Honeybee linguistics—a comparative analysis of the waggle dance among species of Apis

All honeybees use the waggle dance to recruit nestmates. Studies on the dance precision of Apis mellifera have shown that the dance is often imprecise. Two hypotheses have been put forward aimed at explaining this imprecision. The first argues that imprecision in the context of foraging is adaptive as it ensures that the dance advertises the same patch size irrespective of distance. The second argues that the bees are constrained in their ability to be more precise, especially when the source is nearby. Recent studies have found support for the latter hypothesis but not for the “tuned-error” hypothesis, as the adaptive hypothesis became known. Here we investigate intra-dance variation among Apis species. We analyse the dance precision of A. florea, A. dorsata, and A. mellifera in the context of foraging and swarming. A. mellifera performs forage dances in the dark, using gravity as point of reference, and in the light when dancing for nest sites, using the sun as point of reference. Both A. dorsata and A. florea are open-nesting species; they do not use a different point of reference depending on context. A. florea differs from both A. mellifera and A. dorsata in that it dances on a horizontal surface and does not use gravity but instead “points” directly toward the goal when indicating direction. Previous work on A. mellifera has suggested that differences in dance orientation and point of reference can affect dance precision. We find that all three species improve dance precision with increasing waggle phase duration, irrespective of differences in dance orientation, and point of reference. When dancing for sources nearby, dances are highly variable. When the distance increases, dance precision converges. The exception is dances performed by A. mellifera on swarms. Here, dance precision decreases as the distance increases. We also show that the size of the patch advertised increases with increasing distance, contrary to what is predicted under the tuned-error hypothesis

Hygienic behaviour in the Australian stingless bees Tetragonula carbonaria and T. hockingsi

Hygienic behaviour is a natural mechanism of colony-level disease resistance to brood pathogens and has been reported in honey bees and stingless bees. A novel brood disease was recently confirmed in the Australian stingless bees Tetragonula carbonaria Smith and Tetragonula hockingsi Cockerell and there is a paucity of data available on hygienic behaviour in these species. To address this, we investigated hygienic behaviour in eight colonies of T. carbonaria and four colonies of T. hockingsi, using brood freeze-kill and pin-kill assays. Hygienic behaviour was present in both species and was rapidly expressed in both assays. In T. carbonaria, the mean time (± SE) for removal of freeze-killed and pin-killed brood was 9.1 ± 1.9 hours and 8.2 ± 0.9 hours, respectively (n=8; one trial per assay). In T. hockingsi, removal of freeze-killed and pin-killed brood was 14.1 ± 5.1 hours and 10.4 (no SE) hours, respectively. There was no significant difference (α=0.05) in time taken to complete the hygienic behaviour phases (detection, uncapping, removal or cell dismantling) between assay type or assay order in both species. However, intercolony variation was observed in both species in the assays, suggesting that like honey bees, hygienic behaviour may have a genetic component. Tetragonula carbonaria and T. hockingsi displayed significantly faster detection, uncapping, removal and cell dismantling times than any of the stingless bees or most honey bees studied previously. This may, in part, explain why stingless bees appear to suffer from relatively few brood diseases

Honeybee, Apis mellifera, guards use adaptive acceptance thresholds to limit worker reproductive parasitism

Keywords: acceptance threshold Apis mellifera guard honeybee queenless recognition robbing worker reproductive parasitism To protect their colonies from robbing by conspecifics, honeybees have evolved nest-guarding behaviour. Guards adjust their acceptance threshold so that, as the likelihood of robbing increases, fewer nonnestmates are admitted. In addition to the possibility of robbing, queenless colonies may be infiltrated by reproductively parasitic non-nestmates. We tested the hypothesis that queenless colonies would be more discriminatory of non-nestmates than queenright colonies. As predicted, queenless colonies accepted significantly fewer non-nestmates (from queenright colonies) than they did nestmates, whereas queenright colonies did not differentiate significantly between the two sources. This trend continued once laying workers became active in queenless colonies. Thus there is evidence that queenless colonies are more discerning against potential reproductive parasites than queenright colonies. We also tested the hypothesis that as the likelihood of an intruder being a reproductive parasite increased, guards would become less permissive of allowing it entrance to the colony. Queenright colonies accepted significantly more non-nestmates from queenright colonies (no active ovaries) than they did non-nestmates from queenless colonies (many with active ovaries). However, queenless colonies did not make this distinction. We suggest that to queenless colonies all non-nestmates are potential parasites.

Harmonic radar tracking reveals that honeybee drones navigate between multiple aerial leks

Male honeybees (drones) are thought to congregate in large numbers in particular “drone congregation areas” to mate. We used harmonic radar to record the flight paths of individual drones and found that drones favored certain locations within the landscape which were stable over two years. Drones often visit multiple potential lekking sites within a single flight and take shared flight paths between them. Flights between such sites are relatively straight and begin as early as the drone's second flight, indicating familiarity with the sites acquired during initial learning flights. Arriving at congregation areas, drones display convoluted, looping flight patterns. We found a correlation between a drone's distance from the center of each area and its acceleration toward the center, a signature of collective behavior leading to congregation in these areas. Our study reveals the behavior of individual drones as they navigate between and within multiple aerial leks

Life-Long Radar Tracking of Bumblebees

This work was supported by European Research Council Advanced Grant no. 339347

Urbanisation generates multiple trait syndromes for terrestrial animal taxa worldwide

Cities can host significant biological diversity. Yet, urbanisation leads to the loss of habitats, species, and functional groups. Understanding how multiple taxa respond to urbanisation globally is essential to promote and conserve biodiversity in cities. Using a dataset encompassing six terrestrial faunal taxa (amphibians, bats, bees, birds, carabid beetles and reptiles) across 379 cities on 6 continents, we show that urbanisation produces taxon-specific changes in trait composition, with traits related to reproductive strategy showing the strongest response. Our findings suggest that urbanisation results in four trait syndromes (mobile generalists, site specialists, central place foragers, and mobile specialists), with resources associated with reproduction and diet likely driving patterns in traits associated with mobility and body size. Functional diversity measures showed varied responses, leading to shifts in trait space likely driven by critical resource distribution and abundance, and taxon-specific trait syndromes. Maximising opportunities to support taxa with different urban trait syndromes should be pivotal in conservation and management programmes within and among cities. This will reduce the likelihood of biotic homogenisation and helps ensure that urban environments have the capacity to respond to future challenges. These actions are critical to reframe the role of cities in global biodiversity loss.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Belief without Credence

One of the deepest ideological divides in contemporary epistemology concerns the relative importance of belief versus credence. A prominent consideration in favor of credence-based epistemology is the ease with which it appears to account for rational action. In contrast, cases with risky payoff structures threaten to break the link between rational belief and rational action. This threat poses a challenge to traditional epistemology, which maintains the theoretical prominence of belief. The core problem, we suggest, is that belief may not be enough to register all aspects of a subject’s epistemic position with respect to any given proposition. We claim this problem can be solved by introducing other doxastic attitudes—genuine representations—that differ in strength from belief. The resulting alternative picture, a kind of doxastic states pluralism, retains the central features of traditional epistemology—most saliently, an emphasis on truth as a kind of objective accuracy—while adequately accounting for rational action

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Moving without a purpose : an experimental study of swarm guidance in the Western honey bee, Apis mellifera

During reproductive swarming, honey bee scouts perform two very important functions. Firstly, they find new nesting locations and return to the swarm cluster to communicate their discoveries. Secondly, once the swarm is ready to depart, informed scout bees act as guides, leading the swarm to its final destination. We have previously hypothesised that the two processes, selecting a new nest site and swarm guidance, are tightly linked in honey bees. When swarms can be laissez faire about where they nest, reaching directional consensus prior to lift off seems unnecessary. If, in contrast, it is essential that the swarm reaches a precise location, either directional consensus must be near unanimous prior to swarm departure or only a select subgroup of the scouts guide the swarm. Here, we tested experimentally whether directional consensus is necessary for the successful guidance of swarms of the Western honey bee Apis mellifera by forcing swarms into the air prior to the completion of the decision-making process. Our results show that swarms were unable to guide themselves prior to the swarm reaching the pre-flight buzzing phase of the decision-making process, even when directional consensus was high. We therefore suggest that not all scouts involved in the decision-making process attempt to guide the swarm