Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous Abstract"Galacto-oligosaccharides supplementation in prefrail older and healthy adults increased faecal bifidobacteria, but did not impact immune function and oxidative stress"    Next AbstractBumblebees require visual pollen stimuli to initiate and multimodal stimuli to complete a full behavioral sequence in close-range flower orientation »

Naturwissenschaften


Title:Foraging scent marks of bumblebees: footprint cues rather than pheromone signals
Author(s):Wilms J; Eltz T;
Address:"Department of Neurobiology, Sensory Ecology Group, University of Dusseldorf, Universitatsstr. 1, 40225 Dusseldorf, Germany"
Journal Title:Naturwissenschaften
Year:2008
Volume:20070828
Issue:2
Page Number:149 - 153
DOI: 10.1007/s00114-007-0298-z
ISSN/ISBN:0028-1042 (Print) 0028-1042 (Linking)
Abstract:"In their natural habitat foraging bumblebees refuse to land on and probe flowers that have been recently visited (and depleted) by themselves, conspecifics or other bees, which increases their overall rate of nectar intake. This avoidance is often based on recognition of scent marks deposited by previous visitors. While the term 'scent mark' implies active labelling, it is an open question whether the repellent chemicals are pheromones actively and specifically released during flower visits, or mere footprints deposited unspecifically wherever bees walk. To distinguish between the two possibilities, we presented worker bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) with three types of feeders in a laboratory experiment: unvisited control feeders, passive feeders with a corolla that the bee had walked over on its way from the nest (with unspecific footprints), and active feeders, which the bee had just visited and depleted, but which were immediately refilled with sugar-water (potentially with specific scent marks). Bumblebees rejected both active and passive feeders more frequently than unvisited controls. The rate of rejection of passive feeders was only slightly lower than that of active feeders, and this difference vanished completely when passive corollas were walked over repeatedly on the way from the nest. Thus, mere footprints were sufficient to emulate the repellent effect of an actual feeder visit. In confirmation, glass slides on which bumblebees had walked on near the nest entrance accumulated hydrocarbons (alkanes and alkenes, C23 to C31), which had previously been shown to elicit repellency in flower choice experiments. We conclude that repellent scent marks are mere footprints, which foraging bees avoid when they encounter them in a foraging context"
Keywords:Animals Bees/*physiology *Cues *Feeding Behavior Hydrocarbons Odorants Pheromones/*physiology Reward;
Notes:"MedlineWilms, Jessica Eltz, Thomas eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Germany 2007/08/29 Naturwissenschaften. 2008 Feb; 95(2):149-53. doi: 10.1007/s00114-007-0298-z. Epub 2007 Aug 28"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 21-11-2024