Flower Symmetry Preferences in Honeybees and their Crab Spider Predators

Flowers exhibit symmetrical patterns, and innate preferences for symmetry in pollinators like honeybees are documented. Most previous studies of symmetry preferences in honeybees, Apis mellifera, tested levels of asymmetry using artificial flowers or stimuli. Here we investigated the effect of flower asymmetry on flower preferences of honeybees in a novel approach using real flowers, incorporating their spectral properties and how the receivers process the visual signals. Importantly, we also tested the response of an ‘eavesdropping’ predator, the crab spider Thomisus spectabilis, that also utilizes the same flower to prey on honeybees. Flowers (Chrysanthemum frutescens) were manipulated to contain asymmetrical and symmetrical patterns, excluding olfactory cues. Both crab spiders and honeybees exhibited a significant preference for symmetrical flowers. Moreover, honeybees exhibited a significant preference for radial symmetry over bilateral symmetry, but no corresponding effect was recorded in crab spiders. Further analyses demonstrated that flower reflectance and orientation of the axis of symmetry did not affect crab spider decisions. Field observations on T. spectabilis revealed that the natural variation in C. frutescens symmetry had no effect on the choice of crab spiders. This indicates that spiders and honeybees may use other flower characteristics, for example, olfactory cues, together with flower symmetry, to make their foraging decisions.     

A generalised mimicry system involving angiosperm flower colour, pollen and bumblebees’ innate colour preferences

Flower colour is a major advertisement signal of zoophilous plants for pollinators. Bees, the main pollinators, exhibit innate colour preferences, which have often been attributed to only one single floral colour, though most flowers display a pattern of two or several colours. The existing studies of floral colour patterns are mostly qualitative studies. Using a model of bee colour vision we quantitatively investigate two questions: whether or not component colours of floral colour patterns may mimic pollen signals, and whether or not bumblebees exhibit innate preferences for distinct parameters of naturally existing floral colour patterns. We analysed the spectral reflectances of 162 plant species with multicoloured flowers and inflorescences, distiniguishing between inner and outer colours of floral colour patterns irrespective of the particular structures so coloured.We found that:– The inner colour of radially symmetrical flowers and inflorescences and of zygomorphic flowers appears less diverse to bees than the peripheral colour.– The inner colour of most radial flowers and inflorescences as well as the inner colour of a large number of non-related zygomorphic flowers appears to bees to be very similar to that of pollen.– Bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) exhibit innate preferences for two-coloured over single-coloured dummy flowers in a spontaneous choice test.– Bumblebees exhibit innate preferences for dummy flowers with a large over those with a small centre area.– Bumblebees exhibit innate preferences for dummy flowers with a centre colour similar to that of pollen over those with another centre colour.Our findings support the hypotheses that the inner component of floral colour patterns could be interpreted as a generalised and little recognised form of mimicry of the colour of visually displayed pollen, that bumblebees exhibit innate preferences regarding colour and size parameters of floral colour patterns, and that these correspond to visually displayed pollen. These findings together suggest a prominent role of floral colour patterns in advertisement to and guidance of naive flower visitors.     

Learning of visual cues in the fruit fly parasitoid Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae)

Parasitoids can learn to associate information from the host microhabitat with ovipositional experiences. Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti) is a koinobiont larval-pupal endoparasitoid of many tephritids. In P. concolor, the role of visual cues learning during host microhabitat location has not been greatly explored. Here, the innate preferences of P. concolor for colours, shapes and patterns were investigated, as well as the effects of sensitisation and associative learning regarding female preferences for these visual cues. Na?ve females showed no innate preferences for a particular colour, shape or pattern, and their responses were unaffected by sensitisation. In contrast, P. concolor females developed clear preferences after training on Ceratitis capitata larvae associated with a given colour, but not when they were trained on different shapes or patterns. Our findings on how P. concolor learn to pick up visual cues could help to define its optimal environment, and to predict its natural post-release distribution in biological control programs.     

Vision of the honeybee Apis mellifera for patterns with one pair of equal orthogonal bars

The visual discrimination of patterns of two equal orthogonal black bars by honeybees has been studied in a Y-choice apparatus with the patterns presented vertically at a fixed range. Previous work shows that bees can discriminate the locations of one, or possibly more, contrasts in targets that are in the same position throughout the training. Therefore, in critical experiments, the locations of areas of black were regularly shuffled to make them useless as cues. The bees discriminate consistent radial and tangential cues irrespective of their location on the target during learning and testing. Orientation cues, to be discriminated, must be presented on corresponding sides of the two targets. When orientation, radial and tangential cues are omitted or made useless by alternating them, discrimination is impossible, although the patterns may look quite different to us. The shape or the layout of local cues is not re-assembled from the locations of the bars, even when there are only two bars in the pattern, as if the bees cannot locate the individual bars within the large spatial fields of their global filters.     

A new interpretation of flower guide colouration: Absorption of ultraviolet light enhances colour saturation

In melittophilous plants the colour pattern of the flowers, as perceived by bumblebees, is a gradient of centripetally increasing spectral purity. This pattern serves as a signal for innate flower recognition in naive bumblebees permitting orientation to flowers and landing on flowers. Structures which make up the total signal pattern can include the background (e.g., green leaves), corollas, and stamens or floral guides. How various colour parameters, such as dominant wavelength, intensity, and spectral purity influence the colour signal pattern of flowers is analyzed. The process of strong absorption of ultraviolet light is shown to be a mechanism for the enhancement of spectral purity in flower guides. The importance of other mechanisms is also demonstrated. The presence of a gradient of centripetally increasing spectral purity in floral colour patterns as perceived by a bumblebee's eyes is demonstrated by a comparison of the spectral reflectance in different parts of the flower and a representation of colour loci in the colour triangle.     

Pattern discrimination by the honeybee (Apis mellifera ) is colour blind for radial / tangential cues

Bees were trained to discriminate between two patterns, one of which was associated with a reward, in a Y-choice apparatus with the targets presented vertically at a distance at an angular subtense of 50°. Previous work with this apparatus has found discrimination between two patterns of coloured gratings or radial sectors that are fixed in different orientations during the training. When there was contrast to the blue receptors alone, gratings of period 6° were resolved, and 4° when there was contrast to the green receptors. In the present work, bees discriminate between a pattern containing tangentially arranged edges and one containing radially arranged edges, both with no average edge orientation. The targets were rotated every 5 min to make the locations of areas useless as cues. The edges remained consistently radial or tangential and were therefore the only cues. Tests with patterns of selected colours and various levels of grey show that for each colour there is a level of grey at which discrimination fails. Discrimination is therefore colour-blind. The same patterns were made with combinations of coloured papers that give no contrast to the green receptors or alternatively to the blue receptors. The bees discriminate only if the edges between colours present a contrast to the green receptors. The system that discriminates generalized radial and tangential cues is therefore colour blind because the inputs are restricted to the green receptors, not because receptor outputs are added together. The same result was obtained with a very coarse pattern of period 20°. Accepted: 10 January 1999     

Generalization in visual recognition by the honeybee (Apis mellifera) : A review and explanation

During a century of studies on honeybee vision, generalization was the word for the acceptance of an unfamiliar pattern in the place of the training pattern, or the ability to learn a common factor in a group of related patterns. The ideas that bees generalize one pattern for another, detect similarity and differences, or form categories, were derived from the use of the same terms in the human cognitive sciences. Recent work now reveals a mechanistic explanation for bees. Small groups of ommatidia converge upon feature detectors that respond selectively to certain parameters that are in the pattern: modulation in the receptors, edge orientations, or to areas of black or colour. Within each local region of the eye the responses of each type of feature detector are summed to form a cue. The cues are therefore not in the pattern, but are local totals in the bee. Each cue has a quality, a quantity and a position on the eye, like a neuron response. This summation of edge detector responses destroys the local pattern based on edge orientation but preserves a coarse, sparse and simplified version of the panorama. In order of preference, the cues are: local receptor modulation, positions of well-separated black areas, a small black spot, colour and positions of the centres of each cue, radial edges, the averaged edge orientation and tangential edges. A pattern is always accepted by a trained bee that detects the expected cues in the expected places and no unexpected cues. The actual patterns are irrelevant. Therefore we have an explanation of generalization that is based on experimental testing of trained bees, not by analogy with other animals.Historically, generalization appeared when the training patterns were regularly interchanged to make the bees examine them. This strategy forced the bees to ignore parameters outside the training pattern, so that learning was restricted to one local eye region. This in turn limited the memory to one cue of each type, so that recognition was ambiguous because the cues were insufficient to distinguish all patterns. On the other hand, bees trained on very large targets, or by landing on the pattern, learned cues in several eye regions, and were able to recognize the coarse configural layout.     

Determining sensitive stages for learning to detect predators in larval bronzed frogs: Importance of alarm cues in learning

Successful survival and reproduction of prey organisms depend on their ability to detect their potential predators accurately and respond effectively with suitable defences. Predator detection can be innate or can be acquired through learning. We studied prey–predator interactions in the larval bronzed frogs (Sylvirana temporalis), which have the innate ability to detect certain predators. We conducted a series of experiments to determine if the larval S. temporalis rely solely on innate predator detection mechanisms or can also learn to use more specific cues such as conspecific alarm cues for the purpose. The results of our study clearly indicate that larval S. temporalis use both innate and learned mechanisms for predator detection. Predator-naïve tadpoles could detect kairomones alone as a potential threat and responded by reducing activity, suggesting an innate predator detection mechanism. Surprisingly, predator-naïve tadpoles failed to detect conspecific alarm cues as a potential threat, but learned to do so through experience. After acquiring the ability to detect conspecific alarm cues, they could associate novel predator cues with conspecific alarm cues. Further, post feeding stages of larval S. temporalis are sensitive for learning to detect conspecific alarm cues to label novel predators.     

A bee’s eye view of remarkable floral colour patterns in the south-west Australian biodiversity hotspot revealed by false colour photography

Background and AimsColour pattern is a key cue of bee attraction selectively driving the appeal of pollinators. It comprises the main colour of the flower with extra fine patterns, indicating a reward focal point such as nectar, nectaries, pollen, stamens and floral guides. Such advertising of floral traits guides visitation by the insects, ensuring precision in pollen gathering and deposition. The study, focused in the Southwest Australian Floristic Region, aimed to spot bee colour patterns that are usual and unusual, missing, accomplished by mimicry of pollen and anthers, and overlapping between mimic-model species in floral mimicry cases.MethodsFloral colour patterns were examined by false colour photography in 55 flower species of multiple highly diverse natural plant communities in south-west Australia. False colour photography is a method to transform a UV photograph and a colour photograph into a false colour photograph based on the trichromatic vision of bees. This method is particularly effective for rapid screening of large numbers of flowers for the presence of fine-scale bee-sensitive structures and surface roughness that are not detectable using standard spectrophotometry.Key ResultsBee- and bird-pollinated flowers showed the expected but also some remarkable and unusual previously undetected floral colour pattern syndromes. Typical colour patterns include cases of pollen and flower mimicry and UV-absorbing targets. Among the atypical floral colour patterns are unusual white and UV-reflecting flowers of bee-pollinated plants, bicoloured floral guides, consistently occurring in Fabaceae spp., and flowers displaying a selective attractiveness to birds only. In the orchid genera (Diuris and Thelymitra) that employ floral mimicry of model species, we revealed a surprising mimicry phenomenon of anthers mimicked in turn by model species.ConclusionThe study demonstrates the applicability of ‘bee view’ colour imaging for deciphering pollinator cues in a biodiverse flora with potential to be applied to other eco regions. The technique provides an exciting opportunity for indexing floral traits on a biome scale to establish pollination drivers of ecological and evolutionary relevance.     

Two-dimensional pattern discrimination by the honeybee

For a reward of sugar, bees will learn to prefer a pattern rather than an alternative similar one. This visual discrimination allows us to measure resolution, and to search for the cues that the bees remember and later use to recognize the rewarded pattern. Two systems in parallel, analogous to low pass and high pass filters, are distinguished. The first system discriminates the location and size of at least one area of contrast on each side of the target, with inputs from blue and green receptors, but the ability to discriminate the location of colour depends upon fixation. The bees remember less than a low resolution copy of the image, even when they fixate on a vertical pattern. The second system amplifies the contrast at edges in the pattern, ignoring the direction of contrast, and controls fixation upon the target. Edges are discriminated according to their orientation and radial or tangential arrangement. An axis of bilateral symmetry is detected. However, the relative locations of cues within the image are lost, apparently because the relevant neurones have very large fields. Only the cues, not the whole patterns, are preserved in memory. This system is colour blind because its input is restricted to the receptors with peak sensitivity in the green. The two systems together discriminate many simple patterns, but not all, because the filters are limited in variety.     

Visual discrimination of radial cues by the honeybee (Apis mellifera)

This is a systematic study of the discrimination of black radially symmetrical patterns presented on a white vertical background and subtending 45 degrees or 50 degrees at the point of choice in a Y-maze apparatus. Before discrimination can occur, the ability to fixate is promoted by any radial pattern irrespective of the number of symmetry axes. A ring of spots can also stabilize the eye before the positions of the spots are discriminated.Cues for discrimination are of two main types. First, with fixed patterns of sectors or spots, the cue is the location of an area of black relative to the fixation point, and the particular number of axes is less important than the size of the individual areas. Secondly, evidence is presented for a family of filters with large fields and coarse tuning that detect patterns of radially symmetrical edges. These filters become more evident when the patterns are made of thin black radial bars or when they are rotated at random during the training. An angular shift of one radial pattern relative to the other, or a difference between numbers of bars, is best discriminated when one of the patterns but not the other has angles of 30 degrees, 60 degrees, or 120 degrees between radial edges, and least when the angles are 90 degrees. Baffles in the apparatus make the bees pause and fixate so that discrimination is improved. When targets are rotated during the learning process, radial cues for discriminations must be presented as edges, not as spots or areas. Besides detecting and fixating flowers, this system could be useful to estimate the perfection of their symmetry.     

What the honeybee sees: a review of the recognition system of Apis mellifera

Abstract. For many years, two opposing theories have dominated our ideas of what honeybees see. The earliest proposal based on training experiments was that bees detected only simple attributes or features, irrespective of the actual pattern. The features demonstrated experimentally before 1940 were the disruption of the pattern (related to spatial frequency), the area of black or colour, the length of edge, and the angle of orientation of a bar or grating. Cues discovered recently are the range, and radial and tangential edges, and symmetry, relative to the fixation point, which is usually the reward hole. This theory could not explain why recognition failed when the pattern was moved. In the second theory, proposed in 1969, the bee detected the retinotopic directions of black or coloured areas, and estimated the areas of overlap and nonoverlap on each test pattern with the corresponding positions in the training pattern. This proposal explained the progressive loss of recognition as a test pattern was moved or reduced in size, but required that the bees saw and remembered the layout of every learned pattern and calculated the mismatch with each test image. Even so, the same measure of the mismatch was given by many test patterns and could not detect a pattern uniquely. Moreover, this theory could not explain the abundant evidence of simple feature detectors. Recent work has shown that bees learn one or more of a limited number of simple cues. A newly discovered cue is the position, mainly in the vertical direction, of the common centre (centroid) of black areas combined together. Significantly, however, the trained bees look for the cues mentioned above only in the range of places where they had occurred during the training. These two observations made possible a synthesis of both theories. There is no experimental evidence that the bees detect or re-assemble the layout of patterns in space; instead, they look for a cue in the expected place. With an array of detectors of the known cues, together with their directions, this mechanism would enable bees to recognize each familiar place from the coincidences of cues in different directions around the head.     

The use of multiple cues in mate choice

An increasing number of studies find females to base their mate choice on several cues. Why this occurs is debated and many different hypotheses have been proposed. Here I review the hypotheses and the evidence in favour of them. At the same time I provide a new categorisation based on the adaptiveness of the preferences and the information content of the cues. A few comparative and empirical studies suggest that most multiple cues are Fisherian attractiveness cues or uninformative cues that occur alongside a viability indicator and facilitate detection, improve signal reception, or are remnants from past selection pressures. However, much evidence exists tor multiple cues providing additional information and serving as multiple messages that either indicate general mate quality or enable females that differ in mate preferences to choose the most suitable male. Less evidence exists for multiple cues serving as back-up signals. The importance of receiver psychology, multiple sensory environments and signal interaction in the evolution of multiple cues and preferences has received surprisingly little attention but may be of crucial importance. Similarly, sexual conflict has been proposed to result in maladaptive preferences for manipulative cues, and in neutral preferences for threshold cues, but no reliable evidence exists so far. An important factor in the evolution of multiple preferences is the cost of using additional cues. Most theoretical work assumes that the cost of choice increases with the number of cues used, which restricts the conditions under which preferences for multiple cues are expected to evolve. I suggest that in contrast to this expectation, the use of multiple cues can reduce mate choice costs by decreasing the number of mates inspected more closely or the time and energy spent inspecting a set of mates. This may be one explanation for why multiple cues are more common than usually expected. Finally I discuss the consequences that the use of multiple cues may have for the process of sexual selection, the maintenance of genetic variation, and speciation.     

Some labels that are recognized on landmarks by the honeybee (Apis mellifera)

Freely flying bees were trained in a situation that resembled the natural task of a bee arriving at a foraging site that was located by a landmark. The bees' task was to locate the reward in the arm of the Y-choice apparatus, where a black pattern on a white background was displayed in one arm versus a white target in the other arm, at a range of 27 cm. The alternative patterns for the training included previously identified cues. They were: an oblique bar, three parallel oblique bars, an oblique grating, a square cross, six spokes, a large or a small spot, a spotty modulation, or a ring. The trained bees were given a variety of interleaved tests to discover the labels they had used to identify the patterns. A label is defined as the coincidence of cues that contributed to the recognition of a single landmark. The bees learned, firstly, the black area at the expected place, secondly, modulation caused by edges at the expected place. These cues were quantified and always available. In addition, the orientation cue was learned from a grating that covered the target, but was ignored in a single bar. The bees learned the positions of the centres of black and of radial symmetry. In tests, they also recognized unfamiliar cues that were not displayed in the training. The cues and preferences were similar to those used to discriminate between two targets. The new experiments validate some old conclusions that have been controversial for 40 years.     

Variation in context‐dependent foraging behavior across pollinators

Pollinator foraging behavior has direct consequences for plant reproduction and has been implicated in driving floral trait evolution. Exploring the degree to which pollinators exhibit flexibility in foraging behavior will add to a mechanistic understanding of how pollinators can impose selection on plant traits. Although plants have evolved suites of floral traits to attract pollinators, flower color is a particularly important aspect of the floral display. Some pollinators show strong innate color preference, but many pollinators display flexibility in preference due to learning associations between rewards and color, or due to variable perception of color in different environments or plant communities. This study examines the flexibility in flower color preference of two groups of native butterfly pollinators under natural field conditions. We find that pipevine swallowtails (Battus philenor) and skippers (family Hesperiidae), the predominate pollinators of the two native Texas Phlox species, Phlox cuspidata and Phlox drummondii, display distinct patterns of color preferences across different contexts. Pipevine swallowtails exhibit highly flexible color preferences and likely utilize other floral traits to make foraging decisions. In contrast, skippers have consistent color preferences and likely use flower color as a primary cue for foraging. As a result of this variation in color preference flexibility, the two pollinator groups impose concordant selection on flower color in some contexts but discordant selection in other contexts. This variability could have profound implications for how flower traits respond to pollinator‐mediated selection. Our findings suggest that studying dynamics of behavior in natural field conditions is important for understanding plant–pollinator interactions.     

The preferences of the honeybee (Apis mellifera) for different visual cues during the learning process

By working with very simple images, a number of different visual cues used by the honeybee have been described over the past decades. In most of the work, the bees had no control over the choice of the images, and it was not clear whether they learned the rewarded pattern or the difference between two images. Preferences were known to exist when untrained bees selected one pattern from a variety of them, but because the preferences of the bees were ignored, it was not possible to understand how natural images displaying several cues were detected. The preferences were also essential to make a computer model of the visual system. Therefore experiments were devised to show the order of preference for the known cues in the training situation. Freely flying bees were trained to discriminate between a rewarded target with one pattern on the left side and a different one on the right, versus a white or neutral target. This arrangement gave the bees a choice of what to learn. Tests showed that in some cases they learned two or three cues simultaneously; in other cases the bees learned one, or they preferred to avoid the unrewarded target. By testing with different combinations of patterns, it was possible to put the cues into an order of preference. Of the known cues, loosely or tightly attached to eye coordinates, a black or blue spot was the most preferred, followed by strong modulation caused by edges, the orientation of parallel bars, six equally spaced spokes, a clean white target, and then a square cross and a ring. A patch of blue colour was preferred to yellow.     

Recognition of a familiar place by the honeybee (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Apis mellifera</Emphasis>)

Recent work shows that at any one place bees detect a limited variety of simple cues in parallel. At each choice point, they recognize a few cues in the range of positions where the cues occurred during the learning process. There is no need to postulate that they re-assemble the surrounding panorama in memory; only that they retain memories of the coincidences of cues in the expected retinotopic directions. The cues could be stimuli that excite groups of peripheral visual neurons. All the experimentally known cues are described, including modulation of the receptors, the locations of areas of black or colour, the nearness, size, averaged edge orientation, and radial and tangential edges. Cues of each type are separately summed within large fields, the size of which varies with the cue. Local orientation cues from edges at right angles cancel each other within each field, which also suggests that the discrimination of shape and texture is limited. Resolution depends on lateral interactions and the number of ommatidia required for each cue. To identify a new place, a few sparse cues, together with their directions, are learned in orientation flights. When the bee returns, the cues in the panorama are progressively matched as they coincide with the cues in memory. The limited number of cues, though economical for memory, may restrict the foraging behaviour and lead to flower constancy. This kind of a visual system is a candidate model for other animals or machines with economical processing systems.     

ASSORTATIVE MATING PREFERENCES AMONG HYBRIDS OFFERS A ROUTE TO HYBRID SPECIATION

Homoploid speciation generates species without a change in chromosome number via introgressive hybridization and has been considered rare in animals. Heliconius butterflies exhibit bright aposematic color patterns that also act as cues in assortative mating. Heliconius heurippa has a color pattern that can be recreated by introgression of the H. melpomene red band into an H. cydno genetic background. Wild H. heurippa males show assortative mating based on color pattern and we here investigate the origin of this preference by studying first-generation backcross hybrids between H. melpomene and H. cydno that resemble H. heurippa . These hybrids show assortative mating preferences, showing a strong preference for their own color pattern over that of either parental species. This is consistent with a genetic basis to wing pattern preference and implies, first, that assortative mating preferences would facilitate the initial establishment of a homozygous hybrid color pattern by increasing the likelihood that early generation hybrids mate among themselves. Second, once established such a lineage would inherit assortative mating preferences that would lead to partial reproductive isolation from parental lineages.     

Toll-like receptors are key participants in innate immune responses

During an infection, one of the principal challenges for the host is to detect the pathogen and activate a rapid defensive response. The Toll-like family of receptors (TLRs), among other pattern recognition receptors (PRR), performs this detection process in vertebrate and invertebrate organisms. These type I transmembrane receptors identify microbial conserved structures or pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). Recognition of microbial components by TLRs initiates signaling transduction pathways that induce gene expression. These gene products regulate innate immune responses and further develop an antigen-specific acquired immunity. TLR signaling pathways are regulated by intracellular adaptor molecules, such as MyD88, TIRAP/Mal, between others that provide specificity of individual TLR- mediated signaling pathways. TLR-mediated activation of innate immunity is involved not only in host defense against pathogens but also in immune disorders. The involvement of TLR-mediated pathways in auto-immune and inflammatory diseases is described in this review article.     

Relative localization in the human fovea: radial-tangential anisotropy

A distinction is drawn between two intrinsic directions within a simple spatial configuration. The line joining two elements is the radial direction and orthogonal to it is the tangential direction. Separation and bisection discrimination and just-detectable differences in line length are examples of radial thresholds. Vernier and alignment detection are tangential thresholds. Neural processing along these two intrinsic directions differs. There is a strong 'oblique effect' for tangential thresholds and virtually none for radial thresholds. Flank interaction impairs tangential but not radial thresholds.