Colony energy requirements affect the foraging currency of bumble bees

Summary This study examines whether the foraging behavior of worker bumble bees (Bombus: Apidae) collecting nectar on inflorescences of seablush (Plectritis congesta: Valerianaceae) is affected by colony energetic requirements, which were experimentally manipulated either by adding sucrose solution to honey pots or by removing virtually all available nectar from the pots. The competing hypotheses tested were: (1) no change; energetic requirements do not affect behavior, since there is a single best way to collect food in a given environment; (2) energetic currency; the energetic currency maximized by foragers changes according to colony energetic condition, with nectar-depletion causing a shift from maximizing long-term productivity to maximizing immediate energetic gain, thereby de-emphasizing energetic costs; and (3) predation; foragers devalue risk of predation as risk of starvation increaes, with colony nectar-depletion causing foragers to be less predation riskaverse in order to increase immediate energetic gain. Relative to when their colony energy reserves were enhanced, foragers from nectar-depleted colonies selected smaller inflorescences, visited fewer flowers per inflorescence, probed flowers at a higher rate while on each inflorescence, and walked between inflorescences less often, thereby spending a greater proportion of their foraging trip in flight. These behaviors increased a bee's energetic costs while foraging, and should also have increased its immediate energetic gains, allowing rejection of the no change hypothesis. Predictions of the predation hypothesis were generally not supported, and our results best support the energetic currency hypothesis. Foraging currency of bumble bees therefore appears to be a function of colony energetic state. Offprint requests to: R.V. Cartar     

Constraints on foraging success due to resource ecology limit colony productivity in social insects

The benefit of group living is a fundamental question in social evolution. For sociality to evolve, each individual must gain in terms of some fitness component by living in larger groups. However, in social insects, a decrease in per capita success in brood production has been observed in larger groups. While it has been proposed that this decrease could be outweighed by an increase in the predictability of success, a functional basis to this hypothesis has so far never been demonstrated. In this paper, using foraging economics as a functional proxy to colony productivity, we construct a model to explore how number of foragers in the colony interacts with the ecology of resources to influence per capita foraging success and its predictability. The results of the model show that there is no increase in per capita foraging success in larger colonies under most circumstances, though there is an increase in its predictability. We then test the model with empirical data on the foraging behavior of the primitively eusocial wasp, Ropalidia marginata. The consistency between the data and the model suggests that foraging economics could provide a robust functional basis in explaining the relationship between colony size and productivity.     

Honeybees modify gustatory responsiveness after receiving nectar from foragers within the hive

Food quality is a relevant characteristic to be transferred within eusocial insect colonies because its evaluation improves the collective foraging efficiency. In honeybees, colony mates could directly acquire this resource characteristic during trophallactic encounters with nectar foragers. In the present study, we focused on the gustatory responsiveness of bees that have unloaded food from incoming foragers. The sugar sensitivity of receiver bees was assessed in the laboratory by using the proboscis extension response paradigm. After unloading, hive bees were captured either from a colony that foraged freely in the environmental surroundings or from a colony that foraged at an artificial feeder with a known sucrose solution. In the first situation, the sugar sensitivity of the hive bees negatively correlated with the sugar concentration of the nectar crops brought back by forager mates. Similarly, in the controlled situation, the highest sucrose concentration the receivers accepted during trophallaxis corresponded to the highest thresholds to sucrose. The results indicate that first-order receivers modify their sugar sensitivity according to the quality of the food previously transferred through trophallaxis by the incoming foragers. In addition, trophallaxis is a mechanism capable of transferring gustatory information in honeybees. Its implications at a social scale might involve changes in the social information as well as in nectar distribution within the colony.     

Honey bee foragers as sensory units of their colonies

Forager honey bees function not only as gatherers of food for their colonies, but also as sensory units shaped by natural selection to gather information regarding the location and profitability of forage sites. They transmit this information to colony members by means of waggle dances. To investigate the way bees transduce the stimulus of nectar-source profitability into the response of number of waggle runs, I performed experiments in which bees were stimulated with a sucrose solution feeder of known profitability and their dance responses were videorecorded. The results suggest that several attributes of this transduction process are adaptations to enhance a bee's effectiveness in reporting on a forage site. (1) Bees register the profitability of a nectar source not by sensing the energy gain per foraging trip or the rate of energy gain per trip, but evidently by sensing the energetic efficiency of their foraging. Perhaps this criterion of nectar-source profitability has been favored by natural selection because the foraging gains of honey bees are typically limited by energy expenditure rather than time availability. (2) There is a linear relationship between the stimulus of energetic efficiency of foraging and the response of number of waggle runs per dance. Such a simple stimulus-response function appears adequate because the range of suprathreshold stimuli (max/min ratio of about 10) is far smaller than the range of responses (max/min ratio of about 100). Although all bees show a linear stimulus-response function, there are large differences among individuals in both the response threshold and the slope of the stimulus-response function. This variation gives the colony a broader dynamic range in responding to food sources than if all bees had identical thresholds of dance response. (3) There is little or no adaptation in the dance response to a strong stimulus (tonic response). Thus each dancing bee reports on the current level of profitability of her forage site rather than the changes in its profitability. This seems appropriate since presumably it is the current profitability of a forage site, not the change in its profitability, which determines a site's attractiveness to other bees. (4) The level of forage-site quality that is the threshold for dancing is tuned by the bees in relation to forage availability. Bees operate with a lower dance threshold when forage is sparse than when it is abundant. Thus a colony utilizes input about a wide range of forage sites when food is scarce, but filters out input about low-reward sites when food is plentiful. (5) A dancing bee does not present her information in one spot within the hive but instead distributes it over much of the dance floor. Consequently, the dances for different forage sites are mixed together on the dance floor. This helps each bee following the dances to take a random sample of the dance information, which is appropriate for the foraging strategy of a honey bee colony since it is evidently designed to allocate foragers among forage sites in proportion to their profitability.     

Effects of colony food shortage on behavioral development in honey bees

Three experiments were conducted to explore the effects of severe food shortage on the control of two important and interrelated aspects of temporal division of labor in colonies of the honey bee (Apis mellifera): the size and age distribution of a colony's foraging force. The experiments were conducted with single-cohort colonies, composed entirely of young bees, allowing us to quickly distinguish the development of new (precocious) foragers from increases in activity of bees already competent to forage. In experiment 1, colony food shortage caused an acceleration of behavioral development; a significantly greater proportion of bees from starved colonies than from fed colonies became precocious foragers, and at significantly younger ages. Temporal aspects of this starvation effect were further explored in experiment 2 by feeding colonies that we initially starved, and starving colonies that we initially fed. There was a significant decrease in the number of new foragers in starved colonies that were fed, detected 1 day after feeding. There also was a significant increase in the number of new foragers in fed colonies that were starved, but only after a 2-day lag. These results suggest that colony nutritional status does affect long-term behavioral development, rather than only modulate the activity of bees already competent to forage. In experiment 3, we uncoupled the nutritional status of a colony from that of the individual colony members. The behavior of fed individuals in starved colonies was indistinguishable from that of bees in fed colonies, but significantly different from that of bees in starved colonies, in terms of both the number and age distribution of foragers. These results demonstrate that effects of starvation on temporal polyethism are not mediated by the most obvious possible worker-nest interaction: a direct interaction with colony food stores. This is consistent with previous findings suggesting the importance of worker-worker interactions in the regulation of temporal polyethism in honey bees as well as other social insects. Received: 17 April 1997 / Accepted after revision: 26 December 1997     

Exploration and exploitation of food sources by social insect colonies: a revision of the scout-recruit concept

Social insect colonies need to explore and exploit multiple food sources simultaneously and efficiently. At the individual level, this colony-level behaviour has been thought to be taken care of by two types of individual: scouts that independently search for food, and recruits that are directed by nest mates to a food source. However, recent analyses show that this strict division of labour between scouts and recruits is untenable. Therefore, a modified concept is presented here that comprises the possible behavioural states of an individual forager (novice forager, scout, recruit, employed forager, unemployed experienced forager, inspector and reactivated forager) and the transitions between them. The available empirical data are reviewed in the light of both the old and the new concept, and probabilities for the different transitions are derived for the case of the honey-bee. The modified concept distinguishes three types of foragers that may be involved in the exploration behaviour of the colony: novice bees that become scouts, unemployed experienced bees that scout, and lost recruits, i.e. bees that discover a food source other than the one to which they were directed to by their nest mates. An advantage of the modified concept is that it allows for a better comparison of studies investigating the different roles performed by social insect foragers during their individual foraging histories. Received: 29 December 1999 / Revised: 25 February 2000 / Accepted: 16 October 2000     

On the integration of individual foraging strategies with colony ergonomics in social insects: nectar-collection in honeybees

Summary We experimentally tested whether foraging strategies of nectar-collecting workers of the honeybee (Apis mellifera) vary with colony state. In particular, we tested the prediction that bees from small, fast growing colonies should adopt higher workloads than those from large, mature colonies. Queenright small colonies were set up by assembling 10 000 worker bees with approximately 4100 brood cells. Queenright large colonies contained 35 000 bees and some 14 500 brood cells. Thus, treatments differed in colony size but not in worker/brood ratios. Differences in workload were tested in the context of single foraging cycles. Individuals could forage on a patch of artificial flowers offering given quantities and qualities of nectar rewards. Workers of small colonies took significantly less nectar in an average foraging excursion (small: 40.1 ± 1.1 SE flowers; large: 44.8 ± 1.1), but spent significantly more time handling a flower (small: 7.3 ± 0.4 s ; large: 5.8 ± 0.4 s). When the energy budgets for an average foraging trip were calculated, individuals from all colonies showed a behavior close to maximization of net energetic efficiency (i.e., the ratio of net energetic gains to energetic costs). However, bees from small colonies, while incurring only marginally smaller costs, gained less net energy per foraging trip than those from large colonies, primarily as a result of prolonged handling times. The differences between treatments were largest during the initial phases of the experimental period when also colony development was maximally different. Our results are at variance with simple models that assume natural selection to have shaped behavior in a single foraging trip only so as to maximize colony growth. Offprint requests to: P. Schmid-Hempel     

Costs and benefits of pocket gopher foraging: linking behavior and physiology

Animals can attain fitness benefits by maintaining a positive net energy balance, including costs of movement during resource acquisition and the profits from foraging. Subterranean rodent burrowing provides an excellent system in which to examine the effects of movement costs on foraging behavior because it is energetically expensive to excavate burrows. We used an individual-based modeling approach to study pocket gopher foraging and its relationship to digging cost, food abundance, and food distribution. We used a unique combination of an individual-based foraging-behavior model and an energetic model to assess survival, body mass dynamics, and burrow configurations. Our model revealed that even the extreme cost of digging is not as costly as it appears when compared to metabolic costs. Concentrating digging in the area where food was found, or area-restricted search (ARS), was the most energetically efficient digging strategy compared to a random strategy. Field data show that natural burrow configurations were more closely approximated by the animals we modeled using ARS compared to random diggers. By using behavior and simple physiological principles in our model, we were able to observe realistic body mass dynamics and recreate natural movement patterns.     

Colony state and regulation of pollen foraging in the honey bee,Apis mellifera L.

Summary To place social insect foraging behavior within an evolutionary context, it is necessary to establish relationships between individual foraging decisions and parameters influencing colony fitness. To address this problem, we examined interactions between individual foraging behavior and pollen storage levels in the honey bee, Apis mellifera L. Colonies responded to low pollen storage conditions by increasing pollen intake rates 54% relative to high pollen storage conditions, demonstrating a direct relationship between pollen storage levels and foraging effort. Approximately 80% of the difference in pollen intake rates was accounted for by variation in individual foraging effort, via changes in foraging activity and individual pollen load size. An additional 20% resulted from changes in the proportion of the foraging population collecting pollen. Under both high and low pollen storage treatments, colonies returned pollen storage levels to pre-experimental levels within 16 days, suggesting that honey bees regulate pollen storage levels around a homeostatic set point. We also found a direct relationship between pollen storage levels and colony brood production, demonstrating the potential for cumulative changes in individual foraging decisions to affect colony fitness. Offprint requests to: J.H. Fewell at the current address     

Why are bumble bees risk-sensitive foragers?

Summary In a controlled laboratory experiment, we re-examined the question of bumble bee risk-sensitivity. Harder and Real's (1987) analysis of previous work on bumble bee risk aversion suggests that risk-sensitivity in these organisms is a result of their maximizing the net rate of energy return (calculated as the average of expected per flower rates). Whether bees are risk-sensitive foragers with respect to minimizing the probability of energetic shortfall is therefore still an open question. We examined how the foraging preferences of bumble bees for nectar reward variation were affected by colony energy reserves, which we manipulated by draining or adding sucrose solution to colony honey pots. Nine workers from four confined colonies of Bombus occidentalis foraged for sucrose solution in two patches of artificial flowers. These patches yielded the same expected rate of net energy intake, but floral volumes were variable in one patch and constant in the other. Our results show that bumble bees can be both risk-averse (preferring constant flowers) and risk-prone (preferring variable flowers), depending on the status of their colony energy reserves. Diet choice in bumble bees appears to be sensitive to the target value a colony-level energetic requirement. Offprint requests to: R.V. Cartar     

Division of labor between undertaker specialists and other middle-aged workers in honey bee colonies

A primary determinant of colony organization in temporally polyethic insect societies is inter-individual variation in behavior that is independent of worker age. We examined behavioral repertoires, behavioral correlates of adult development, and spatial distributions within the hive to explore the mechanisms that produce behavioral variation among middle-age honey bees (Apis mellifera). Individually labeled undertakers, guards, food storers, and wax workers exhibited a broad range of task-related behavior, but bees tagged as undertakers were more likely to subsequently remove a corpse from the hive and handle a corpse compared to other middle-aged bees. The activity level of undertakers was similar to other task groups, suggesting that undertaking specialists were neither hyper-active “elites” nor quiescent “reserves” that become active only when a dead bee stimulus is present. Undertakers also were more likely to remove debris and to remain in the lower region of the hive or near the entrance, even when not engaged in corpse removal; both preferences may promote colony efficiency by reducing inter-task travel times. Guards and undertakers were less likely to perform behavior normally associated with young bees compared to food storers and wax workers. Undertakers and guards also initiated foraging at earlier ages than the other task groups. These results suggest that undertakers and guards may be slightly developmentally advanced compared to food storers and wax workers. There also was evidence for lifetime differences in behavioral preferences which could not be explained by differences in adult development. Bees tagged as undertakers were more likely to subsequently remove a dead bee during their entire pre-foraging career compared to other task groups or members of their general age cohort. Differences in both the rate of adult development and individual behavioral preferences, both of which may be subject to genetic and environmental influences, are important determinants of inter-individual variation among honey bees of middle age. Received: 5 February 1997 / Accepted after revision: 27 May 1997     

The honey bee shaking signal: function and design of a modulatory communication signal

This study explores the meaning and functional design of a modulatory communication signal, the honey bee shaking signal, by addressing five questions: (I) who shakes, (II) when do they shake, (III) where do they shake, (IV) how do receivers respond to shaking, and (V) what conditions trigger shaking. Several results confirm the work of Schneider (1987) and Schneider et al. (1986a): (I) most shakers were foragers (at least 83%); (II) shaking exhibited a consistent temporal pattern with bees producing the most signals in the morning (0810–1150 hours) just prior to a peak in waggle dancing activity; and (IV) bees moved faster (by 75%) after receiving a shaking signal. However, this study differs from previous work by providing a long-term, temporal, spatial, and vector analysis of individual shaker behavior. (III) Bees producing shaking signals walked and delivered signals in all areas of the hive, but produced the most shaking signals directly above the waggle dance floor. (IV) Bees responded to the signal by changing their direction of movement. Prior to receiving a signal, bees selected from the waggle dance floor moved, on average, towards the hive exit. After receiving a signal, some bees continued moving towards the exit but others moved directly away from the exit. During equivalent observation periods, non-shaken bees exhibited a strong tendency to move towards the hive exit. (V) Renewed foraging activity after food dearth triggered shaking signals, and, the level of shaking is positively correlated with the duration of food dearth. However, shaking signal levels also increased in the morning before foraging had begun and in the late afternoon after foraging had ceased. This spontaneous afternoon peak has not previously been reported. The shaking signal consequently appears to convey the general message “reallocate labor to different activities” with receiver context specifying a more precise meaning. In the context of foraging, the shaking signal appears to activate (and perhaps deactivate) colony foraging preparations. The generally weak response elicited by modulatory signals such as the shaking signal may result from a high receiver response threshold which allows the receiver to integrate multiple sources of information and which thereby increases the probability that receiver actions will be appropriate to colony needs. Received: 21 March 1997 / Accepted after revision: 30 August 1997     

Time budgets and foraging in a Malagasy primate: do sex differences reflect reproductive condition and female dominance?

Female mammals commonly employ behavioral tactics of modulating activity levels and foraging behavior to counter the energetic burden of reproduction; these behavioral changes are reflected as intersexual differences. Traditional views of Malagasy primates posit that high reproductive costs select for female dominance which guarantees to energetically stressed females priority of resource access. I tested predictions regarding reproductive influences on sex differences in time budgets and foraging behavior using two groups of Milne-Edwards' sifaka (Propithecus diadema edwardsi) in southeastern Madagascar. Compared to males, females increased neither feeding nor resting time during gestation or lactation. Sex differences were essentially absent in all foraging time variables examined (time, duration, rate). In contrast, dietary composition diverged between the sexes in some months. The possibility that females selected particular food items to boost nutrient and energetic intake to meet increased requirements during reproduction must be further clarified with nutritional analyses. Sex differences in plant part choices coincided with lactation in one of the two study groups. Thus, the timing of sex differences in feeding patterns of P. d. edwardsi only partially supports the prediction that sex differences are most pronounced during the period of greatest female energetic demand. A comparative review indicated no tight association between female dominance and sex differences in foraging among Malagasy primates. Traditional female dominance theory falls short of explaining the observed patterns. The results of my study coupled with recent evidence suggest that non-behavioral tactics involving energy conservation and storage require further attention as mechanisms by which female lemurs cope with reproductive costs. Received: 12 June 1998 / Accepted after revision: 10 October 1998     

Colony-level selection effects on individual and colony foraging task performance in honeybees, Apis mellifera L.

In honeybees, as in other highly eusocial species, tasks are performed by individual workers, but selection for worker task phenotypes occurs at the colony level. We investigated the effect of colony-level selection for pollen storage levels on the foraging behavior of individual honeybee foragers to determine (1) the relationship between genotype and phenotypic expression of foraging traits at the individual level and (2) how genetically based variation in worker task phenotype is integrated into colony task organization. We placed workers from lines selected at the colony level for high or low pollen stores together with hybrid workers into a common hive environment with controlled access to resources. Workers from the selected lines showed reciprocal variation in pollen and nectar collection. High-pollen-line foragers collected pollen preferentially, and low- pollen-line workers collected nectar, indicating that the two tasks covary genetically. Hybrid workers were not intermediate in phenotype, but instead showed directional dominance for nectar collection. We monitored the responses of workers from the selected strains to changes in internal (colony) and external (resource) stimulus levels for pollen foraging to measure the interaction between genotypic variation in foraging behavior and stimulus environment. Under low-stimulus conditions, the foraging group was over-represented by high-pollen-line workers. However, the evenness in distribution of the focal genetic groups increased as foraging stimuli increased. These data are consistent with a model where task choice is a consequence of genetically based response thresholds, and where genotypic diversity allows colony flexibility by providing a range of stimulus thresholds. Received: 3 May 1999 / Received in revised form: 22 December 1999 / Accepted: 23 January 2000     

High social density increases foraging and scouting rates and induces polydomy in Temnothorax ants

Many organisms live in crowded groups where social density affects behavior and fitness. Social insects inhabit nests that contain many individuals where physical interactions facilitate information flow and organize collective behaviors such as foraging, colony defense, and nest emigration. Changes in nest space and intranidal crowding can alter social interactions and affect worker behavior. Here, I examined the effects of social density on foraging, scouting, and polydomy behavior in ant colonies—using the species Temnothorax rugatulus. First, I analyzed field colonies and determined that nest area scaled isometrically with colony mass—this indicates that nest area changes proportionally with colony size and suggests that ants actively control intranidal density. Second, laboratory experiments showed that colonies maintained under crowded conditions had greater foraging and scouting activities compared to the same colonies maintained at a lower density. Moreover, crowded colonies were significantly more likely to become polydomous. Polydomous colonies divided evenly based on mass between two nests but distributed fewer, heavier workers and brood to the new nests. Polydomous colonies also showed different foraging and scouting rates compared to the same colonies under monodomous conditions. Combined, the results indicate that social density is an important colony phenotype that affects individual and collective behavior in ants. I discuss the function of social density in affecting communication and the organization of labor in social insects and hypothesize that the collective management of social density is a group level adaptation in social insects.     

Predator foraging behavior in response to perception and learning by its prey: interactions between orb-spinning spiders and stingless bees

Although rewarded bees learn and remember colors and patterns, they have difficulty in learning to avoid negative stimuli such as decorated spider webs spun by Argiope argentata. A. argentata decorates its web with silk patterns that vary unpredictably (Fig. 1) and thus foraging insects that return to sites where spiders are found encounter new visual cues daily. Stingless bees can learn to avoid spider webs but avoidance-learning is slowed or inhibited by daily variation in web decorations (Figs. 3,4; Tables 1,2). In addition, even if bees learn to avoid decorated webs found in one location, they are unable to generalize learned-avoidance responses to similarly decorated webs found at other sites. A. argentata seems to have evolved a foraging behavior that is tied to the ways insects perceive and process information about their environment. Because of the evolutionary importance of bee-flower interdependence, the predatory behavior of web-decorating spiders may be difficult for natural selection to act against.     

Sensory allometry, foraging task specialization and resource exploitation in honeybees

Insect societies are important models for evolutionary biology and sociobiology. The complexity of some eusocial insect societies appears to arise from self-organized task allocation and group cohesion. One of the best-supported models explaining self-organized task allocation in social insects is the response threshold model, which predicts specialization due to inter-individual variability in sensitivity to task-associated stimuli. The model explains foraging task specialization among honeybee workers, but the factors underlying the differences in individual sensitivity remain elusive. Here, we propose that in honeybees, sensory sensitivity correlates with individual differences in the number of sensory structures, as it does in solitary species. Examining European and Africanized honeybees, we introduce and test the hypothesis that body size and/or sensory allometry is associated with foraging task preferences and resource exploitation. We focus on common morphological measures and on the size and number of structures associated with olfactory sensitivity. We show that the number of olfactory sensilla is greater in pollen and water foragers, which are known to exhibit higher sensory sensitivity, compared to nectar foragers. These differences are independent of the distribution of size within a colony. Our data also suggest that body mass and number of olfactory sensilla correlate with the concentration of nectar gathered by workers, and with the size of pollen loads they carry. We conclude that sensory allometry, but not necessarily body size, is associated with resource exploitation in honeybees and that the differences in number of sensilla may underlie the observed differences in sensitivity between bees specialized on water, pollen and nectar collection.     

The regulation of pollen foraging by honey bees: how foragers assess the colony's need for pollen

Summary The honey bee colony presents a challenging paradox. Like an organism, it functions as a coherent unit, carefully regulating its internal milieu. But the colony consists of thousands of loosely assembled individuals each functioning rather autonomously. How, then, does the colony acquire the necessary information to organize its work force? And how do individuals acquire information about specific colony needs, and thus know what tasks need be performed? I address these questions through experiments that analyze how honey bees acquire information about the colony's need for pollen and how they regulate its collection. The results demonstrate features of the colony's system for regulating pollen foraging: (1) Pollen foragers quickly acquire new information about the colony's need for pollen. (2) When colony pollen stores are supplemented, many pollen foragers respond by switching to nectar foraging or by remaining in the hive and ceasing to forage at all. (3) Pollen foragers do not need direct contact with pollen to sense the colony's change of state, nor do they use the odor of pollen as a cue to assess the colony's need for pollen. (4) Pollen foragers appear to obtain their information about colony pollen need indirectly from other bees in the hive. (5) The information takes the form of an inhibitory cue. The proposed mechanism for the regulation of pollen foraging involves a hierarchical system of information acquisition and a negative feedback loop. By taking advantage of the vast processing capacity of large numbers of individuals working in parallel, such a system of information acquisition and dissemination may be ideally suited to promote efficient regulation of labor within the colony. Although each individual relies on only limited, local information, the colony as a whole achieves a finely-tuned response to the changing conditions it experiences.     

Genotype and colony environment affect honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) development and foraging behavior

We examined the interaction of genotype and environment on foraging-behavior development and forage choice in honeybees. High- and low-pollen-hoarding strains and unselected wild-type bees were co-fostered in pairs of colonies manipulated to differentially stimulate high and low pollen foraging. The high-pollen-foraging stimulus consisted of high amounts of larvae, a known stimulus for pollen foraging, plus low amounts of pollen, known to induce pollen foraging. The low-pollen-foraging stimulus consisted of low amounts of larvae plus high amounts of pollen. We estimated the median age at which bees initiated foraging, determined forage choice, and the quality and quantity of resources collected. High-strain bees consistently foraged at younger ages than workers from the other sources. High-strain bees appeared to be more sensitive to the pollen-foraging-stimulus treatments, showing greater differences in foraging age and behavior. Three-way interactions of genotype, pollen foraging stimulus, and colony pair (replicate) were statistically significant for most foraging variables measured suggesting that additional, unknown environmental factors also affect foraging behavior. Our results suggest there is a functional relationship between age of first foraging and forage choice with a strong genetic component that is modulated by colony environment.     

The communal crop: modulation of sucrose response thresholds of pre-foraging honey bees with incoming nectar quality

We examined whether the quality (concentration) of incoming sucrose solutions returned by foraging honey bees affected the response thresholds of pre-foraging members of the colony. Six pairs of colonies were given ad libitum access to sucrose solution feeders. A colony from each pair was switched from 20–50% sugar concentration feeders while the other continued to have access to 20% sucrose feeders. Proboscis extension response (PER) scores to an increasing series of sucrose concentrations were significantly higher in pre-foragers of colonies foraging on 20% sucrose throughout compared to pre-foragers in colonies where foraging was switched to 50% sucrose. Although all colonies had honey stores, the concentration of sugar solution in non-foraging bees crops were significantly lower in bees from colonies foraging on 20% sucrose compared to those from colonies foraging on 50% sucrose. Because response thresholds to sugar of young bees were modulated by the concentration of sucrose solution returned to colonies, we repeated the 2000 study of Pankiw and Page that potentially confounded baseline response thresholds with modulated scores due to experience in the colony. Here, we examined PER scores to sucrose in bees within 6 h of emergence, prior to feeding experience, and their forage choice 2 to 3 weeks later. Pollen foragers had higher PER scores as newly emerged bees compared to bees that eventually became nectar foragers. These results confirm those of the 2000 study by Pankiw and Page. Combined, these experiments demonstrate that variation in pre-forager sucrose response thresholds are established prior to emerging as adults but may be modulated by incoming resources later on. Whether this modulation has long-term effects on foraging behavior is unknown but modulation has short-term effects and the potential to act as a means of communication among all bees in the colony.Communicated by M. Giurfa