The evolution of cooperation and altruism: the basic conditions are simple and well known

No description supplie

Can humans learn from insect societies?

No description supplie

Biomimicry: further insights from ant colonies?

Biomimicry means learning from nature. Well known examples include physical structures such as the Velcro fastener. But natural selection has also "engineered" mechanisms by which the components of adaptive biological systems are organized. For example, natural selection has caused the foragers in an ant colony to cooperate and communicate in order to increase the total foraging success of the colony. Ant colony optimization (ACO) is based on the pheromone trails by which many ant species communicate the locations of food in the environment around the nest. Computer algorithms based on ACO perform well in hard computational problems like the Traveling Salesman Problem. ACO algorithms normally use only a single attractive "pheromone". However, it seems that real ants use more. The Pharaoh's ant, Monomorium pharaonis, uses three different trail pheromones to provide short-term (volatile) and long-term attraction (non-volatile) and short-term (volatile) repellence so that foragers are directed to particular locations of the trail system where food can be collected. In addition, Pharaoh's ants also extract information from the geometry of the trail system and have division of labour among the forager workers, some of whom specialize in laying and detecting pheromone trails. ACO takes inspiration from ant colonies but does not need to faithfully model how ant colonies solve problems. For example, in ACO "pheromone" is applied retroactively once an "ant" has returned to the nest, which is something that can easily be implemented in a computer program but is obviously something that real ants cannot do. This raises the possibility that ACO might benefit from taking further inspiration from ant colonies. Presumably, real ants use multiple information sources and communication signals for a reason

Clarity on honey bee collapse?

Over the past few years, the media have frequently reported deaths of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies in the United States, Europe, and Japan. Most reports express opinions but little hard science. A recent historical survey (1) pointed out that extensive colony losses are not unusual and have occurred repeatedly over many centuries and locations. Concern for honey bees in the United States has been magnified by their vital role in agriculture. The California almond industry alone is worth $2 billion annually and relies on over 1 million honey bee hives for cross-pollination. So what is killing honey bee colonies worldwide, and what are the implications for agriculture

Research data for paper: The Disproportionate Value of ‘Weeds’ to Pollinators and Biodiversity.

Data for paper published in Journal of Applied Ecology (2022). Pollinator surveys of six sites pasture and ex-pasture sites in East Sussex, UK during July and August 2020.Abstract1. Agricultural intensification has been implicated in global biodiversity declines. In the European Union, agri‐environment schemes are designed to address this. For pollinating insects, funding has been provided to sow wildflower mixes. However, previous research indicates that a suite of agricultural weeds are also of great importance to pollinators. 2. Here, we compare the biodiversity associated with the species which are considered harmful to agricultural production and legally deemed as “injurious” by the United Kingdom (UK) 1959 Weeds Act (common ragwort - Jacobaea vulgaris, creeping thistle - Cirsium arvense, spear thistle - C. vulgare, curled dock - Rumex crispus, broad-leaved dock - R. obtusifolius), with plant species recommended for pollinator targeted agri-environmental options.3. In our field study the abundance and diversity of pollinators visiting the weed species averaged twice that of the recommended plants and included the main insect orders (Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera). This relationship was also seen in a meta-analysis of literature data, which indicates that four-fold more flower-visitor species and five-fold more conservation-listed species are associated with the weeds. Additionally, the literature shows that twice the number of herbivorous insect species are associated with these plants. 4. We suggest that several factors are responsible for this pattern. Injurious weed species are widely distributed, their flower morphology allows access to a wide variety of pollinator species, and they produce, on average, four times more nectar sugar than the recommended plant species.5. Freedom of information requests to public bodies such as local councils, Natural England and Highways England indicate that c. £10 million per year is spent controlling injurious weeds. Meanwhile, the cost of the four pollinator-targeted agri-environmental options in the UK exceeds £40m annually.6. Our results clearly show that weeds have an underappreciated value to biodiversity. Unfortunately, current UK agricultural policy encourages neither land sparing for, nor land sharing with, weeds. However, the UK government is currently committed to overhauling agricultural payments to encourage more wildlife- and climate-friendly practices. Thus, the challenge of reconciling the conflicts between agricultural production and these native and biodiverse species should be a renewed priority to land managers, researchers and policymakers.</div

A new eusocial vertebrate?

No description supplie

[Review] Have suitable experimental designs been used to determine the effects of neonicotinoid insecticides on bee colony performance in the field?

Laboratory studies have shown than neonicotinoid insecticides can cause sub-lethal effects on bees. Field studies are needed to determine whether these effects also occur when bees forage on flowering crops grown from neonicotinoid-treated seeds. However, for many reasons the results of field experiments may be inconsistent. For example, neonicotinoid residues in crop nectar and pollen and the availability of alternative nectar and pollen sources vary. In addition to these practical difficulties, different field experiment designs, especially different controls, address different questions. Most field studies on neonicotinoids have compared the performance of colonies adjacent to a bee-attractive crop grown from treated seeds with control colonies adjacent to the same crop grown from untreated seeds. This makes it possible to determine the cost, C, of any insecticide residues but not the overall effect of the crop, B – C, which includes any benefits, B, of the additional pollen and nectar. An alternative and rarely used design, only 1 of the 12 field studies reviewed, determines the overall effect of the crop by siting control colonies out of foraging range of the crop but in the same landscape. This design may be more relevant because bee-attractive crops, such as oilseed rape, are normally grown as alternatives to arable crops that do not provide bee forage, such as wheat and barley. As a result, it is possible that B – C?>?0 (or B – C?=?0) even if C?>?0. The challenges and merits of alternative experimental designs are discussed in relation to practical considerations and policy making

Comparing foraging behaviour of small and large honey bee colonies by decoding waggle dances made by foragers

1. We compared the foraging behaviour of two small (approximately 6000 bees) and two large (approximately 20 000 bees) honey-bee colonies over 6 days. We determined where the bees of each colony foraged, whether they collected nectar or pollen, the number of patches foraged at, the number of bees engaged in foraging, and the concentration of the nectar collected. 2. Even though the colonies were located in the same environment and had the same genetic background, foragers from different colonies used different forage patches. 3. Small and large colonies foraged at a similar distance in July when forage was abundant (mean foraging distance for small and large colonies was 67 and 62 km, respectively) whereas the large colonies foraged significantly further in August when forage was scarce (mean foraging distance for small and large colonies was 43 and 85 km, respectively). 4. Small colonies foraged at approximately the same number of patches as large colonies. The total number of foragers returning to the small colonies per minute was significantly lower than the number of foragers returning to the large colonies. This means that, relative to their size, small colonies foraged at more patches than large colonies. 5. The quality of the nectar collected by foragers of the small and large colonies did not differ. However, small colonies did collect more pollen than large colonies

Honey bee waggle dances facilitate shorter foraging distances and increased foraging aggregation

Many social organisms assist their group mates in foraging. The honey bee waggle dance allows nestmates to communicate the locations of rewarding flower patches. This remarkable behaviour can increase colony food collection under certain environmental conditions. However, we know little about how it affects colony foraging distribution in the landscape. Here, we predicted that dance communication influences foraging distances and increases the aggregation of foraging locations. We tested these predictions by manipulating the ability of Apis mellifera colonies situated in a heterogeneous landscape to communicate location information. Following established methodology, six study colonies in observation hives were turned horizontally and exposed to light treatments that produced either oriented or disoriented dancing. After 10–17 days, hives were then turned vertically and allowed to dance under normal conditions. We videoed and decoded dances to compare foraging patterns that had developed during the preceding treatment. This procedure was repeated throughout the foraging season from spring to autumn. Dance decoding revealed that, on average, bees from disoriented colonies recruited for food sources further away than oriented colonies. This effect was consistent throughout the year. Oriented colonies' recruitment was to a smaller area and was more spatially aggregated than that of disoriented colonies. However, experimental treatment did not affect colony weight gain. Our results show that dance communication plays an important role in the spatial distribution of foraging and is potentially beneficial in reducing commuting costs by directing recruits to closer foraging locations. These findings may be particularly relevant in heterogeneous landscapes.</p

Learning and discrimination of individual cuticular hydrocarbons by honeybees (Apis mellifera)

In social insect colonies, recognition of nestmates, kinship, caste and reproductive status is crucial both for individuals and for the colony. The recognition cues used are thought to be chemical, with the hydrocarbons found on the cuticle of insects often cited as being particularly important. However, in honeybees (Apis mellifera) the role of cuticular hydrocarbons in nestmate recognition is controversial. Here we use the proboscis extension response (PER) conditioning paradigm to determine how well honeybees learn long-chain linear alkanes and (Z)-alkenes present on the cuticle of worker bees, and also how well they can discriminate between them. We found large differences both in learning and discrimination abilities with the different cuticular hydrocarbons. Thus, the tested hydrocarbons could be classified into those which the bees learnt and discriminated well (mostly alkenes) and those which they did not (alkanes and some alkenes). These well-learnt alkenes may constitute important compounds used as cues in the social recognition processes