skip to main content


Title: Honey Bees ( Apis mellifera Hymenoptera: Apidae) Preferentially Avoid Sugar Solutions Supplemented with Field-Relevant Concentrations of Hydrogen Peroxide Despite High Tolerance Limits
Abstract Honey bees (Apis mellifera L. Hymeoptera: Apidae) use hydrogen peroxide (synthesized by excreted glucose oxidase) as an important component of social immunity. However, both tolerance of hydrogen peroxide and the production of glucose oxidase in honey is costly. Hydrogen peroxide may also be encountered by honey bees at high concentrations in nectar while foraging, however despite its presence both in their foraged and stored foods, it is unclear if and how bees monitor concentrations of, and their behavioral responses to, hydrogen peroxide. The costs of glucose oxidase production and the presence of hydrogen peroxide in both nectar and honey suggest hypotheses that honey bees preferentially forage on hydrogen peroxide supplemented feed syrups at certain concentrations, and avoid feed syrups supplemented with hydrogen peroxide at concentrations above some tolerance threshold. We test these hypotheses and find that, counter to expectation, honey bees avoid glucose solutions supplemented with field-relevant hydrogen peroxide concentrations and either avoid or don’t differentiate supplemented sucrose solutions when given choice assays. This is despite honey bees showing high tolerance for hydrogen peroxide in feed solutions, with no elevated mortality until concentrations of hydrogen peroxide exceed 1% (v/v) in solution, with survival apparent even at concentrations up to 10%. The behavioral interaction of honey bees with hydrogen peroxide during both within-colony synthesis in honey and when foraging on nectar therefore likely relies on interactions with other indicator molecules, and maybe constrained evolutionarily in its plasticity, representing a constitutive immune mechanism.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1659683
NSF-PAR ID:
10312987
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
Brunet, Johanne
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Insect Science
Volume:
22
Issue:
1
ISSN:
1536-2442
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    Nectar scents are thought to function as honest signals of reward used by pollinators, but this hypothesis has rarely been tested.

    UsingPenstemon digitalis, we examined honest signalling of the nectar volatile (S)‐(+)‐linalool and pollinator responses to linalool in both field and laboratory settings. Because our previous work showed that linalool emission was associated with higher female fitness and that nectar is scented with linalool, we hypothesized that linalool was an honest signal of nectar reward. To assess honesty, we measured linalool–nectar associations including nectar volume, sugar amount, concentration and production rate for inflorescences and flowers in several populations. We also assessed whetherBombus impatiens, the main pollinator ofP. digitalisat our sites, can use linalool as a foraging signal. We supplemented real or artificial flowers in the field and laboratory with varying linalool–nectar combinations to measure pollinator behavioural responses.

    We found that an inflorescence's linalool emissions could be used to predict nectar rewards inP. digitalis, but this was driven by indirect associations with display size rather than directly advertising more profitable flowers. For flowers within inflorescences there was also no evidence for an association between signal and reward. Field tests of bumblebee behaviour were inconclusive. However, in laboratory assays, bumblebees generally used variation in linalool emissions to choose more profitable flowers, demonstrating they can detect differences in linalool emitted byP. digitalisand associate them with reward profitability. These results suggest experiments that decouple display size, scent and reward are necessary to assess whether (and when) bees prefer higher linalool emissions. Bees preferred nectars with lower linalool concentrations when linalool flavoured the nectar solution, suggesting the potential for conflicting pressures on scent emission in the field.

    Synthesis. Our results highlight the challenges of assessing function for traits important to fitness and suggest that the perception of floral signalling honesty may depend on whether pollinators use inflorescences or flowers within inflorescences when making foraging decisions. We conclude that future research on honest signalling in flowering plants, as well as its connection to phenotypic selection, should explicitly define honesty, in theoretical and experimental contexts.

     
    more » « less
  2. 1. Competition alters animal foraging, including promoting the use of alternative resources. It may also impact how animals feed when they are able to handle the same food with more than one tactic. Competition likely impacts both consumers and their resources through its effects on food handling, but this topic has received little attention.

    2. Bees often use two tactics for extracting nectar from flowers: they can visit at the flower opening, or rob nectar from holes at the base of flowers. Exploitative competition for nectar is thought to promote nectar robbing. If so, higher competition among floral visitors should reduce constancy to a single foraging tactic as foragers will seek food using all possible tactics. To test this prediction, field observations and two experiments involving bumble bees visiting three montane Colorado plant species (Mertensia ciliata,Linaria vulgaris,Corydalis caseana) were used under various levels of inter‐ and intra‐specific competition for nectar.

    3. In general, individual bumble bees remained constant to a single foraging tactic, independent of competition levels. However, bees that visitedM. ciliatain field observations decreased their constancy and increased nectar robbing rates as visitation rates by co‐visitors increased.

    4. While tactic constancy was high overall regardless of competition intensity, this study highlights some intriguing instances in which competition and tactic constancy may be linked. Further studies investigating the cognitive underpinnings of tactic constancy should provide insight on the ways in which animals use alternative foraging tactics to exploit resources.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    Honey bees, as many species of social insects, display a division of labor among colony members based on behavioral specializations related to age. Adult worker honey bees perform a series of tasks in the hive when they are young (such as brood care or nursing) and at ca. 2–3 wk of age, shift to foraging for nectar and pollen outside the hive. The transition to foraging involves changes in metabolism and neuroendocrine activities. These changes are associated with a suite of developmental genes. It was recently demonstrated that antibiotics influence behavioral development by accelerating or delaying the onset of foraging depending on timing of antibiotic exposure. To understand the mechanisms of these changes, we conducted a study on the effects of antibiotics on expression of candidate genes known to regulate behavioral development. We demonstrate a delay in the typical changes in gene expression over the lifetime of the individuals that were exposed to antibiotics during immature stage and adulthood. Additionally, we show an acceleration in the typical changes in gene expression on individuals that were expose to antibiotics only during immature stage. These results show that timing of antibiotic exposure alter the typical regulation of behavioral development by metabolic and neuroendocrine processes.

     
    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    Hummingbirds utilize visual cues to locate flowers, but little is known about the role olfaction plays in nectar foraging despite observations that hummingbirds avoid resources occupied by certain insects. We investigated the behavioral responses of both wild and captive hummingbirds to olfactory cues of hymenopteran floral visitors, including native wood ants (Formica francoeuri), invasive Argentine ants (Linepithema humile), and European honeybees (Apis mellifera). We demonstrate for the first time that hummingbirds use olfaction to make foraging decisions when presented with insect-derived chemical cues under field and aviary conditions. Both wild and captive hummingbirds avoided foraging on feeders with defensive chemicals ofF. francoeuriand aggregation pheromones ofL. humile, but showed no response to honeybee cuticular hydrocarbons. Our experiments demonstrate the importance of olfaction in shaping hummingbird foraging decisions.

    Significance statement

    Recent reviews reveal that avian olfaction is not just limited to vultures and a few taxa. We demonstrate that a very charismatic group, hummingbirds, avoid defensive and aggregatory chemical cues from insects present at nectar resources. Olfactory cues can provide critical information about the presence and potential threat of insect floral visitors. This study raises new questions about the underrated importance of olfaction in avian foraging and specifically, hummingbird foraging.

     
    more » « less
  5. In temperate climates, honey bees show strong phenotypic plasticity associated with seasonal changes. In summer, worker bees typically only survive for about a month and can be further classified as young nurse bees (which feed the developing brood) and older forager bees. In winter, brood production and foraging halts and the worker bees live several months. These differences in task and longevity are reflected in their physiology, with summer nurses and long-lived winter bees typically having larger fat bodies, high expression levels of vitellogenin (a longevity, nutrition, and immune-related gene), and larger provisioning glands in their head. The environmental factors (both within the colony and within the surrounding environment) that trigger this transition to long-lived winter bees are poorly understood. One theory suggests is that winter bees are an extended nurse bee state, brought on by a reduction in nursing duties in the fall (i.e., lower brood area). We examine that theory here by assessing nurse bee physiology in both the summer and fall, in colonies with varying levels of brood. We find that season is a better predictor of nurse bee physiology than brood area. This finding suggests that seasonal factors beyond brood area, such as pollen availability and colony demography, may be necessary for inducing the winter bee phenotype. This finding furthers our understanding of winter bee biology, which could have important implications for colony management for winter, a critical period for colony survival.

     
    more » « less