Many complex factors have been linked to the recent marked increase in honey bee colony failure, including pests and pathogens, agrochemicals, and nutritional stressors. It remains unclear, however, why colonies frequently react to stressors by losing almost their entire adult bee population in a short time, resulting in a colony population collapse. Here we examine the social dynamics underlying such dramatic colony failure. Bees respond to many stressors by foraging earlier in life. We manipulated the demography of experimental colonies to induce precocious foraging in bees and used radio tag tracking to examine the consequences of precocious foraging for their performance. Precocious foragers completed far fewer foraging trips in their life, and had a higher risk of death in their first flights. We constructed a demographic model to explore how this individual reaction of bees to stress might impact colony performance. In the model, when forager death rates were chronically elevated, an increasingly younger forager force caused a positive feedback that dramatically accelerated terminal population decline in the colony. This resulted in a breakdown in division of labor and loss of the adult population, leaving only brood, food, and few adults in the hive. This study explains the social processes that drive rapid depopulation of a colony, and we explore possible strategies to prevent colony failure. Understanding the process of colony failure helps identify the most effective strategies to improve colony resilience.

Social insects make elaborate use of simple mechanisms to achieve seemingly complex behavior and may thus provide a unique resource to discover the basic cognitive elements required for culture, i.e., group-specific behaviors that spread from “innovators” to others in the group via social learning. We first explored whether bumblebees can learn a nonnatural object manipulation task by using string pulling to access a reward that was presented out of reach. Only a small minority “innovated” and solved the task spontaneously, but most bees were able to learn to pull a string when trained in a stepwise manner. In addition, naïve bees learnt the task by observing a trained demonstrator from a distance. Learning the behavior relied on a combination of simple associative mechanisms and trial-and-error learning and did not require “insight”: naïve bees failed a “coiled-string experiment,” in which they did not receive instant visual feedback of the target moving closer when tugging on the string. In cultural diffusion experiments, the skill spread rapidly from a single knowledgeable individual to the majority of a colony’s foragers. We observed that there were several sequential sets (“generations”) of learners, so that previously naïve observers could first acquire the technique by interacting with skilled individuals and, subsequently, themselves become demonstrators for the next “generation” of learners, so that the longevity of the skill in the population could outlast the lives of informed foragers. This suggests that, so long as animals have a basic toolkit of associative and motor learning processes, the key ingredients for the cultural spread of unusual skills are already in place and do not require sophisticated cognition.

Motile animals actively seek out and gather resources they find rewarding, and this is an extremely powerful organizer and motivator of animal behavior. Mammalian studies have revealed interconnected neurobiological systems for reward learning, reward assessment, reinforcement and reward-seeking; all involving the biogenic amine dopamine. The neurobiology of reward-seeking behavioral systems is less well understood in invertebrates, but in many diverse invertebrate groups, reward learning and responses to food rewards also involve dopamine. The obvious exceptions are the arthropods in which the chemically related biogenic amine octopamine has a greater effect on reward learning and reinforcement than dopamine. Here we review the functions of these biogenic amines in behavioral responses to rewards in different animal groups, and discuss these findings in an evolutionary context.

Honeybees are well known for their complex division of labor. Each bee sequentially performs a series of social tasks during its life. The changes in social task performance are linked to gross differences in behavior and physiology. We tested whether honeybees performing different social tasks (nursing versus foraging) would differ in their gustatory responsiveness and associative learning behavior in addition to their daily tasks in the colony. Further, we investigated the role of the biogenic amine tyramine and its receptors in the behavior of nurse bees and foragers. Tyramine is an important insect neurotransmitter, which has long been neglected in behavioral studies as it was believed to only act as the metabolic precursor of the better-known amine octopamine. With the increasing number of characterized tyramine receptors in diverse insects, we need to understand the functions of tyramine on its own account. Our findings suggest an important role for tyramine and its two receptors in regulating honeybee gustatory responsiveness, social organization and learning behavior. Foragers, which were more responsive to gustatory stimuli than nurse bees and performed better in appetitive learning, also differed from nurse bees in their tyramine brain titers and in the mRNA expression of a tyramine receptor in the brain. Pharmacological activation of tyramine receptors increased gustatory responsiveness of nurse bees and foragers and improved appetitive learning in nurse bees. These data suggest that a large part of the behavioral differences between honeybees may be directly linked to tyramine signaling in the brain.