Are honey bees' foraging preferences affected by pollen amino acid composition?

Cook, S. M.; Awmack, C. S.; Murray, D. A.; Williams, I. H.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2311.2003.00548.x

Cited by 211 publications

(194 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

181

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the importance of P:L ratios, other components in pollen, such as micronutrients or individual amino or fatty acids, may still influence bee foraging decisions (45)(46)(47). Indeed, pollenkitt, which includes free fatty and amino acids that vary among pollen species, is critical for pollen recognition and phagostimulation (34-36, 48, 49).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Macronutrient ratios in pollen shape bumble bee ( Bombus impatiens ) foraging strategies and floral preferences

Vaudo

Patch

Mortensen

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

313

302

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To fuel their activities and rear their offspring, foraging bees must obtain a sufficient quality and quantity of nutritional resources from a diverse plant community. Pollen is the primary source of proteins and lipids for bees, and the concentrations of these nutrients in pollen can vary widely among host-plant species. Therefore we hypothesized that foraging decisions of bumble bees are driven by both the protein and lipid content of pollen. By successively reducing environmental and floral cues, we analyzed pollen-foraging preferences of Bombus impatiens in (i) host-plant species, (ii) pollen isolated from these hostplant species, and (iii) nutritionally modified single-source pollen diets encompassing a range of protein and lipid concentrations. In our semifield experiments, B. impatiens foragers exponentially increased their foraging rates of pollen from plant species with high protein: lipid (P:L) ratios; the most preferred plant species had the highest ratio (∼4.6:1). These preferences were confirmed in cage studies where, in pairwise comparisons in the absence of other floral cues, B. impatiens workers still preferred pollen with higher P:L ratios. Finally, when presented with nutritionally modified pollen, workers were most attracted to pollen with P:L ratios of 5:1 and 10:1, but increasing the protein or lipid concentration (while leaving ratios intact) reduced attraction. Thus, macronutritional ratios appear to be a primary factor driving bee pollen-foraging behavior and may explain observed patterns of host-plant visitation across the landscape. The nutritional quality of pollen resources should be taken into consideration when designing conservation habitats supporting bee populations.foraging behavior | nutritional ecology | pollen | pollinator | preferences F oraging animals must obtain appropriate nutrients for growth, development, and reproduction from their environments. Bees forage in a very complex and changing environment, where floral nutritional resources (nectar and pollen) vary widely in quality and quantity among plant species (1). These resources are accompanied by myriad floral cues, including floral odors, color, morphology, and display area, and can vary dramatically in spatiotemporal availability; all these factors may influence and reinforce foraging decisions (2, 3). Worldwide declines in populations of bees and other pollinators have been linked to reduced diversity and abundance of host-plant species, likely placing bees under nutritional stress (4, 5). To develop strategic conservation protocols that preserve or restore foraging habitat that supports healthy pollinator populations, we must understand how bees forage in their environments to meet their nutritional needs. It is well established that solitary and social insects can forage selectively and regulate their intake of synthetic diets spanning a range of macronutrient nutritional qualities to reach their optimal, species-specific nutritional intake (6-8). Here we examine whether the generalist bumble bee species Bombus...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Macronutrient ratios in pollen shape bumble bee ( Bombus impatiens ) foraging strategies and floral preferences

Vaudo

Patch

Mortensen

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

313

302

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the quality and quantity of nectar provided to honeybees and its accessibility. In the following discussion we will focus on nectar resource because it is involved in honey production and has economic implications even if pollen quality may also influence sunflower attractiveness (Cook et al, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here is presented a first step to investigate this potential using an original method based on the study of honeybee attendance during flowering period. Attendance, or the number of bee visits on the crop can be considered as an integrative parameter because social bees foraging preferences take in account nectar secretion and pollen quality and resource accessibility (Atlagić et al, 2003;Cook et al, 2003;Cnaani et al, 2006;Tepedino and Parker, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential attractiveness of sunflower cultivars to the honeybeeApis melliferaL.

Cerrutti

Pontet

2016

OCL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-In France, sunflower honey production has decreased since the nineties and professional beekeepers report important honey yield variability between years and locations. Consequently, melliferous potential of current sunflower cultivars is questioned as it is not part of traits held in breeding programs. To investigate this question, a 3-years study was conducted on two sites and attractiveness for honeybees of 13 current sunflower cultivars was assessed under natural conditions. The number of honeybee visits per plant was recorded daily during blooming period on cultivars randomly distributed on experimental plots. Sunflower genetic was a major factor influencing honeybee attendance on plots and discrepancy between most and least visited cultivars reached a factor of 3. Cultivars relative attractiveness was consistent between years and sites. Potential link between sunflower attractiveness for honeybees and its melliferous characteristics is discussed. If confirmed, farmers' choice concerning cultivars at a territory scale could contribute to enhance nectar resource for pollinators and to increase viability of apicultural activity.Keywords: Honeybee / attractiveness / sunflower / cultivar / nectar Résumé -Étude de l'attractivité de différents cultivars de tournesol pour l'abeille domestique Apis mellifera L. En France, la production de miel de tournesol est en diminution depuis les années 1990 et les apiculteurs professionnels rapportent une importante variabilité de rendements en miel entre les années et les sites. De ce fait, ils s'interrogent sur le potentiel mellifère des cultivars de tournesol actuels comme la production de nectar n'est pas prise en compte dans les programmes de sélection. Afin d'étudier cette question, une expérimentation de 3 ans a été conduite sur deux sites et l'attractivité pour les abeilles de 13 cultivars de tournesol évaluée en conditions naturelles. Le nombre de visites d'abeilles par plante a été enregistré quotidiennement pendant la période de floraison sur les variétés distribuées aléatoi-rement en placettes expérimentales. La génétique du tournesol s'est révélée être un facteur majeur expliquant le niveau de fréquentation des placettes et les écarts de fréquentation observés entre cultivars ont atteint un facteur de 3. Le niveau d'attractivité mesuré a été relativement constant entre les années et les sites expérimentaux. Le lien entre attractivité pour les abeilles et potentiel mellifère du tournesol est ici discuté. S'il se confirmait, les choix variétaux effectués à l'échelle du territoire par les agriculteurs pourraient contribuer à renforcer la ressource nectarifère disponible pour les pollinisateurs et à augmenter la viabilité de l'apiculture. Mots clés :Abeille mellifère / attractivité / tournesol / cultivar / nectar

show abstract

“…Honeybees are broad polylectic insects (Cane and Sipes, 2006) and several authors have showed their preferences to specific taxa (Boelter and Wilson, 1984;Page et al, 1995;Currie, 2001, 2002;Cook et al, 2003;Pankiw et al, 2002). Although honeybees collect pollen from a relative small number of taxa compared to the number of plants growing around the colony, they usually prefer to collect pollen from plants that are in large populations (Severson and Parry, 1981;Coffey and Breen, 1997;Andrada and Telleria, 2005;Dimou and Thrasyvoulou, 2007;Avni et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of phenological, aerobiological and melissopalynological patterns of Olea europaea

Dimou

2011

Apidologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-In the last few years, many studies have used airborne pollen to record the flowering season of plants. However, the airborne pollen found in traps does not always originate from or reflect the flowering period of the taxa from the studied surroundings. This study compared aerobiological, melissopalynological and flowering phenological data obtained from olive trees. The results of the study suggest that pollen loads collected by honeybees can be used as an alternative method to airborne pollen to record the flowering phenological phases and to provide accurate results.aerobiology / melissopalynology / phenology / pollen season / pollen loads / Apis mellifera

show abstract

Are honey bees' foraging preferences affected by pollen amino acid composition?

Cited by 211 publications

References 17 publications

Macronutrient ratios in pollen shape bumble bee ( Bombus impatiens ) foraging strategies and floral preferences

Macronutrient ratios in pollen shape bumble bee ( Bombus impatiens ) foraging strategies and floral preferences

Differential attractiveness of sunflower cultivars to the honeybeeApis melliferaL.

Comparison of phenological, aerobiological and melissopalynological patterns of Olea europaea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About