Under the radar: detection avoidance in brood parasitic bees

Litman, Jessica R.

doi:10.1098/rstb.2018.0196

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent works continue to fill research gaps in equipment [ 96 , 97 , 98 ], reflectivity, and insects’ geometrical characteristics [ 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 ]. As shown earlier, radar applications focus on either biodiversity/conservation [ 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 ] or agriculture (economically important insects [ 108 , 109 , 110 ] and pest management [ 21 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 ]).…”

Section: Insect Radarmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Insect Monitoring Approaches with Special Reference to Radar Techniques

Noskov

Bendix

Frieß

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drastic declines in insect populations are a vital concern worldwide. Despite widespread insect monitoring, the significant gaps in the literature must be addressed. Future monitoring techniques must be systematic and global. Advanced technologies and computer solutions are needed. We provide here a review of relevant works to show the high potential for solving the aforementioned problems. Major historical and modern methods of insect monitoring are considered. All major radar solutions are carefully reviewed. Insect monitoring with radar is a well established technique, but it is still a fast-growing topic. The paper provides an updated classification of insect radar sets. Three main groups of insect radar solutions are distinguished: scanning, vertical-looking, and harmonic. Pulsed radar sets are utilized for all three groups, while frequency-modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) systems are applied only for vertical-looking and harmonic insect radar solutions. This work proves the high potential of radar entomology based on the growing research interest, along with the emerging novel setups, compact devices, and data processing approaches. The review exposes promising insect monitoring solutions using compact radar instruments. The proposed compact and resource-effective setups can be very beneficial for systematic insect monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Insect Radarmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Insect Monitoring Approaches with Special Reference to Radar Techniques

Noskov

Bendix

Frieß

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several generalist parasite species using cavitynesting bees as hosts leave an observable exit hole when leaving the host nest (Krombein, 1967;Strohm, 2011). Thus, natural selection should favour bees that recognize the hallmarks of nest healthiness and prefer nesting near healthy nests and avoid proximity to parasitized nests of others or reject abstract contextual cues that are linked to parasitization (Boyd & Richerson, 1985;Henrich & Gil-White, 2001;Laland, 2004;Sarabian et al, 2018;Litman, 2019). Here we studied with a field experiment whether blue and orange-vented mason bees (observers) use the nesting success of heterospecifics, red mason bees, as a basis of decision-making in nestsite selection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective interspecific information use in the nest choice of solitary bees

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the studies on learning in bees have focused on the foraging context; we know little about the preferences and cognitive processes in nest-site selection, especially in solitary bees. The majority of the bee species are solitary and in contrast to eusocial bees, solitary bees’ cognition and social information use have remained largely unstudied. Solitary cavity-nesting mason bees (Osmia spp.) are an ideal system to study interspecific information use in nest choice in the wild as many species share similar nesting requirements. Here, we show that the blue mason bee (O. caerulescens) and the orange-vented mason bee (O. leaiana) examine hallmarks of parasitization of the nests of red mason bees (O. bicornis) before deciding where to establish their own nests. They were also presented with contextual cues (geometric symbols) that could be linked to parasitization by observational learning. Subjects subsequently had the choice of nesting in a nest site marked by the symbol that matched, or did not match, the one seen at the parasitized or healthy nest. We show that the bees copied and rejected the symbol of the examined nest manipulated to exhibit successful and unsuccessful nesting, respectively. We conclude that solitary bees use interspecific information in their nest-site selection. In contrast with current theories of species coexistence, niche overlap between species may dynamically change depending on the observed success of surrounding individuals.

show abstract

“…Polacik et al [17] Litman [23] Yang et al [57] Spottiswoode & Busch [58] Kaur et al [59] Tartally et al [65] Medina & Langmore [77] What adaptations are necessary for parasites to succeed? How do parasites differ in morphology, behaviour and physiology to non-parasites?…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The coevolutionary biology of brood parasitism: a call for integration

Thorogood

Spottiswoode

Portugal

2019

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obligate brood-parasitic cheats have fascinated natural historians since ancient times. Passing on the costs of parental care to others occurs widely in birds, insects and fish, and often exerts selection pressure on hosts that in turn evolve defences. Brood parasites have therefore provided an illuminating system for researching coevolution. Nevertheless, much remains unknown about how ecology and evolutionary history constrain or facilitate brood parasitism, or the mechanisms that shape or respond to selection. In this special issue, we bring together examples from across the animal kingdom to illustrate the diverse ways in which recent research is addressing these gaps. This special issue also considers how research on brood parasitism may benefit from, and in turn inform, related fields such as social evolution and immunity. Here, we argue that progress in our understanding of coevolution would benefit from the increased integration of ideas across taxonomic boundaries and across Tinbergen’s Four Questions: mechanism, ontogeny, function and phylogeny of brood parasitism. We also encourage renewed vigour in uncovering the natural history of the majority of the world's brood parasites that remain little-known. Indeed, it seems very likely that some of nature’s brood parasites remain entirely unknown, because otherwise we are left with a puzzle: if parental care is so costly, why is brood parasitism not more common? This article is part of the theme issue ‘The coevolutionary biology of brood parasitism: from mechanism to pattern’.

show abstract

Under the radar: detection avoidance in brood parasitic bees

Abstract: One contribution of 18 to a theme issue 'The coevolutionary biology of brood parasitism: from mechanism to pattern'.

Cited by 22 publications

References 42 publications

A Review of Insect Monitoring Approaches with Special Reference to Radar Techniques

A Review of Insect Monitoring Approaches with Special Reference to Radar Techniques

Selective interspecific information use in the nest choice of solitary bees

The coevolutionary biology of brood parasitism: a call for integration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About