Facultative use of the repellent scent mark in foraging bumblebees: complex versus simple flowers

@article{Saleh2006FacultativeUO,
  title={Facultative use of the repellent scent mark in foraging bumblebees: complex versus simple flowers},
  author={Nehal Saleh and Kazuharu Ohashi and James D. Thomson and Lars Chittka},
  journal={Animal Behaviour},
  year={2006},
  volume={71},
  pages={847-854}
}
Bumblebees leave scent marks on flowers, and use these marks to avoid recently depleted resources. We tested whether the response to such scent marks is fixed, or whether bees can adjust their responses flexibly, depending on floral complexity. Complex flowers require longer handling times and, when foraging on these flowers, bees show spatial foraging patterns that make revisits more likely. Therefore, we examined whether bees responded to scent marks more strongly if they were found on… Expand

Figures from this paper

The importance of experience in the interpretation of conspecific chemical signals
TLDR
It is found that the bees’ experience with the level of reward determines how the scent mark is interpreted: the same scent can act as both an attractant and a repellent. Expand
Contrasting responses of bumble bees to feeding conspecifics on their familiar and unfamiliar flowers
TLDR
This is the first report suggesting that animals adjust their responses to feeding conspecifics depending on their familiarity with food sources, and such behavioural flexibilities should allow foragers to both explore and exploit their environments efficiently. Expand
Stingless bees (Melipona scutellaris) learn to associate footprint cues at food sources with a specific reward context
TLDR
Results demonstrate that M. scutellaris learns to associate unspecific footprint cues at food sources with differential, specific reward contexts, and uses these chemical cues accordingly for their foraging decisions. Expand
Do inexperienced bumblebee foragers use scent marks as social information?
TLDR
These findings provide no support for ‘hard-wired’ responses to scent marks in bumblebees and highlight the importance of associative learning in shaping social information use to match local circumstances. Expand
Bumblebee social learning can lead to suboptimal foraging choices
TLDR
It is found that bumblebees attach particular meaning to conspecific presence on flowers, even when this could lead to suboptimal foraging performance, and the relatively lower flexibility in the use of social than nonsocial cues suggests a biased positive value of Conspecifics as indicators of rewarded flowers. Expand
Social scent marks do not improve avoidance of parasites in foraging bumblebees
TLDR
The adaptation of bumblebees to avoid flowers contaminated by C. bombi arose from the long-term host–parasite interaction between these species, which results in an innate behaviour of bees and a detection and aversion of the odour of contaminated flower nectar. Expand
Laboratory studies examining aspects of scent marking, traplining and remote detection of reward in the foraging bumblebee.
TLDR
It is shown that experience and long term memory play an important role in both foraging strategies: scent marking and traplining, and that bees required long term spatial memory to gradually form traplines. Expand
Recognition of scent marks in solitary bees to avoid previously visited flowers
TLDR
This work 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. Expand
Floral visitors and ant scent marks: noticed but not used?
TLDR
It is demonstrated that, while naive 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. Expand
Bumblebees forage on flowers of increasingly complex morphologies despite low success
TLDR
Investigation of how complex flowers are chosen and handled by naive and experienced bumblebees when presented along with simple ones suggests that inexperienced foragers and unsuccessful feeding attempts increasingly contribute to floral pollination along the morphological complexity gradient. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 41 REFERENCES
Discrimination of Unrewarding Flowers by Bees; Direct Detection of Rewards and Use of Repellent Scent Marks
TLDR
It is argued 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, and 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. Expand
The repellent scent-mark of the honeybeeApis mellifera tigustica and its role as communication cue during foraging
TLDR
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. Expand
Foraging bumblebees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumblebee species
TLDR
Examination of detection of recently visited flowers in a mixed community of bumblebees foraging on comfrey, Symphytum officinale, in southern England concludes that these Bombus species are probably using scent marks left by previous visitors. Expand
Can Bees Select Nectar-Rich Flowers in a Patch?
TLDR
It is concluded that bees can, and sometimes do, visit nectar-rich flowers preferentially, sometimes recognizing these in ways not commonly taken into account in studies of foraging strategies. Expand
The use of conspecific and interspecific scent marks by foraging bumblebees and honeybees
TLDR
Honeybees may be using a less volatile chemical odour to detect whether flowers have recently been visited, possibly in addition to 2-heptanone, which was previously thought to use a volatile chemical as a repellent forage-marking scent. Expand
Repellent scent-marking of flowers by a guild of foraging bumblebees (Bombus spp.)
TLDR
It is found that flowers were repellent to other bumblebee foragers for approximately 20 min and also that after this time nectar levels in S. officinale flowers had largely replenished, Thus bumblebees could forage more efficiently by avoiding flowers with low rewards. Expand
Honeybees mark with scent and reject recently visited flowers
TLDR
The movement pattern of foraging bees also contributed to foraging efficiency, as the probability of an immediate return to the flower just abandoned was very low, however, when a quick repeat visit took place, the presence of the repellent scent-mark promoted rapid rejection. Expand
Costs to foraging bumble bees of switching plant species
TLDR
Bees foraging on simple flowers showed no tendency towards flower constancy, and switching between species did not increase handling times or handling errors, and foragers displayed strong constancy when visiting more complex flowers. Expand
The foraging movements of bumblebees on vertical “inflorescences”: An experimental analysis
TLDR
The bumblebees,Bombus edwardsii, move upward while visiting consecutive flowers on artificial “inflorescences”, which tends to maximize the number of visits to rewarding flowers while minimizing visits to non-rewarding flowers, thereby enhancing foraging returns. Expand
Identity and Function of Scent Marks Deposited by Foraging Bumblebees
TLDR
The chemical components of the tarsal glands were analyzed by combined gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for three species of bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, B. lapidarius, and B. pascuorum to determine which were important in inducing a repellent effect in workers. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...