Effects of interactions among genotypically diverse nestmates on task specialization by foraging honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that differences in patterns of task specialization among nestmate honeybee workers (Apis mellifera) can be explained, in part, as a consequence of genotypic variability. Here, we present evidence supporting the hypothesis that an individual's pattern of task specialization is affected not only by her own genotype, but, indirectly, by the genotypes of her nestmates. Workers from two strains of honey bees, one selected for high pollen hoarding, the other for low pollen hoarding, were observed in colonies of their respective parent strains and in colonies of the other strain. Worker genotype and host-colony type affected foraging activity. Workers from the high strain fostered in low-strain colonies returned with pollen on 75.6% of total foraging trips, while workers from the high strain fostered in high-strain colonies returned with pollen on 53.5% of total trips. Workers from the low strain fostered in low-strain colonies returned with pollen on 34.8% of total foraging trips while workers from the low strain fostered in high-strain colonies returned with pollen on 2.6% of total trips. Similar results were obtained in a second experiment. We suggest that workers influence the behavior of their nestmates indirectly through their effects on the shared colony environment. The asymmetry seen in the response of workers from these strains to the two types of colony environments also suggests that these genotypes exhibit different norms of reaction.

Foraging loads of stingless bees and utilisation of stored nectar for pollen harvesting

“…These findings agree with results previously found in Apis mellifera. Calderone and Page (1992) measured much higher volumes and lower concentrations of crop nectar (mean values: 25 µL, 37%) in returning honeybee foragers than Gary and Lorenzen (1976) in departing honeybee foragers elsewhere (0.7 µL, 49%). Future studies may reveal whether the amount or concentration of nectar carried upon departure reflects the anticipated pollen properties, flight distance and/or availability of additional floral nectar on the flower to be visited, and whether it varies systematically among bee and/or flower species.…”

The effects of pollen availability during larval development on the behaviour and physiology of spring-reared honey bee workers

“…Each colony consisted of a full-sized Langstroth hive body for a brood chamber and was headed by a lab-reared and naturally mated queen of mixed Buckfast and Italian descent. Genotype, which can have a significant influence on pollen foraging, storage and utilisation in colonies (e.g., Hellmich et al, 1985;Calderone and Page, 1992;Dreller and Page, 1999), was not controlled for in this study so that natural variation in colony response across treatment groups would be quantified. Each spring, a four-frame nucleus colony was installed in a glass-walled observation hive that was housed in a building located 1200 m from the field colonies in 2002 and 30 m away in 2003.…”

Measuring the cost of worker reproduction in honeybees: work tempo in an "anarchic" line

“…We chose not to analyse each task separately because differences between the two genotypes could refect differences in rates of age polyethism (the relationship between behaviour and age, Lindauer, 1961;Calderone and Page, 1992) rather than overall activity.…”