Search for: All records

ABSTRACT Visual learning is vital to the behavioral ecology of the Western honey bee (Apis mellifera). Honey bee workers forage for floral resources, a behavior that requires the learning and long-term memory of visual landmarks, but how these memories are mapped to the brain remains poorly understood. To address this gap in our understanding, we collected bees that successfully learned visual associations in a conditioned aversion paradigm and compared gene expression correlates of memory formation in the mushroom bodies, a higher-order sensory integration center classically thought to contribute to learning, as well as the optic lobes, the primary visual neuropil responsible for sensory transduction of visual information. We quantified expression of CREB and CaMKII, two classical genetic markers of learning, and fen-1, a gene specifically associated with punishment learning in vertebrates. As expected, we found substantial involvement of the mushroom bodies for all three markers but additionally report the involvement of the optic lobes across a similar time course. Our findings imply the molecular involvement of a sensory neuropil during visual associative learning parallel to a higher-order brain region, furthering our understanding of how a tiny brain processes environmental signals. 

Abstract Honey bees utilize their circadian rhythms to accurately predict the time of day. This ability allows foragers to remember the specific timing of food availability and its location for several days. Previous studies have provided strong evidence toward light/dark cycles being the primary Zeitgeber for honey bees. Work in our laboratory described large individual variation in the endogenous period length of honey bee foragers from the same colony and differences in the endogenous rhythms under different constant temperatures. In this study, we further this work by examining the temperature inside the honey bee colony. By placing temperature and light data loggers at different locations inside the colony we measured temperature at various locations within the colony. We observed significant oscillations of the temperature inside the hive, that show seasonal patterns. We then simulated the observed temperature oscillations in the laboratory and found that using the temperature cycle as a Zeitgeber, foragers present large individual differences in the phase of locomotor rhythms for temperature. Moreover, foragers successfully synchronize their locomotor rhythms to these simulated temperature cycles. Advancing the cycle by six hours, resulting in changes in the phase of activity in some foragers in the assay. The results are shown in this study highlight the importance of temperature as a potential Zeitgeber in the field. Future studies will examine the possible functional and evolutionary role of the observed phase differences of circadian rhythms. 

We aimed to examine mechanistically the observed foraging differences across two honey bee, Apis mellifera , subspecies using the proboscis extension response assay. Specifically, we compared differences in appetitive reversal learning ability between honey bee subspecies: Apis mellifera caucasica (Pollman), and Apis mellifera syriaca (Skorikov) in a “common garden” apiary. It was hypothesized that specific learning differences could explain previously observed foraging behavior differences of these subspecies: A.m. caucasica switches between different flower color morphs in response to reward variability, and A.m. syriaca does not switch. We suggest that flower constancy allows reduced exposure by minimizing search and handling time, whereas plasticity is important when maximizing harvest in preparation for long winter is at a premium. In the initial or Acquisition phase of the test we examined specifically discrimination learning, where bees were trained to respond to a paired conditioned stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus and not to respond to a second conditioned stimulus that is not followed by an unconditioned stimulus. We found no significant differences among the subspecies in the Acquisition phase in appetitive learning. During the second, Reversal phase of the experiment, where flexibility in association was tested, the paired and unpaired conditioned stimuli were reversed. During the Reversal phase A.m. syriaca showed a reduced ability to learn the reverse association in the appetitive learning task. This observation is consistent with the hypothesis that A.m. syriaca foragers cannot change the foraging choice because of lack of flexibility in appetitive associations under changing contingencies. Interestingly, both subspecies continued responding to the previously rewarded conditioned stimulus in the reversal phase. We discuss potential ecological correlates and molecular underpinnings of these differences in learning across the two subspecies. In addition, in a supplemental experiment we demonstrated that these differences in appetitive reversal learning do not occur in other learning contexts.