrose. We term this the “maxilla-labium extension response” (MaLER). MaLER could be conditioned by forward pairing an odour (conditioned stimulus) with sucrose (unconditioned stimulus) in the course of six conditioning trials (absolute conditioning). In non-rewarded tests following conditioning, ants gave significantly higher specific responses to the conditioned stimulus than to a novel odour. When trained for differential conditioning, ants discriminated between the odour forward-paired with sucrose and an odour forward-paired with quinine (a putative aversive stimulus). In both absolute and differential conditioning, memory lasted for at least 1 h. MaLER conditioning allows full control of the stimulation sequence, inter-stimulus and inter-trial intervals and satiety, which is crucial for any further study on associative learning in ants.     

Discrimination of coloured patterns by honeybees through chromatic and achromatic cues

We investigated pattern discrimination by worker honeybees, Apis mellifera, focusing on the roles of spectral cues and the angular size of patterns. Free-flying bees were trained to discriminate concentric patterns in a Y-maze. The rewarded pattern could be composed of either a cyan and a yellow colour, which presented both different chromatic and achromatic L-receptor contrast, or an orange and a blue colour, which presented different chromatic cues, but the same L-receptor contrast. The non-rewarded alternative was either a single-coloured disc with the colour of the central disc or the surrounding ring of the pattern, a checkerboard pattern with non-resolvable squares, the reversed pattern, or the elements of the training pattern (disc or ring alone). Bees resolved and learned both colour elements in the rewarded patterns and their spatial properties. When the patterns subtended large visual angles, this discrimination used chromatic cues only. Patterns with yellow or orange central discs were generalised toward the yellow and orange colours, respectively. When the patterns subtended a visual angle close to the detection limit and L-receptor contrast was mediating discrimination, pattern perception was reduced: bees perceived only the pattern element with higher contrast.     

Tactile learning in the honeybee

Free-flying bees were conditioned on a vertical wall to a vertical tactile pattern consisting of parallel lines of grooves and elevations. The asymptote of the learning curve is reached after approximately 25 rewards. Bees can discriminate the conditioned vertical pattern from a horizontal or diagonal alternative. Angle discrimination is apparent only for relatively coarse tactile cues. The proboscis extension response of fixed bees was used to condition bees to a vertical tactile pattern which was presented to the antennae. The learning curve reaches an asymptote after 4 rewards. After 7 unrewarded extinction trials the conditioned responses are reduced to 50%. Bees show best discrimination for patterns whose edges they can scan with their antennae. The animals show a high degree of generalization by responding to an object irrespective of the trained pattern. Under laboratory conditions fixed bees can discriminate the angles and spatial wavelengths of fine tactile patterns consisting of parallel grooves. Bees can also discriminate forms and sizes of tactile patterns. They do not discriminate between different types of edges and between positive and negative forms. Accepted: 17 September 1998     

Interstimulus interval as a discriminative stimulus: Evidence of the generality of a novel asymmetry in temporal discrimination learning

Three appetitive conditioning experiments with rats examined temporal discrimination learning within Pavlovian conditioning trials. In all experiments, the duration of a feature white noise stimulus signaled whether or not a subsequent 10-s target tone would be reinforced. In Experiment 1, the feature durations were 4 and 1 min. For one group of rats (Group 4+/1−), 4 min of noise signaled that the tone would be reinforced and 1 min of noise signaled that the tone would not be reinforced. A second group (Group 1+/4−) was trained with the reverse contingency. The results showed a clear asymmetry in temporal discrimination learning: rats trained with 4+/1− (Long+/Short−) learned the discrimination readily (responding more in the tone on reinforced than on nonreinforced trials), whereas rats trained with 1+/4− (Short+/Long) did not. In Experiment 2, the feature durations were shortened to 60 and 15 s. Due to strong excitatory conditioning of the 15-s feature, the reverse asymmetry was observed, with the Short+/Long− discrimination learned more readily than the Long+/Short− discrimination. However, Experiment 3 demonstrated that the original Long+/Short− advantage could be recovered while using 60− and 15-s feature durations if the excitatory conditioning of the feature was reduced by including nonreinforced feature trials. The results support previous research involving the timing of intertrial intervals and are consistent with the temporal elements hypothesis which holds that the passage of time is encoded as a series of hypothetical stimulus elements.     

Pattern discrimination by the honeybee: disruption as a cue

The discrimination of pattern disruption in freely flying honeybees (Apis mellifera) was examined. Bees were trained to discriminate at a fixed distance between a regularly repeated black/white pattern and the same pattern at a different magnification in targets of the same angular size. The locations of areas of black were regularly shuffled to make them useless as cues. The results of the experiments indicate that the bees discriminate the disruption of the pattern as a whole, irrespective of the actual pattern. Bees trained to prefer a larger period transfer to an even larger period, when given a forced choice with a pair of patterns of differing disruption from those they were trained on, as if their spontaneous preference has not been overcome. Bees trained to prefer a smaller period, however, prefer the former negative pattern rather than transfer to an even smaller period. These results show that the bees do not rely solely on learning the absolute period of a pattern nor the relative disruption of two patterns, and they are confused when these two cues conflict in tests with unfamiliar targets. Bees can discriminate between fields of view that differ in average disruption as a generalized cue, irrespective of pattern. Accepted: 7 April 1997     

Pavlovian conditioning with proximal stimuli

This experiment was conducted with the objective of demonstrating that the effective stimuli in Pavlovian Conditioning are not environmental stimuli but internal physiological processes elicited by environmental input (proximal stimuli). In order to achieve the objective, afterimages in color vision were used: looking at a diffuse lightened circle after seeing a red circle yields an image of a green circle. A differential conditioning paradigm with two sequential compounds was run. In one group (G+B-: n1 = 10), a red circle followed by a green circle was paired with shock, whereas a red circle followed by a blue circle remained unpaired. A second group (G-B+: n2 = 10) received red-blue paired trials and unpaired red-green trials. Immediately after that training, subjects were tested with a new, never trained sequential compound: a red circle followed by a diffuse lightened circle. Furthermore, they were tested with the already trained compounds. Taking the environmental point of view, the never trained stimulus should elicit an orienting response lying in between the excitatory reaction to the paired stimulus and the inhibitory reaction to the unpaired stimulus. From the proximal point of view, the diffuse light should elicit an excitatory reaction in group G+B- and an inhibitory reaction in group G-B+. Electrodermal conditioned anticipatory and omission responses were measured. The results supported the proximal hypothesis. Hence, defining input in environmental terms may be the wrong way. Instead, in conceptualizing the stimulus in conditioning, the following should be considered: the processing organism itself is creating the effective stimuli.     

Discriminative behavior and Pavlovian conditioning in the mollusc Pleurobranchaea

The buccal motor system in the sea slug Pleurobranchaea californica is multifunctional; similar sets of neurons and muscles generate different behaviors through similar electrophysiological motor patterns. Such multifunctional systems compromise the traditional practice of identifying a motor pattern and then using that pattern to indicate the behavior in reduced preparations. We address this issue in a series of experiments leading to the comparison of differential Pavlovian conditioning in whole animals with the conditioned behavior of the same animals during electrophysiological recording. Because differential conditioning requires two conditioned stimuli (CSs), we show here that each of two CSs activated the conditioned response from animals after they received the stimulus (CS+) paired with an unconditioned stimulus (UCS). Conditioning sessions consisted of 5 training trials with a 2-h intertrial interval. In one study, experimental animals received a 60-s CS+, derived from beer (Sbr), paired with a 50-s electrical shock UCS whose onset occurred 10 s after the CS+ onset; control animals received the Sbr and UCS explicitly unpaired. In a second study, animals received similar procedures as in the first but with a CS+ consisting of squid homogenate (Ssq). Tests with both CSs showed that animals did not discriminate between Sbr and Ssq before beginning conditioning, but did so afterward. Experimental animals exhibited robust food aversion (withdrawal and suppressed feeding) to the CS+, but retained strong appetitive responses to the CS they did not receive in training; response thresholds to the CS+ changed as much as 1000-fold by comparison to the preconditioning values. Control animals exhibited similar though significantly smaller behavioral changes as the experimental animals. Both stimuli evoked associatively learned responses, but Sbr produced greater experimental-control differences than Ssq did. Two accompanying papers show the results of using both CSs in differential conditioning, and describe the behavioral/electrophysiological comparisons.     

Movement learning of free flying honeybees

Summary Free flying honeybees were conditioned to moving black and white stripe patterns. Bees learn rapidly to distinguish the direction of movement in the vertical and horizontal plane.After being trained to a moving pattern bees do not discriminate the moving alternative from a stationary one. There is no significant velocity discrimination for patterns moving in the same direction.For vertical movements there are clear asymmetries in the spontaneous choice preference and in the learning curves for patterns moving upward or downward.After bees are trained to a stationary pattern they can discriminate it from an upward moving alternative. Learning curves involving movement are generally biphasic, suggesting different adaptive systems depending on the number of rewards.The flight pattern of bees which are trained to movement changes during the process of learning. At the beginning of the learning procedure bees reveal an optokinetic response to the moving patterns, this response is strongly reduced after a number of rewards on a moving pattern.     

Odor information transfer in the stingless bee<Emphasis Type="Italic"> Melipona quadrifasciata</Emphasis>: effect of in-hive experiences on classical conditioning of proboscis extension

A recent study showed that the stingless bee Melipona quadrifasciata could learn to discriminate odors in a classical conditioning of proboscis extension response (PER). Here we used this protocol to investigate the ability of these bees to use olfactory information obtained within the colony in an experimental context: the PER paradigm. We compared their success in solving a classical differential conditioning depending on the previous olfactory experiences received inside the nest. We found that M. quadrifasciata bees are capable of transferring the food-odor information acquired in the colony to a differential conditioning in the PER paradigm. Bees attained higher discrimination levels when they had previously encountered the rewarded odor associated to food inside the hive. The increase in the discrimination levels, however, was in some cases unspecific to the odor used indicating a certain degree of generalization. The influence of the food scent offered at a field feeder 24 h before the classical conditioning could also be seen in the discrimination attained by the foragers in the PER setup, detecting the presence of long-term memory. Moreover, the improved performance of recruited bees in the PER paradigm suggests the occurrence of social learning of nectar scents inside the stingless bees’ hives.     

Bumble Bees Show Asymmetrical Discrimination Between Two Odors in a Classical Conditioning Procedure

Olfactory processing of two odorants and their mixture was investigated in bumble bees Bombus terrestris using classical conditioning of the proboscis extension. In a standard procedure, workers were able to learn linalool, phenylacetaldehyde, and the mixture of these two components, with a similar level of response to these three stimuli. Thereafter, when we applied a differential conditioning procedure where one rewarded odorant was presented alternately against an unrewarded one, an asymmetrical discrimination between the two pure odors was found. Bumble bees performed well in the discriminative task when linalool was the rewarded stimulus and phenylacetaldehyde the unrewarded one, but they had difficulty learning phenylacetaldehyde if it was the rewarded odor in the symmetrical procedure. Indeed, unrewarded stimulations with linalool appeared to disrupt the learning of the alternative odor, possibly due to an innate biological meaning of linalool.     

Colour preferences of flower-naive honeybees

Flower-naive honeybees Apis mellifera L. flying in an enclosure were tested for their colour preferences. Bees were rewarded once on an achromatic (grey, aluminium or hardboard), or on a chromatic (ultraviolet) disk. Since naive bees never alighted on colour stimuli alone, a scent was given in combination with colour. Their landings on twelve colour stimuli were recorded. Results after one reward (“first test”) were analysed separately from those obtained after few rewards (“late tests”).

1. After pre-training to achromatic signals, bees preferred, in the first test, bee-uv-blue and bee-green colours. With increasing experience, the original preference pattern persisted but the choice of bee-blue and bee-green colours increased.
2. Neither colour distance of the test stimuli to the background or to the pre-training signal, nor their intensity, nor their green contrast, accounted for the colour choice of bees. Choices reflected innate preferences and were only associated with stimulus hue.
3. Bees learned very quickly the pre-trained chromatic stimulus, the original colour preferences being thus erased.
4. Colour preferences were strongly correlated with flower colour and its associated nectar reward, as measured in 154 flower species.
5. Colour preferences also resemble the wavelength dependence of colour learning demonstrated in experienced bees.

     

The Sound and the Fury—Bees Hiss when Expecting Danger

Honey bees are important model systems for the investigation of learning and memory and for a better understanding of the neuronal basics of brain function. Honey bees also possess a rich repertoire of tones and sounds, from queen piping and quacking to worker hissing and buzzing. In this study, we tested whether the worker bees’ sounds can be used as a measure of learning. We therefore conditioned honey bees aversively to odours in a walking arena and recorded both their sound production and their movement. Bees were presented with two odours, one of which was paired with an electric shock. Initially, the bees did not produce any sound upon odour presentation, but responded to the electric shock with a strong hissing response. After learning, many bees hissed at the presentation of the learned odour, while fewer bees hissed upon presentation of another odour. We also found that hissing and movement away from the conditioned odour are independent behaviours that can co-occur but do not necessarily do so. Our data suggest that hissing can be used as a readout for learning after olfactory conditioning, but that there are large individual differences between bees concerning their hissing reaction. The basis for this variability and the possible ecological relevance of the bees’ hissing remain to be investigated.     

Detection of coloured stimuli by honeybees: minimum visual angles and receptor specific contrasts

Honeybees Apis mellifera were trained to distinguish between the presence and the absence of a rewarded coloured spot, presented on a vertical, achromatic plane in a Y-maze. They were subsequently tested with different subtended visual angles of that spot, generated by different disk diameters and different distances from the decision point in the device. Bees were trained easily to detect bee-chromatic colours, but not an achromatic one. Chromatic contrast was not the only parameter allowing learning and, therefore, detection: _min, the subtended visual angle at which the bees detect a given stimulus with a probability P ₀ = 0.6, was 5° for stimuli presenting both chromatic contrast and contrast for the green photoreceptors [i.e. excitation difference in the green photoreceptors, between target and background (green contrast)], and 15° for stimuli presenting chromatic but no green contrast. Our results suggest that green contrast can be utilized for target detection if target recognition has been established by means of the colour vision system. The green-contrast signal would be used as a far-distance signal for flower detection. This signal would always be detected before chromatic contrast during an approach flight and would be learned in compound with chromatic contrast, in a facilitation-like process.     

Behavioural discrimination of oilseed rape volatiles by the honeybee Apis mellifera L.

This study investigated the ability of the honeybee to discriminatebetween six compounds previously identified as oilseed rapefloral volatiles: linalool, 2-phenylethanol, methyl salicylate,benzyl alcohol, (E)-2-hexenal and 1-octen-3-ol. These componentswere tested individually or in a synthetic mixture for theirability to elicit the conditioned proboscis extension response.Three experiments were done: conditioning to the mixture atone concentration (1.0, 0.1 or 0.01 µg per component)and testing to the individual components either at the conditioningor at the other concentrations; conditioning to individual componentsand testing to the mixture (1.0 µg); conditioning andtesting to the individual components (1.0 µg). The resultsfrom the proboscis extension assay were then compared to thoseobtained from free-flying bees in a flight room. From the conditionedproboscis extension assay, a conditioning threshold level wasfound (0.1 µg for the mixture studied) below which a reliableconditioning could not be achieved. Recognition thresholds wereobserved: bees responded to concentrations ten-fold higher orlower than that used for conditioning. Responses to lower concentrationswere weaker, whilst responses were increased at concentrationshigher than the conditioning one. A hierarchy within the compoundstested was found, with linalool, 2-phenylethanol and methylsalicylate cueing mixture recognition more effectively thanthe other components. The ranking order of the six componentswas similar in both the conditioned proboscis extension andthe conditioned foraging behaviour in flight room. When conditionedand tested to the individual components, bees discriminateda learned odour from a number of others. However, the specificitylevel for the recognition of the learned odour varied accordingto the component, the most clearly discriminated being the compoundswhich were used by the bee in mixture recognition.     

Individual Learning Ability and Complex Odor Recognition in the Honey Bee, Apis mellifera L.

Individually restrained worker bees were trained to recognize complex odors in a conditioned proboscis extension assay. Three groups of bees were considered, based on the responses recorded during the experimental procedure: selective learners, nonselective learners, and nonlearners. For conditioning, three concentrations of two synthetic mixtures were used. The distribution of bees between groups was not significantly affected by the nature or by the concentration of the conditioning mixture. After conditioning, bees were tested with the individual compounds, and the responses were analyzed with respect to the three groups. Selective learners showed discriminative responses to a few key compounds, while nonselective learners responded to all the compounds, and nonlearners to none. These results showed that complex odor recognition is based on the recognition of key components and relies on the ability of bees to learn.     

蜜蜂对复合气味中特征因素的选择性记忆巩固的研究

目的 蜜蜂天生具有丰富的嗅觉辨识能力,觅食、交配、导航以及社交活动均依赖其嗅觉系统,是研究嗅觉感知和学习记忆的行为及神经机制的理想模型。蜜蜂既能够将某个复合气味作为一个整体也可以将复合气味的各组成成分进行辨别和区分,但是在特征依赖的联合记忆中依据何种原则进行加工并存储到长期记忆还不清楚。方法 本文利用特征阳性（feature positive：AB+,B-）和特征阴性（feature negative：AB-,B+）的奖赏性嗅觉条件化,训练蜜蜂对复合气味和成分气味的辨别,并检测蜜蜂对复合气味（AB）、成分气味（B）以及特征气味（A）的中长时记忆（3 h）和长时记忆（24 h）。结果 在特征阳性的奖赏性嗅觉条件化中,蜜蜂对训练过的气味可以形成稳定的中长时和长时记忆,并且对复合气味中的特征气味的记忆与复合气味的记忆呈现高度相似。但在特征阴性的奖赏性嗅觉条件化中,蜜蜂虽能够在3 h和24 h对训练过的两种气味具有显著的伸喙反应差异,且对特征阴性的气味无显著反应,但对复合气味的反应随时间的推移而增加。结论 实验结果表明,蜜蜂选择性地将与奖赏信息联合出现的气味巩固到长时记忆中,但并未依据特征成分加工储存到长时记忆中。奖赏信息预示着食物源,与生存息息相关,表明对环境信息进行选择性的记忆巩固加工并储存可能是低等动物高效地编码生存相关信息的重要策略。     

Why do bees turn back and look?

The timing of learning of colour and shape of the food source, as well as of near-by landmarks, was examined exploiting a behaviour described recently, the Turn Back and Look behaviour (TBL): Bees departing from a novel food source after feeding turn around to view it at a short distance (Figs. 2, 3) before departing for the hive. They repeat this behaviour on several successive visits, termed the TBL phase (Fig. 5). To examine the function of the TBL, I trained individual bees in 4 different modes. In the first 3 they could view a food source or a landmark of a particular colour or shape during (i) arrival as well as departure, (ii) only arrival, and (iii) only departure; in the final mode (iv) the bees viewed one colour (or shape) on arrival, and another on departure. At the end of the TBL phase, the bees were tested by offering them a choice between the visual stimulus to which they were trained (modes i–iii) and a different (novel) one, or between the stimulus viewed on arrival and that viewed on departure (mode iv). The test results show that learning after feeding (while performing the TBL), i.e. backward conditioning, occurs regardless of whether the colour (Fig. 6, Fig. 10a) or shape (Fig. 7) of the food source, or the colour (Fig. 10b), shape (Fig. 11), and position (Fig. 12) of a near-by landmark is considered. Bees trained in mode (iv) preferred the stimulus learned on arrival over that learned on departure in almost all cases. However, a stimulus viewed exclusively on departure (mode iii) was often learned as well as when it was viewed exclusively on arrival (mode ii) (Figs. 10a, 11, 12), or both on arrival and departure (mode i) (Fig. 6). The finding that the timing of learning can be manipulated suggests that it is not based on hard wired predispositions to learn particular visual cues on arrival, and others on departure.