Selective olfactory choices of the honeybee among sunflower aromas: A study by combined olfactory conditioning and chemical analysis

Pham-Delègue, M.H.; Masson, C.; Étiévant, P. X.; Azar, M

doi:10.1007/bf01012110

Cited by 40 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, some recent work with Marjorana syriaca suggests that whole-plant volatiles can also be important in long-and close-range attraction (Beker et al 1989). The orientation to fragrance by honey bees is most likely a conditioned response (reviewed in Waller et al 1973;Pham-Deleque et al 1986), and there is little evidence that honey bees have innate preferences for particular floral odors (Ribbands 1955;Faegri and van der Pijl 1971;Waller et al 1973;PhamDeleque et al 1986;Henning et al 1992).…”

Section: Beesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Olfactory versus visual cues in a floral mimicry system

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used arrays of artificial flowers with and without fragrance to determine the importance of olfactory and visual cues in attracting insects to a floral mimic. The mimic is a fungus, Puccinia monoica Arth., which causes its crucifer hosts (here, Arabis drummondii Gray) to form pseudoflowers that mimic co-occurring flowers such as the buttercup, Ranunculus inamoenus Greene. Although pseudoflowers are visually similar to buttercups, their sweet fragrance is distinct. To determine whether visitors to pseudoflowers were responding to fragrance we performed an experiment in which we removed the visual cues, but allowed fragrance to still be perceived. In this experiment we found that pseudoflower fragrance can attract visitors by itself. In other experiments we found that the relative importance of olfactory and visual cues depended on the species of visitor. Halictid bees (Dialictus sp.) had a somewhat greater visual than olfactory response, whereas flies (muscids and anthomyiids) were more dependent on olfactory cues. We also used bioassays to determine which of the many compounds present in the natural fragrance were responsible for attraction. We found that halictid bees were equally attracted to pseudoflowers and to a blend containing phenylacetaldehyde, 2-phenylethanol, benzaldehyde and methylbenzoate in the same relative concentrations as in pseudoflowers. Flies, on the other hand, only responded to pseudoflower scent, indicating that we have not yet identified the compound(s) present in pseudoflowers that are attracting them. The ability of insects to differentiate pseudoflowers from true flowers by their fragrance may be important in the evolution of the mimicry system. Different fragrances may facilitate proper transfer of both fungal spermatia and pollen, and thus make it possible for the visual mimicry to evolve.

show abstract

Section: Beesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Olfactory versus visual cues in a floral mimicry system

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A fraction of the volatile compounds that constitute the floral scent can dissolve in the cuticular waxes and become incorporated into the body surface, helping bees to learn and discriminate among several flower species (MASSON 1982, PHAN-DELEGUE et al 1986). The floral fragrances contain more than a hundred compounds including hydrocarbons (WILLIAMS & WHITTEN 1983, PAHN-DELEGUE et al 1986. If the secretion produced by the CSG is dispersed on the bee's body surface and if the hydrocarbons contained in this secretion are able to absorb floral fragrances, it can be hypothesized that gland's secretion also functions in the establishment of the colony's identity, by enabling the acquisition of particular scents originated from food stocks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cephalic salivary glands of two species of advanced eusocial bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae): morphology and secretion

Poiani¹,

Cruz-Landim²

2010

Zoologia (Curitiba, Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Some adult eusocial bees have a pair of cephalic salivary glands (CSG) in addition to the thoracic labial or salivary gland pairs. This paper deals with variations in morphological features and secretion production of the CSG of females and males of Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758 and Scaptotrigona postica Latreille, 1807. The following life stages were studied: newly emerged, nurse, and forager workers; newly emerged and egg-laying queens; and newly emerged and sexually mature males. The histological results showed that the CSG differs between the two species in the following features: while alveoli and duct cells are cuboidal in workers and queens of A. mellifera, they change from cuboidal to flat in S. postica as the workers age. The glands of newly emerged males and females of A. mellifera are similar.However, as males become sexually mature, glands degenerate and practically disappear. The secretion from the glands of females of both species is oleaginous and gradually accumulates in the lumen of the alveoli in the beginning of the adult phase. Consequently, forager workers and egg-laying queens exhibit more turgid alveoli than younger individuals.Sudan black and Nile's blue staining indicated that the CSG secretion consists of neutral lipids. The possible role of gland secretion is discussed taking in account tasks performed by the individuals in the particular phases studied.

show abstract

“…Differences between honey types are more quantitative than qualitative, although monofloral honeys can produce compounds specific of the plant of origin (Bouseta et al, 1992;Ferreres et al, 1994). In honey bees, the recognition of complex mixtures was shown to depend not on the whole volatile blend, but rather on a smaller fraction or even a limited number of key-components (for floral odours: Pham-Delègue et al, 1986, 1993Thiéry et al, 1990;Le Métayer et al, 1997; for comb and cuticular waxes: Fröhlich et al, 2000Fröhlich et al, , 2001. Such components could be divided into two categories: (1) those common to the odour of all honeys, and (2) those specific to the plant (or plants) from which the nectar was collected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Floral aromas are known to be complex mixtures of tens to hundreds of components, but behavioural and electrophysiological studies have shown that floral volatile extracts are recognised on the basis of a limited range of key-components (Pham-Delègue et al, 1986, 1993Thiéry et al, 1990;Le Métayer et al 1997). Honey odours, as flower odours, are characterised by specific compounds, which can be identified using physico-chemical analyses (Bicchi et al, 1982(Bicchi et al, , 1983Bouseta et al, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning and discrimination of honey odours by the honey bee

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-We used classical conditioning of the proboscis extension response to test whether the natural discrimination ability of honey bees could be used to assess the origin of honeys. Five honeys were used as the conditioning stimuli in the procedure: linden (Tilia spp.), oilseed rape (Brassica napus), eucalyptus, sunflower (Helianthus annuus), and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia). Bees exhibited high levels of conditioned responses to all honey odours. Responses to the conditioned honey were usually the highest, but high levels of generalisation; i.e. behavioural response to other honeys, were recorded. Using a differential conditioning procedure where one honey odour was rewarded and another odour was explicitly unrewarded, we showed that honey bees could not always differentiate between honey types. The potential use of the honey bee as a biological detector to discriminate among honeys is discussed.honey bee / olfactory learning / discrimination / honey / melissopalynology

show abstract

Selective olfactory choices of the honeybee among sunflower aromas: A study by combined olfactory conditioning and chemical analysis

Cited by 40 publications

References 8 publications

Olfactory versus visual cues in a floral mimicry system

Olfactory versus visual cues in a floral mimicry system

Cephalic salivary glands of two species of advanced eusocial bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae): morphology and secretion

Learning and discrimination of honey odours by the honey bee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About