Foraging bumblebees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumblebee species

@article{Goulson1998ForagingBA,
  title={Foraging bumblebees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumblebee species},
  author={Dave Goulson and Sadie A. Hawson and J C Stout},
  journal={Animal Behaviour},
  year={1998},
  volume={55},
  pages={199-206}
}
Honey bees, Apis mellifera, use short-lived repellent scent marks to distinguish and reject flowers that have recently been visited by themselves or by siblings, and so save time that would otherwise be spent in probing empty flowers. Conversely, both honey bees and bumblebees, Bombus spp., can mark rewarding flowers with scent marks that promote probing by conspecifics. We examined detection of recently visited flowers in a mixed community of bumblebees foraging on comfrey, Symphytum… 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
Repellent foraging scent recognition across bee families
TLDR
It is shown that females of the solitary wool-carder bee Anthidium manicatum discriminate against previously visited inflorescences, and that discrimination is equally strong regardless of whether the previous visitor is conspecific or belongs to a different bee family (Bombus terrestris, Apidae). Expand
Repellent foraging scent recognition across bee families 1
Honeybees and bumblebees avoid probing flowers that have been recently depleted by conspecifics, presumably repelled by odours deposited by the previous visitor (foraging scent marks). Here we showExpand
Foraging scent marks of bumblebees: footprint cues rather than pheromone signals
TLDR
Repellent scent marks are mere footprints, which foraging bees avoid when they encounter them in a foraging context, and are concluded to emulate the repellent effect of an actual feeder visit. Expand
The influence of nectar secretion rates on the responses of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) to previously visited flowers
TLDR
The duration of flower avoidance was markedly different among flower species and was inversely related to nectar secretion rates, suggesting that the key parameters influencing bumblebee behaviour are those included in the model. 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
Facultative use of the repellent scent mark in foraging bumblebees: complex versus simple flowers
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 theirExpand
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
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
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 47 REFERENCES
Resource Partitioning in Bumblebees: Experimental Studies of Foraging Behavior
TLDR
These removal experiments demonstrated that the bumblebees were sampling flowers frequently enough and were flexible enough in the absence of other bumblebee species. 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
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
Choice of flowers by foraging honey bees (Apis mellifera): possible morphological cues
TLDR
Differences in morphological characters between types of inflorescence correlated with nectar volume and sugar weight per flower so that visited inflorescences had a disproportionately greater volume of nectar and weight of sugar per flower and greater variance in nectarVolume. Expand
The flower-visiting behaviour of bumble bees: floral complexity and learning.
TLDR
The initial probing response of inexperienced bumble bees is mainly instinctive behaviou... the time spent in trial and error learning before the criterion was obtained was significantly greater for flowers of high structural complexity than for those of intermediate and low complexity. Expand
Learning constraints and floral choice behaviour in bumble bees
TLDR
The results suggest that when bees forage on an increasing number of floral types, their ability to discriminate between these and non-rewarding types is reduced considerably. Expand
NECTAR STANDING CROPS IN DELPHINIUM NELSONII FLOWERS: SPATIAL AUTOCORRELATION AMONG PLANTS?
TLDR
Computer simulations of nectarivores foraging in a large plant population to explore factors that promote reward patchiness suggest that moderate patch- iness will develop at all but extremely low or high flower visitation rates, and spatial patchiness is lower when interplant coefficient of variation in nectar production rate is large, as in populations. Expand
Ideal free distributions of nectar foraging bumblebees
TLDR
A computer simulation showed that the distribution of the bees and the equalization of the gain per flower can partly be explained by the bees' systematic searching for nectar, and partly by a non-random plant choice. Expand
Local Geographic Distributions of Bumblebees Near Crested Butte, Colorado: Competition and Community Structure
TLDR
It was hypothesized that the local geographic distributions of bumblebees near Crested Butte, Colorado and the community patterns exhibited by these bumble Bees are the products of competition for plants and a pattern consistent with the competition hypothesis emerges. Expand
Flower handling by bumblebees: a comparison of specialists and generalists
TLDR
Naive workers of the specialist bumblebee, Bombus consobrinus, were more efficient than those of generalist species in acquiring flower-handling skills on their specialty plant, Aconitum (monkshood). Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...