Why are bumble bees risk-sensitive foragers? (original) (raw)
Summary
In a controlled laboratory experiment, we re-examined the question of bumble bee risk-sensitivity. Harder and Real's (1987) analysis of previous work on bumble bee risk aversion suggests that risk-sensitivity in these organisms is a result of their maximizing the net rate of energy return (calculated as the average of expected per flower rates). Whether bees are risk-sensitive foragers with respect to minimizing the probability of energetic shortfall is therefore still an open question. We examined how the foraging preferences of bumble bees for nectar reward variation were affected by colony energy reserves, which we manipulated by draining or adding sucrose solution to colony honey pots. Nine workers from four confined colonies of Bombus occidentalis foraged for sucrose solution in two patches of artificial flowers. These patches yielded the same expected rate of net energy intake, but floral volumes were variable in one patch and constant in the other. Our results show that bumble bees can be both risk-averse (preferring constant flowers) and risk-prone (preferring variable flowers), depending on the status of their colony energy reserves. Diet choice in bumble bees appears to be sensitive to the “target value” a colony-level energetic requirement.
Access this article
Subscribe and save
- Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
- Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
- Cancel anytime View plans
Buy Now
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
- Barnard CJ, Brown CAJ (1985) Risk-sensitive foraging in common shrews (Sorex araneus L.). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:161–164
Google Scholar - Caraco T (1981) Energy budgets, risk and foraging preferences in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:213–217
Google Scholar - Caraco T (1982) Aspects of risk-aversion in foraging white-crowned sparrows. Anim Behav 30:719–727
Google Scholar - Caraco T (1983) White-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys): foraging preferences in a risky environment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 12:63–69
Google Scholar - Caraco T, Chasin M (1984) Foraging preferences: response to reward skew. Anim Behav 32:76–85
Google Scholar - Caraco T, Lima SL (1985) Foraging juncos: interaction of reward mean and variability. Anim Behav 33:216–224
Google Scholar - Caraco T, Martindale S, Whittam TS (1980) An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim Behav 28:820–830
Google Scholar - Gillespie RG, Caraco T (1987) Risk-sensitive foraging strategies of two spider populations. Ecology 68:887–899
Google Scholar - Harder LD (1986) Effects of nectar concentration and flower depth on flower handling efficiency of bumble bees. Oecologia (Berlin) 69:309–315
Google Scholar - Harder LD, Real LA (1987) Why are bumble bees risk averse? Ecology 68:1104–1108
Google Scholar - Heinrich B (1975) Thermoregulation in bumblebees II. Energetics of warm-up and free flight. J Comp Physiol 96:155–166
Google Scholar - Houston Al, McNamara JM (1982) A sequential approach to risk-taking. Anim Behav 30:1260–1261
Google Scholar - Moore FE, Simm PA (1986) Risk-sensitive foraging by a migratory bird (Dendroica coronata). Experientia 42:1054–1056
Google Scholar - Oster GF, Wilson EO (1978) Caste and ecology in the social insects. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ
Google Scholar - Plowright RC, Laverty TM (1984) The ecology and sociobiology of bumble bees. Annu Rev Entomol 29:175–199
Google Scholar - Possingham HP, Houston AI, McNamara JM (MS) Risk-averse foraging in bees: a comment on the model of Harder and Real.
- Real LA (1981) Uncertainty and pollinator-plant interactions: the foraging behavior of bees and wasps on artificial flowers. Ecology 62:20–26
Google Scholar - Real LA, Caraco T (1986) Risk and foraging in stochastic environments: theory and evidence. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17:371–390
Google Scholar - Real LA, Ott J, Silverfine E (1982) On the tradeoff between the mean and the variance in foraging: effect of spatial distribution and color preference. Ecology 63:1617–1623
Google Scholar - SAS Institute Inc (1985) SAS User's Guide/ Statistics, Version 5 Edition. Cary, NC
- Sladen FWL (1912) The humble bee: its life history and how to domesticate it. MacMillan, London
Google Scholar - Stephens DW, Charnov EL (1982) Optimal foraging: some simple stochaistic models. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 10:251–263
Google Scholar - Stephens DW, Paton SR (1986) How constant is the constant of risk-aversion? Anim Behav 34:1659–1667
Google Scholar - Templeton AR, Lawlor LR (1981) The fallacy of averages in ecological optimization theory. Am Nat 117:390–393
Google Scholar
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
- Behavioural Ecology Research Group, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, V5A 1S6, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Ralph V. Cartar & Lawrence M. Dill
Authors
- Ralph V. Cartar
- Lawrence M. Dill
Additional information
Offprint requests to: R.V. Cartar
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cartar, R.V., Dill, L.M. Why are bumble bees risk-sensitive foragers?.Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26, 121–127 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00171581
- Received: 12 December 1988
- Accepted: 05 June 1989
- Issue date: February 1990
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00171581