Paint marking social wasps: an evaluation of behavioral effects and toxicity

Souza, André Rodrigues de; Ribeiro, Bruna; José, Newton; Prezoto, Fábio

doi:10.1111/j.1570-7458.2012.01285.x

Cited by 22 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Electromagnetic radiation can directly or indirectly lower performance and survival (Cucurachi et al, 2013), but at least for honeybee hives equipped with standard RFID readers mortality rates were unaffected by the radiation (Darney et al, 2016). Studies in which no tags are used, such as capture-mark-recapture using simple paint to mark individuals, or studies using glued plate markings, are also documented to influence grooming, aggression, cooperation and foraging behaviour (De Souza, Ribeiro, José, & Prezoto, 2012;Packer, 2005;Switzer & Combes, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tracking devices have become small enough to be widely applied to arthropods to study their movement. However, possible side effects of these devices on arthropod performance and behaviour are rarely considered. We performed a systematic review of 173 papers about research in which tracking devices—radio frequency identification (RFID), harmonic radar and radio telemetry tags—were attached to terrestrial arthropods. The impact of such tags was quantified in only 12% of the papers, while in 40% the potential impact was completely disregarded. Often‐cited rules of thumb for determining appropriate tag weight had either no empirical basis or were misconstrued. Several properties of a tracking device (e.g. weight, balance, size, drag) can affect different aspects of an arthropod's life history (e.g. energy, movement, foraging, mating). The impact can differ among species and environments. Taken together, these tag effects can influence the reliability of obtained movement data and conclusions drawn from them. We argue that the impact of tracking devices on arthropods should be quantified for each (a) study species, (b) tag type, and (c) environmental context. As an example, we include a low‐effort impact study of the effect of an RFID tag on a digger wasp. Technological advancements enable studying the movement of arthropods in unprecedented detail. However, we should adopt a more critical attitude towards the use of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods. The benefits of tracking devices should be balanced against their potential side effects on arthropods and on the reliability of the resulting data.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A negative effect of fluorescent powder on the longevity was shown for the codling moth, Laspeyresia pomonella [19] and cucurbit beetle, Diabrotica speciosa [27], but not for the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae [12], Asian citrus psyllid, Diaphorina citri [18], sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis [28] or the deciduous fruit moths Aegeria pictipes and Argyrotaenia velutinana [29]. Marking with fluorescent dye had no effect on the longevity of the wasp Polistes versicolor [30] or the parasitoid Gonatocerus ashmeadi [31]. In Asian citrus psyllids, Diaphorina citri , treated with powder, the response to a light was significantly lower up to 4 h after treatment [18] and a reduced response of powdered males to females was found in the codling moth Laspeyresia pomonella [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No effect of powder treatment, however, was found on the behavioural response of the fruit moths Aegeria pictipes and Argyrotaenia velutinana [29] and on the mobility of the sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis [28]. Fluorescent dye did not influence the flight ability of fruit flies [32], but did effect grooming behaviour of the social wasp Polistes versicolor [30]. These studies and the study described here show that the effects of fluorescent powder or dye should be evaluated whenever using the technique for marking a new insect species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in methods for colour marking of mosquitoes

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDifferent techniques are available for colour marking insects and each technique may be suitable for different insect species. Mosquitoes can be marked to determine population size, distribution and flight distance or distinguish closely related species. In this study, two methods of colour marking mosquitoes were described in detail and the impact of both methods on the survival and host-seeking behaviour of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto was investigated.MethodsMosquitoes were marked in groups with fluorescent powder or fluorescent dye. The powder was applied by creating a cloud of powder in a paper cup and the dye was applied with an airbrush. The effect of marking on the survival of mosquitoes of different age groups was tested under controlled conditions. The effect of marking on the host seeking response of the mosquitoes was tested in an olfactometer with human and cow odour as baits.ResultsNo effect of either of the marking methods was found on the survival of mosquitoes that were treated 1 or 3 days after emergence, however, the survival of mosquitoes treated 5 or 9 days after emergence was significantly reduced. The host-seeking response of mosquitoes to human or cow odour was tested in a dual-port olfactometer and was not found to be affected by treatment with fluorescent powder or dye.ConclusionsBoth methods are suitable for colour marking large groups of mosquitoes. Marking with fluorescent powder, however, is preferred because the method is simpler, visible without a UV light and no specific materials are required.

show abstract

“…An alternative method of avoiding pseudoreplication while allowing bees to continue to interact with all of their nest-mates is to mark individuals, and then collect only one observation per bee, or account for repeated measurements on the same individual (Milinski, 1997). Few studies have investigated how marking insects affects behavior (Packer, 2005;De Souza et al, 2012). Common methods for marking individual bees include marking with dots of paint or attaching uniquely-numbered tags.…”

Section: Journal Of Melittologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This agrees with past research. De Souza et al (2012) found that marking social wasps with water-based ink caused an increase in short-term grooming behavior. Finally, the difference in whether bees engaged in further foraging/sonication behavior could potentially be related to colony dynamics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

<i>Bombus impatiens</i> (Hymenoptera: Apidae) display reduced pollen foraging behavior when marked with bee tags vs. paint

Switzer¹,

Combes²

2016

J. Melittol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Numbered bee tags, developed for marking honey bees (Apis mellifera Linnaeus), are glued to the mesosoma of many bees to uniquely identify them. We recorded whether or not bees sonicated to collect pollen after being marked, and we compared the sonication frequency, sonication length, and wing beat frequency of Bombus (Pyrobombus) impatiens Cresson that were tagged with bee tags vs. marked with paint. We found that bees with tags glued to their mesosoma had no significant change in wing beat frequency, sonication frequency, or sonication length, relative to bees that were marked with paint; however, we found that the probability of collecting pollen via sonication after being marked was much lower for bees marked with bee tags vs. paint. Journal of Melittology 2No. 62 placed into experimental cages (Poissonnier et al., 2015). An alternative method of avoiding pseudoreplication while allowing bees to continue to interact with all of their nest-mates is to mark individuals, and then collect only one observation per bee, or account for repeated measurements on the same individual (Milinski, 1997). Few studies have investigated how marking insects affects behavior (Packer, 2005;De Souza et al., 2012). Common methods for marking individual bees include marking with dots of paint or attaching uniquely-numbered tags. When marking bees, numbered tags are often used (e.g., Osborne et al., 1999;Osborne & Williams, 2001) because paint comes in limited colors, and combinations of paint can quickly become complex and difficult to decipher if researchers wish to mark tens or hundreds of bees. Numbered bee tags, glued to the mesosoma, have regularly been used by beekeepers to identify honey bee queens, and are often used to mark other types of bees.To attach the tags or apply dots of paint, some researchers narcotize bees with cold or CO 2 to keep them from moving while being marked, but Poissonnier et al. (2015) found that these methods affect bee behaviors -activity, brood care, foraging, aggression, and egg production -for up to four days after treatment. In addition, Wilson et al. (2006) found that cold narcosis affects bumble bee foraging recruitment. Because of these potential confounding factors, alternative methods may be necessary to study bee behavior.Another method of immobilizing bees is to use a honey bee queen-marking cage (Capaldi et al., 2000;Reynolds et al., 2009), in which a bee is pressed against a mesh grid with a piece of foam. A paint dot or marker can then be placed on the bee, typically on the mesoscutum, by reaching through the grid to access the bee's body. A researcher using a queen-marking cage does not need cold or CO 2 narcosis, and thus queen-marking cages are more convenient for field-based experiments.A variety of glues have been used to affix tags to bees. In general, scientists marking individual insects need an adhesive that is durable, non-toxic in the amount applied, easy to apply, lightweight, and quick drying (Walker & Wineriter, 1981). Many bee-tagging kits include lacquer for...

show abstract

Paint marking social wasps: an evaluation of behavioral effects and toxicity

Cited by 22 publications

References 19 publications

The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

Advances in methods for colour marking of mosquitoes

<i>Bombus impatiens</i> (Hymenoptera: Apidae) display reduced pollen foraging behavior when marked with bee tags vs. paint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About