BackgroundThe detailed interpretation of mass phenomena such as human escape panic or swarm behaviour in birds, fish and insects requires detailed analysis of the 3D movements of individual participants. Here, we describe the adaptation of a 3D stereoscopic imaging method to measure the positional coordinates of individual agents in densely packed clusters. The method was applied to study behavioural aspects of shimmering in Giant honeybees, a collective defence behaviour that deters predatory wasps by visual cues, whereby individual bees flip their abdomen upwards in a split second, producing Mexican wave-like patterns.ResultsStereoscopic imaging provided non-invasive, automated, simultaneous, in-situ 3D measurements of hundreds of bees on the nest surface regarding their thoracic position and orientation of the body length axis. Segmentation was the basis for the stereo matching, which defined correspondences of individual bees in pairs of stereo images. Stereo-matched "agent bees" were re-identified in subsequent frames by the tracking procedure and triangulated into real-world coordinates. These algorithms were required to calculate the three spatial motion components (dx: horizontal, dy: vertical and dz: towards and from the comb) of individual bees over time.ConclusionsThe method enables the assessment of the 3D positions of individual Giant honeybees, which is not possible with single-view cameras. The method can be applied to distinguish at the individual bee level active movements of the thoraces produced by abdominal flipping from passive motions generated by the moving bee curtain. The data provide evidence that the z-deflections of thoraces are potential cues for colony-intrinsic communication. The method helps to understand the phenomenon of collective decision-making through mechanoceptive synchronization and to associate shimmering with the principles of wave propagation. With further, minor modifications, the method could be used to study aspects of other mass phenomena that involve active and passive movements of individual agents in densely packed clusters.

No abstract

Shimmering is a collective defence behaviour in Giant honeybees (Apis dorsata) whereby individual bees flip their abdomen upwards, producing Mexican wave-like patterns on the nest surface. Bucket bridging has been used to explain the spread of information in a chain of members including three testable concepts: first, linearity assumes that individual “agent bees” that participate in the wave will be affected preferentially from the side of wave origin. The directed-trigger hypothesis addresses the coincidence of the individual property of trigger direction with the collective property of wave direction. Second, continuity describes the transfer of information without being stopped, delayed or re-routed. The active-neighbours hypothesis assumes coincidence between the direction of the majority of shimmering-active neighbours and the trigger direction of the agents. Third, the graduality hypothesis refers to the interaction between an agent and her active neighbours, assuming a proportional relationship in the strength of abdomen flipping of the agent and her previously active neighbours. Shimmering waves provoked by dummy wasps were recorded with high-resolution video cameras. Individual bees were identified by 3D-image analysis, and their strength of abdominal flipping was assessed by pixel-based luminance changes in sequential frames. For each agent, the directedness of wave propagation was based on wave direction, trigger direction, and the direction of the majority of shimmering-active neighbours. The data supported the bucket bridging hypothesis, but only for a small proportion of agents: linearity was confirmed for 2.5%, continuity for 11.3% and graduality for 0.4% of surface bees (but in 2.6% of those agents with high wave-strength levels). The complimentary part of 90% of surface bees did not conform to bucket bridging. This fuzziness is discussed in terms of self-organisation and evolutionary adaptedness in Giant honeybee colonies to respond to rapidly changing threats such as predatory wasps scanning in front of the nest.

Giant honeybees (Apis dorsata) nest in the open and have developed a wide array of strategies for colony defence, including the Mexican wave-like shimmering behaviour. In this collective response, the colony members perform upward flipping of their abdomens in coordinated cascades across the nest surface. The time–space properties of these emergent waves are response patterns which have become of adaptive significance for repelling enemies in the visual domain. We report for the first time that the mechanical impulse patterns provoked by these social waves and measured by laser Doppler vibrometry generate vibrations at the central comb of the nest at the basic (=‘natural’) frequency of 2.156 ± 0.042 Hz which is more than double the average repetition rate of the driving shimmering waves. Analysis of the Fourier spectra of the comb vibrations under quiescence and arousal conditions provoked by mass flight activity and shimmering waves gives rise to the proposal of two possible models for the compound physical system of the bee nest: According to the elastic oscillatory plate model, the comb vibrations deliver supra-threshold cues preferentially to those colony members positioned close to the comb. The mechanical pendulum model predicts that the comb vibrations are sensed by the members of the bee curtain in general, enabling mechanoreceptive signalling across the nest, also through the comb itself. The findings show that weak and stochastic forces, such as general quiescence or diffuse mass flight activity, cause a harmonic frequency spectrum of the comb, driving the comb as an elastic plate. However, shimmering waves provide sufficiently strong forces to move the nest as a mechanical pendulum. This vibratory behaviour may support the colony-intrinsic information hypothesis herein that the mechanical vibrations of the comb provoked by shimmering do have the potential to facilitate immediate communication of the momentary defensive state of the honeybee nest to the majority of its members.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00114-013-1056-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Summary — A periodic form of massed flight behaviour in Apis dorsata was studied by video recording and image analysis. Two to three times a day the nest turns from the quiescent state into a high level of commotion for about 5 min. The vertical body orientations of the bees in the curtain then become more and more 'disordered'. In one nest, the total percentage of bees which flew off was less than 20% and the maximum number of hovering bees at a moment was 2-3% of the bee colony. Half of the curtain bees in the surface layer changed their position. The median moving index was below 0.3 mm/s in the quiescent condition and it rose up to 1.0 mm/s during massed flight activity. Our observations indicate that this kind of massed flight is quite different from the great defecation activities reported previously. Although there are diverse forms of massed flight activities in A dorsata, we found that this form of massed flight actitivity causes the periodical rearrangement of the roofing layer of curtain. On a Banyan tree we counted more than 100 nests of A dorsata and observed that nests of different areas of the tree did not supply bees or mass activity simultaneously.Apis dorsata / massed flight activity / orientation flight / image analysis / India

Shimmering is a defence behaviour in giant honeybees (Apis dorsata), whereby bees on the nest surface flip their abdomen upwards in a Mexican wave-like process. However, information spreads faster than can be ascribed to bucket bridging, which is the transfer of information from one individual to an adjacent one. We identified a saltatoric process that speeds up shimmering by the generation of daughter waves, which subsequently merge with the parental wave, producing a new wave front. Motion patterns of individual “focus” bees (n = 10,894) and their shimmering-active neighbours (n = 459,558) were measured with high-resolution video recording and stereoscopic imaging. Three types of shimmering-active surface bees were distinguished by their communication status, termed “agents”: “Bucket-bridging” agents comprised 74.98% of all agents, affected 88.17% of their neighbours, and transferred information at a velocity of v = 0.317±0.015 m/s. “Chain-tail” agents comprised 9.20% of the agents, were activated by 6.35% of their neighbours, but did not motivate others to participate in the wave. “Generator agents” comprised 15.82% of agents, showed abdominal flipping before the arrival of the main wave front, and initiated daughter waves. They affected 6.75% of their neighbourhood and speeded up the compound shimmering process compared to bucket bridging alone by 41.5% to v = 0.514±0.019 m/s. The main direction of shimmering was reinforced by 35.82% of agents, whereas the contribution of the complementing agents was fuzzy. We discuss that the saltatoric process could enable the bees to instantly recruit larger cohorts to participate in shimmering and to respond rapidly to changes in flight direction of preying wasps. A third, non-exclusive explanation is that at a distance of up to three metres from the nest the acceleration of shimmering could notably contribute to the startle response in mammals and birds.

The social waves in giant honeybees termed as shimmering are more complex than mexican waves. it has been demonstrated1 that shimmering is triggered by special agents at the nest surface. in this paper, we have used a nest that originated by amalgamation of two previously separated nests and stimulated waves by a dummy wasp moved on a miniature cable car. we illustrate the plausibility of the special-agent hypothesis1 also for complex shimmering processes.

In Giant Honey Bees, abdomen flipping happens in a variety of contexts. It can be either synchronous or cascaded, such as in the collective defense traits of shimmering and rearing-up, or it can happen as single-agent behavior. Abdomen flipping is also involved in flickering behavior, which occurs regularly under quiescent colony state displaying singular or collective traits, with stochastic, and (semi-) synchronized properties. It presumably acts via visual, mechanoceptive, and pheromonal pathways and its goals are still unknown. This study questions whether flickering is preliminary to shimmering which is subject of the fs (flickering-shimmering)-transition hypothesis? We tested the respective prediction that trigger sites (ts) at the nest surface (where shimmering waves had been generated) show higher flickering activity than the alternative non-trigger sites (nts). We measured the flickering activity of ts- and nts-surface bees from two experimental nests, before and after the colony had been aroused by a dummy wasp. Arousal increased rate and intensity of the flickering activity of both ts- and nts cohorts (P < 0.05), whereby the flickering intensity of ts-bees were higher than that of nts-bees (P < 0.05). Under arousal, the colonies also increased the number of flickering-active ts- and nts-cohorts (P < 0.05). This provides evidence that cohorts which are specialist at launching shimmering waves are found across the quiescent nest zone. It also proves that arousal may reinforce the responsiveness of quiescent curtain bees for participating in shimmering, practically by recruiting additional trigger site bees for expanding repetition of rate and intensity of shimmering waves. This finding confirms the fs-transition hypothesis and constitutes evidence that flickering is part of a basal colony-intrinsic information system. Furthermore, the findings disprove that the muscle activity associated with flickering would heat up the surface bees. Hence, surface bees are not actively contributing to thermoregulation.