The Experts below are selected from a list of 5820 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Michael Hrncir - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Why do Stingless Bees (Melipona subnitida) leave their nest with resin loads
Insectes Sociaux, 2020Co-Authors: Ken-ichi Harano, Camila Maia-silva, Michael HrncirAbstract:Stingless Bees (Apidae, Meliponini) collect plant resins and deliver them to their nest for use as construction material. In some species, however, workers can be observed leaving their colonies with resin loads on their corbiculae. The present study investigated the role of these "resin Bees" in the Brazilian Stingless bee Melipona subnitida. In 7 nests, we observed a total of 424 workers departing the nest under undisturbed colony conditions. One tenth (11.3%) of these outgoing Bees carried resin on their corbiculae. The average weight of the loads was 5.2 mg, approximately, 10% of the Bees' body weight. The round-trip duration of resin Bees (1.3 min) was significantly shorter than that of nectar foragers (12.3 min). When the colonies were experimentally disturbed, the majority of the agitated Bees that left the colony in response carried resin loads (90.5%). Our results suggest that resin Bees in M. subnitida are nest defenders. Under undisturbed colony conditions, these Bees may perform surveillance flights close to the nest, watching out for potential intruders and even mummify them with resin. Additionally, the deterrent effect of plant resins on many bee predators may reduce the workers' risk during these flights.
-
Stingless Bees (Meliponini): senses and behavior
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 2016Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Stefan Jarau, Friedrich G BarthAbstract:Stingless Bees (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponini) are by far the largest group of eusocial Bees on Earth. Due to the diversity of evolutionary responses to specific ecological challenges, the Meliponini are well suited for comparative studies of the various adaptations to the environment found in highly eusocial Bees. Of particular interest are the physiological mechanisms underlying the sophisticated cooperative and collective actions of entire colonies, which form the basis of the ecological success of the different bee species under the particular conditions prevailing in their respective environment. The present Special Issue of the Journal of Comparative Physiology A provides a sample of the exciting diversity of sensorial and behavioral adaptations in Stingless Bees, particularly concerning (1) the sensory bases for foraging, (2) chemical communication, and (3) the behavioral ecology of foraging.
-
Stingless Bees melipona scutellaris learn to associate footprint cues at food sources with a specific reward context
Journal of Comparative Physiology A-neuroethology Sensory Neural and Behavioral Physiology, 2016Co-Authors: Ana Carolina Roselino, Michael Hrncir, Andre Vieira RodriguesAbstract:Foraging insects leave chemical footprints on flowers that subsequent foragers may use as indicators for recent flower visits and, thus, potential resource depletion. Accordingly, foragers should reject food sources presenting these chemical cues. Contrasting this assumption, experimental studies in Stingless Bees (Apidae, Meliponini), so far, demonstrated an attractive effect of footprints. These findings lead to doubts about the meaning of these chemical cues in natural foraging contexts. Here, we asked whether foragers of Stingless Bees (Melipona scutellaris) use footprints according to the previously experienced reward level of visited food sources. Bees were trained to artificial flower patches, at which the reward of a flower either decreased or, alternatively, increased after a visit by a forager. Individuals were allowed a total of nine foraging bouts to the patch, after which their preference for visited or unvisited flowers was tested. In the choice tests, Bees trained under the decreasing reward context preferred unvisited flowers, whereas individuals trained under the increasing reward context preferred visited flowers. Foragers without experience chose randomly between visited and unvisited flowers. These results demonstrate that M. scutellaris learns to associate unspecific footprint cues at food sources with differential, specific reward contexts, and uses these chemical cues accordingly for their foraging decisions.
-
Stingless Bees melipona subnitida adjust brood production rather than foraging activity in response to changes in pollen stores
Journal of Comparative Physiology A-neuroethology Sensory Neural and Behavioral Physiology, 2016Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca, Camila Maiasilva, Dirk Louis P SchorkopfAbstract:Highly eusocial Bees (honey Bees and Stingless Bees) sustain their colonies through periods of resource scarcity by food stored within the nest. The protein supply necessary for successful brood production is ensured through adjustments of the colonies’ pollen foraging according to the availability of this resource in the environment. In honey Bees Apis mellifera, in addition, pollen foraging is regulated through the broods’ demand for this resource. Here, we investigated the influence of the colony’s pollen store level on pollen foraging and brood production in Stingless Bees (Melipona subnitida). When pollen was added to the nests, colonies increased their brood production and reduced their pollen foraging within 24 h. On the other hand, when pollen reserves were removed, colonies significantly reduced their brood production. In strong contrast to A. mellifera; however, M. subnitida did not significantly increase its pollen foraging activity under poor pollen store conditions. This difference concerning the regulation of pollen foraging may be due to differences regarding the mechanism of brood provisioning. Honey Bees progressively feed young larvae and, consequently, require a constant pollen supply. Stingless Bees, by contrast, mass-provision their brood cells and temporary absence of pollen storage will not immediately result in substantial brood loss.
-
On the Diversity of Foraging-Related Traits in Stingless Bees
Pot-Honey, 2012Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Camila Maia-silvaAbstract:Stingless bee pot-honey is a valuable product with a long tradition of harvest and consumption. The differences found among meliponine honeys with respect to their physicochemical composition, sugar content, and floral origin depend not only on the geographic region but also on the Stingless bee species kept for honey production. Tropical habitats are frequently shared by several dozen meliponine species and, consequently, diet overlap in terms of food plants used is considerable. Competition and the selective pressure to maximise food collection shaped a rich variety of foraging-related traits among the Stingless Bees. In the present chapter, we want to give a brief overview of this diversity, discussing the importance of morphological traits (tongue length, body colour, and body size) for the separation of fundamental food niches among the Meliponini. In contrast to a species’ fundamental niche, which is delimited by the morphological and physiological characteristics of an organism, the food niche realised by a species is determined through the interactions with other organisms that share the same fundamental food niche. Here, differences in foraging strategy among the Stingless Bees with regard to aggression, recruitment ability, and recruitment precision influence dominance relationships at a feeding site and, thus, are important factors concerning the partitioning of resources.
Tim A Heard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
australian Stingless Bees detect odours left at food sources by nestmates conspecifics and honey Bees
Insectes Sociaux, 2021Co-Authors: Ros Gloag, Tim A Heard, J P Smith, Ruby E Stephens, Madeleine BeekmanAbstract:Many animals deposit odours in their environment, either intentionally or unintentionally, that remain at a site after the animal itself has left. These odours may be exploited by other species as social information, and thus have a significant role in structuring species interactions, even where the species involved rarely interact directly. Here we show that three species of Australian social Stingless Bees (Meliponini) not only detect the odours left behind by conspecifics, but also those of an abundant introduced competitor, the honey bee Apis mellifera (Apini). Foraging Bees deposit pheromones that assist nestmates in locating profitable food sources (signals) and/or involuntary olfactory “footprints” (cues), both of which are vulnerable to exploitation by the foragers of other colonies. Using choice trials, we find that foragers of Tetragonula carbonaria, Tetragonula clypearis and Austroplebeia australis were more attracted to feeders recently used by, and thus carrying the odours of, their own species (both nestmates and non-nestmates) or honey Bees, than to clean unused feeders. Australia’s Stingless Bees may learn to associate honey bee odours with food and exploit this to their advantage, or they may mistake honey bee odours for some other attractant and be misdirected. Our results suggest that introduced social insects could have a previously overlooked impact on resident communities, by modifying the olfactory landscape of shared resources in ways that alter native species’ foraging behaviour.
-
phloroglucinols from anti microbial deposit resins of australian Stingless Bees tetragonula carbonaria
Phytotherapy Research, 2015Co-Authors: Flavia C Massaro, Tim A Heard, Sara D. Leonhardt, Helen M. Wallace, Thomas J Smyth, Franklin W Smyth, Mohammad Katouli, P M BrooksAbstract:Stingless Bees accumulate deposits of plant resins that are mixed with Beeswax to produce propolis. Previous studies have reported anti-microbial constituents of Stingless bee (Tetragonula carbonaria) propolis from East Australia, but several components remained to be characterized. In the search of natural products yet unreported for Australian propolis, four bee deposit-resins of T. carbonaria Bees were analysed by gas and liquid chromatography mass spectrometry with accurate mass measurements. Ethanolic extracts of the deposit-resins were tested in vitro against Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25983 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853 by the agar diffusion method. Phloroglucinols, flavonoids and isoprenoids were identified in samples. The crude extracts showed strong anti-staphylococcal effects but were less active against the Gram-negative bacterium. The diagnostic data enabled the identification of markers that can be used for profiling other Australian propolis sources and to target the isolation of bioactive phloroglucinols in future studies against antibiotic resistant S. aureus strains. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-
the role of Stingless Bees in crop pollination
Annual Review of Entomology, 1999Co-Authors: Tim A HeardAbstract:▪ Abstract Stingless Bees (Apidae: Meliponini) are common visitors to flowering plants in the tropics, but evidence for their importance and effectiveness as crop pollinators is lacking for most plant species. They are known to visit the flowers of ∼90 crop species. They were confirmed to be effective and important pollinators of 9 species. They may make a contribution to the pollination of ∼60 other species, but there is insufficient information to determine their overall effectiveness or importance. They have been recorded from another 20 crops, but other evidence suggests that they do not have an important role because these plants are pollinated by other means. The strengths and limitations of Stingless Bees as crop pollinators are discussed. Aspects of their biology that impact on their potential for crop pollination are reviewed, including generalized flower visiting behavior of colonies, floral constancy of individual Bees, flight range, and the importance of natural vegetation for maintaining loca...
-
the role of Stingless Bees in crop pollination
Annual Review of Entomology, 1999Co-Authors: Tim A HeardAbstract:Stingless Bees (Apidae: Meliponini) are common visitors to flowering plants in the tropics, but evidence for their importance and effectiveness as crop pollinators is lacking for most plant species. They are known to visit the flowers of approximately 90 crop species. They were confirmed to be effective and important pollinators of 9 species. They may make a contribution to the pollination of approximately 60 other species, but there is insufficient information to determine their overall effectiveness or importance. They have been recorded from another 20 crops, but other evidence suggests that they do not have an important role because these plants are pollinated by other means. The strengths and limitations of Stingless Bees as crop pollinators are discussed. Aspects of their biology that impact on their potential for crop pollination are reviewed, including generalized flower visiting behavior of colonies, floral constancy of individual Bees, flight range, and the importance of natural vegetation for maintaining local populations.
Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the economic and cultural values of Stingless Bees hymenoptera meliponini among ethnic groups of tropical america
Sociobiology, 2018Co-Authors: Jose Javier G Quezadaeuan, David W. Roubik, Guiomar Natesparra, M M Maues, Vera Lucia ImperatrizfonsecaAbstract:Stingless honey Bees— commonly known as Stingless Bees— have long provided food and materials to the inhabitants of tropical America. We conducted a literature search to codify available information, including non-peer reviewed ‘grey literature’, on the purported value of Stingless Bees to indigenous people. Among >400 species of Neotropical Stingless Bees several are widely used in beekeeping. Varied cultural and economic values are associated with their use, and in some cases husbandry, as a consequence of ongoing contact between people and these social insects. Adapting new species to husbandry is being attempted in many countries. The Bees remain culturally important, and beliefs associated with them are significant for different groups, beyond utilization as commodities. We find values in food, craft, religion and medicine, with cultural values ranging from utilitarian to mythological. Values transmitted across generations allow cohesion and communal identity of native organisms associated with any indigenous society. Such cultural values seem in danger of extinction, primarily due to external factors. We provide examples of successful regional strategies in averting cultural and economic loss in natural human heritage, in this case Bees that provide honey and other benefits. Preserving Stingless Bees and the cultural heritage around them provides a good example on how the sustainable use of native species can help in the development of indigenous communities. Bees are important agents for conservation of the environment.
-
Stingless Bees melipona subnitida adjust brood production rather than foraging activity in response to changes in pollen stores
Journal of Comparative Physiology A-neuroethology Sensory Neural and Behavioral Physiology, 2016Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca, Camila Maiasilva, Dirk Louis P SchorkopfAbstract:Highly eusocial Bees (honey Bees and Stingless Bees) sustain their colonies through periods of resource scarcity by food stored within the nest. The protein supply necessary for successful brood production is ensured through adjustments of the colonies’ pollen foraging according to the availability of this resource in the environment. In honey Bees Apis mellifera, in addition, pollen foraging is regulated through the broods’ demand for this resource. Here, we investigated the influence of the colony’s pollen store level on pollen foraging and brood production in Stingless Bees (Melipona subnitida). When pollen was added to the nests, colonies increased their brood production and reduced their pollen foraging within 24 h. On the other hand, when pollen reserves were removed, colonies significantly reduced their brood production. In strong contrast to A. mellifera; however, M. subnitida did not significantly increase its pollen foraging activity under poor pollen store conditions. This difference concerning the regulation of pollen foraging may be due to differences regarding the mechanism of brood provisioning. Honey Bees progressively feed young larvae and, consequently, require a constant pollen supply. Stingless Bees, by contrast, mass-provision their brood cells and temporary absence of pollen storage will not immediately result in substantial brood loss.
-
comparative study in Stingless Bees meliponini demonstrates that nest entrance size predicts traffic and defensivity
Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 2008Co-Authors: Margaret J Couvillon, Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca, Paulo Nogueiraneto, Tom Wenseleers, Francis L W RatnieksAbstract:Stingless Bees (Meliponini) construct their own species-specific nest entrance. The size of this entrance is under conflicting selective pressures. Smaller entrances are easier to defend; however, a larger entrance accommodates heavier forager traffic. Using a comparative approach with 26 species of Stingless Bees, we show that species with greater foraging traffic have significantly larger entrances. Such a strong correlation between relative entrance area and traffic across the different species strongly suggests a trade-off between traffic and security. Additionally, we report on a significant trend for higher forager traffic to be associated with more guards and for those guards to be more aggressive. Finally, we discuss the nest entrance of Partamona, known in Brazil as boca de sapo, or toad mouth, which has a wide outer entrance but a narrow inner entrance. This extraordinary design allows these Bees to finesse the defensivity/traffic trade-off.
-
the males of melipona and other Stingless Bees and their mothers
Apidologie, 2005Co-Authors: H H W Velthuis, Dirk Koedam, Vera Lucia ImperatrizfonsecaAbstract:Female behaviour in social Hymenoptera and the queen-worker conflict with respect to male production have been the focus of many studies. Although male production is an investment that is in conflict with investment in colony size, males play a vital role in colony reproduction. This paper reviews the production patterns of male Stingless Bees, their activities once they have reached adulthood and their origin (i.e., are they sons of workers or of queens). The existence of a broad spectrum of species-specific patterns of male production, sex ratios, and male parentage offers ample opportunities to discuss the influence of ecology on the dynamics of Stingless bee colony life. The paper also argues that selfishness causes the queen and the workers to compete and each to adopt certain strategies in their effort to produce male progeny. It is this competition, expressed in various forms during the characteristic and socially complex process of cell provisioning and oviposition, that could help explain the variable outcomes of male parentage at the species level as we currently know them. Stingless bee male / sex ratio / life history / male aggregation / queen-worker conflict / provisioning and oviposition process
-
male production in Stingless Bees variable outcomes of queen worker conflict
Molecular Ecology, 2002Co-Authors: E. Tóth, Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca, Joan E. Strassmann, Paulo Nogueiraneto, David C. QuellerAbstract:The genetic structure of social insect colonies is predicted to affect the balance between cooperation and conflict. Stingless Bees are of special interest in this respect because they are singly mated relatives of the multiply mated honeyBees. Multiple mating is predicted to lead to workers policing each others’ male production with the result that virtually all males are produced by the queen, and this prediction is borne out in honey Bees. Single mating by the queen, as in Stingless Bees, causes workers to be more related to each others’ sons than to the queen’s sons, so they should not police each other. We used microsatellite markers to confirm single mating in eight species of Stingless Bees and then tested the prediction that workers would produce males. Using a likelihood method, we found some worker male production in six of the eight species, although queens produced some males in all of them. Thus the predicted contrast with honeyBees is observed, but not perfectly, perhaps because workers either lack complete control or because of costs of conflict. The data are consistent with the view that there is ongoing conflict over male production. Our method of estimating worker male production appears to be more accurate than exclusion, which sometimes underestimates the proportion of males that are worker produced.
Camila Maiasilva - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Stingless Bees melipona subnitida adjust brood production rather than foraging activity in response to changes in pollen stores
Journal of Comparative Physiology A-neuroethology Sensory Neural and Behavioral Physiology, 2016Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Vera Lucia Imperatrizfonseca, Camila Maiasilva, Dirk Louis P SchorkopfAbstract:Highly eusocial Bees (honey Bees and Stingless Bees) sustain their colonies through periods of resource scarcity by food stored within the nest. The protein supply necessary for successful brood production is ensured through adjustments of the colonies’ pollen foraging according to the availability of this resource in the environment. In honey Bees Apis mellifera, in addition, pollen foraging is regulated through the broods’ demand for this resource. Here, we investigated the influence of the colony’s pollen store level on pollen foraging and brood production in Stingless Bees (Melipona subnitida). When pollen was added to the nests, colonies increased their brood production and reduced their pollen foraging within 24 h. On the other hand, when pollen reserves were removed, colonies significantly reduced their brood production. In strong contrast to A. mellifera; however, M. subnitida did not significantly increase its pollen foraging activity under poor pollen store conditions. This difference concerning the regulation of pollen foraging may be due to differences regarding the mechanism of brood provisioning. Honey Bees progressively feed young larvae and, consequently, require a constant pollen supply. Stingless Bees, by contrast, mass-provision their brood cells and temporary absence of pollen storage will not immediately result in substantial brood loss.
Stefan Jarau - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Stingless Bees (Meliponini): senses and behavior
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 2016Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Stefan Jarau, Friedrich G BarthAbstract:Stingless Bees (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponini) are by far the largest group of eusocial Bees on Earth. Due to the diversity of evolutionary responses to specific ecological challenges, the Meliponini are well suited for comparative studies of the various adaptations to the environment found in highly eusocial Bees. Of particular interest are the physiological mechanisms underlying the sophisticated cooperative and collective actions of entire colonies, which form the basis of the ecological success of the different bee species under the particular conditions prevailing in their respective environment. The present Special Issue of the Journal of Comparative Physiology A provides a sample of the exciting diversity of sensorial and behavioral adaptations in Stingless Bees, particularly concerning (1) the sensory bases for foraging, (2) chemical communication, and (3) the behavioral ecology of foraging.
-
learnt information in species specific trail pheromone communication in Stingless Bees
Animal Behaviour, 2013Co-Authors: Christian Reichle, Ingrid Aguilar, Manfred Ayasse, Robert Twele, Wittko Francke, Stefan JarauAbstract:Specificity in biological signalling systems is often important to keep information private. Foragers of several species of Stingless Bees deposit chemical marking signals to guide nestmates to food sources. The markings show species- and colony-specific compositions and primarily attract a bee's nestmates. An interesting question is whether the Bees innately recognize specific trail markings or learn their particular composition from nestmates. To investigate this question, we tested whether Scaptotrigona pectoralis and Scaptotrigona subobscuripennis workers taken from their mother colonies and workers that emerged from combs transferred to foster colonies of the congeneric species are attracted to the marking compounds of workers from their natal colony or from the foster colony. A significant majority of workers were attracted to extracts prepared from foragers of the nest they inhabited, regardless of whether this was the original mother or the congeneric foster colony. Thus, the preference of Stingless bee workers for specific food-marking scent mixtures is not innate, but is influenced by the odour they experience within their colony. Despite marked differences in the chemical composition of the scent marks in labial gland secretions of the two investigated species they also shared some main components. We hypothesize that recruitment trail information in Stingless Bees is composed of one or a few key pheromone compounds acting in conjunction with an additional signature mixture that is species and colony specific and must be learnt by recruited workers.
-
Signals and cues in the recruitment behavior of Stingless Bees (Meliponini)
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 2008Co-Authors: Friedrich G Barth, Michael Hrncir, Stefan JarauAbstract:Since the seminal work of Lindauer and Kerr ( 1958 ), many Stingless Bees have been known to effectively recruit nestmates to food sources. Recent research clarified properties of several signals and cues used by Stingless Bees when exploiting food sources. Thus, the main source of the trail pheromone in Trigona are the labial, not however the mandibular glands. In T. recursa and T. spinipes , the first Stingless bee trail pheromones were identified as hexyl decanoate and octyl decanoate, respectively. The attractant footprints left by foragers at the food source are secreted by glandular epithelia of the claw retractor tendon, not however by the tarsal gland. Regarding intranidal communication, the correlation between a forager’s jostling rate and recruitment success stresses the importance of agitated running and jostling. There is no evidence for a “dance” indicating food source location, however, whereas the jostling rate depends on food quality. Thoracic vibrations, another intranidal signal well known in Melipona , were analyzed using modern technology and distinguishing substrate vibrations from airborne sound. Quantitative data now permit estimates of signal and potential communication ranges. Airflow jets as described for the honeybee were not found, and thoracic vibrations do not “symbolically” encode visually measured distance in M. seminigra .
-
effectiveness of recruitment behavior in Stingless Bees apidae meliponini
Insectes Sociaux, 2003Co-Authors: Stefan Jarau, Ronaldo Zucchi, Michael Hrncir, Veronika M Schmidt, Friedrich G BarthAbstract:We examined the ability of Stingless Bees to recruit nest mates to a food source (i) in group foraging species laying pheromone trails from the food to the nest (Trigona recursa Smith, T. hypogea Silvestri, Scaptotrigona depilis Moure), (ii) in solitary foraging species with possible but still doubtful communication of food location inside the nest (Melipona seminigra Friese, M. favosa orbignyi Guerin), and (iii) in species with a less precise (Nannotrigona testaceicornis Lep., Tetragona clavipes Fab.) or no communication (Frieseomelitta varia Lep.). The Bees were allowed to collect food (sugar solution or liver in the necrophageous species) ad libitum and the forager number to accumulate, as it would do under normal unrestrained conditions. The median number of Bees collecting differed considerably among the species (1.0–1436.5). It was highest in the species employing scent trails. The time course of recruitment was characteristic for most of the species and largely independent of the number of foragers involved. The two Melipona species recruited other Bees significantly faster than T. recursa, S. depilis, and N. testaceicornis during the first 10 to 30 minutes of an experiment. In species laying a scent trail to guide nestmates to a food source the first recruits appeared with a delay of several minutes followed by a quick increase in forager number. The median time required to recruit all foragers available differed among the species between 95.0 and 240.0 min. These differences can at least partly be explained by differences in the recruitment mechanisms and do not simply follow from differences in colony biomass.
-
recruitment behavior in Stingless Bees melipona scutellaris and m quadrifasciata ii possible mechanisms of communication
Apidologie, 2000Co-Authors: Michael Hrncir, Stefan Jarau, Ronaldo Zucchi, Friedrich G BarthAbstract:To find out what foragers of the Stingless Bees Melipona scutellarisand M. quadrifasci- ata actually do while recruiting nestmates to a food source we videotaped their behavior in the nest and simultaneously recorded the sounds and vibrations produced by them when returning from a rich food source. Neither temporal nor spectral characteristics of the sounds and vibrations correlated significantly with distance or direction to the food. Foragers motivated recruits to search for food at random by a " jostling run". The number of jostles by a forager correlates with the number of collecting Bees. There was no correlation between the movements of a returning forager and either distance or direction to the feeder. "Zigzag flights", guiding flights and scent marking of foragers were excluded as a way to communicate the location of the food source. Aside from the indication of the mere existence of a food source the mechanisms by which foragers communicate its location are still obscure. Stingless bee / recruitment / mechanisms of communication / Melipona species / vibratory signaling
