Elemental and non-elemental olfactory learning using PER conditioning in the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris

Sommerlandt, Frank M. J.; Rößler, Wolfgang; Spaethe, Johannes

doi:10.1007/s13592-013-0227-4

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The learning performance in our study was at least 50% after six trials, with an average of more than 60% after 10 trials, which was as high as in the study of Sommerlandt et al (2014) and higher than in other studies with B. terrestris, where learning performances of only 20-30% were reported (Laloi et al, 1999;Laloi and Pham-Delegue, 2004). The performance differences between studies may be attributed to different experimental setups (e.g.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

“…The performance differences between studies may be attributed to different experimental setups (e.g. different periods of starvation or differences in the mounting procedure, see discussion in Sommerlandt et al, 2014). Learning performance did not differ between absolute and differential conditioning, indicating that bumblebees are able to learn the comparatively difficult task of concentration differences as well as they can associate an odor with a reward.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…After learning the CS-US association, an animal will extend its proboscis at the mere presentation of the CS (Bitterman et al, 1983;Matsumoto et al, 2012). Honeybees have primarily been used as a model organism for PER conditioning (Bitterman et al, 1983), but it has also been successfully applied to bumblebees (Laloi et al, 1999;Hannaford et al, 2013;Sommerlandt et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How to know which food is good for you: bumblebees use taste to discriminate between different concentrations of food differing in nutrient content

Ruedenauer

Spaethe

Leonhardt

2015

Journal of Experimental Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In view of the ongoing pollinator decline, the role of nutrition in bee health has received increasing attention. Bees obtain fat, carbohydrates and protein from pollen and nectar. As both excessive and deficient amounts of these macronutrients are detrimental, bees would benefit from assessing food quality to guarantee an optimal nutrient supply. While bees can detect sucrose and use it to assess nectar quality, it is unknown whether they can assess the macronutrient content of pollen. Previous studies have shown that bees preferentially collect pollen of higher protein content, suggesting that differences in pollen quality can be detected either by individual bees or via feedback from larvae. In this study, we examined whether and, if so, how individuals of the buff-tailed bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) discriminate between different concentrations of pollen and casein mixtures and thus nutrients. Bumblebees were trained using absolute and differential conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER). As cues related to nutrient concentration could theoretically be perceived by either smell or taste, bees were tested on both olfactory and, for the first time, chemotactile perception. Using olfactory cues, bumblebees learned and discriminated between different pollen types and casein, but were unable to discriminate between different concentrations of these substances. However, when they touched the substances with their antennae, using chemotactile cues, they could also discriminate between different concentrations. Bumblebees are therefore able to discriminate between foods of different concentrations using contact chemosensory perception (taste). This ability may enable them to individually regulate the nutrient intake of their colonies.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How to know which food is good for you: bumblebees use taste to discriminate between different concentrations of food differing in nutrient content

Ruedenauer

Spaethe

Leonhardt

2015

Journal of Experimental Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, the present study was the first especially designed to assess elemental stimulus control in operant discrimination in bees (but see Sommerlandt, Rösller, & Spaethe, 2014, for an example of elemental stimulus control under a Pavlovian paradigm with bumble bees), and our data are not very comparable to data from other studies. For example, Gould (1996) primarily examined how stimuli from different modalities (odor, color, and shape) gained priority in the control of responding and did not address the matter of RSC.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 73%

Assessing restricted stimulus control in typically developing preschool children and bees (Melipona quadrifasciata).

Moreno¹,

Varella²,

Canovas³

et al. 2014

Psychology & Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study established a simple simultaneous discrimination between a pair of two-element compound visual stimuli in children (Experiment 1) and bees (Melipona quadrifasciata, Experiment 2). The contingencies required discriminative control by the compound and the question was whether the accurate stimulus control reached at this level would hold for each individual element of the compound. After baseline reached stability, probe trials assessed stimulus control by each single element of both S+ and S-. Average data showed that children (Exp. 1) tended to show stimulus control by a single element of the S+ compound. In Experiment 2 three of four bees showed stimulus control by both elements of S+ and did not respond or responded only infrequently to the elements of the S-. The children's decline in discrimination accuracy in probe trials, along with its maintenance during the baseline, replicated previous findings showing the development of restricted stimulus control (RSC). The precise stimulus control shown by the bees indicated that all elements correlated with reinforcement acquired stimulus control over their behavior; this confirms the extensive literature on visual discriminative learning in bees, but due to the small number of subjects it is premature to say that bees do not develop RSC.

show abstract

“…They require the ability to establish configural associations: i.e., unique conjunctive representations of compound stimuli that can then be treated as different from the simple sum of their elements. Honey bees, like mammals, learn patterning discriminations using nonelemental strategies (32)(33)(34)46), a capacity that seems absent in other insect models of learning and memory (31,59). Prior work on patterning discriminations in bees focused on negative rather than on positive patterning (32-34) because elemental accounts exist for the latter but not for the former (32).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural substrate for higher-order learning in an insect: Mushroom bodies are necessary for configural discriminations

Devaud

Papouin

Carcaud

et al. 2015

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

120

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning theories distinguish elemental from configural learning based on their different complexity. Although the former relies on simple and unambiguous links between the learned events, the latter deals with ambiguous discriminations in which conjunctive representations of events are learned as being different from their elements. In mammals, configural learning is mediated by brain areas that are either dispensable or partially involved in elemental learning. We studied whether the insect brain follows the same principles and addressed this question in the honey bee, the only insect in which configural learning has been demonstrated. We used a combination of conditioning protocols, disruption of neural activity, and optophysiological recording of olfactory circuits in the bee brain to determine whether mushroom bodies (MBs), brain structures that are essential for memory storage and retrieval, are equally necessary for configural and elemental olfactory learning. We show that bees with anesthetized MBs distinguish odors and learn elemental olfactory discriminations but not configural ones, such as positive and negative patterning. Inhibition of GABAergic signaling in the MB calyces, but not in the lobes, impairs patterning discrimination, thus suggesting a requirement of GABAergic feedback neurons from the lobes to the calyces for nonelemental learning. These results uncover a previously unidentified role for MBs besides memory storage and retrieval: namely, their implication in the acquisition of ambiguous discrimination problems. Thus, in insects as in mammals, specific brain regions are recruited when the ambiguity of learning tasks increases, a fact that reveals similarities in the neural processes underlying the elucidation of ambiguous tasks across species.learning | configural learning | mushroom bodies | honey bee | Apis mellifera

show abstract

Elemental and non-elemental olfactory learning using PER conditioning in the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris

Cited by 38 publications

References 46 publications

How to know which food is good for you: bumblebees use taste to discriminate between different concentrations of food differing in nutrient content

How to know which food is good for you: bumblebees use taste to discriminate between different concentrations of food differing in nutrient content

Assessing restricted stimulus control in typically developing preschool children and bees (Melipona quadrifasciata).

Neural substrate for higher-order learning in an insect: Mushroom bodies are necessary for configural discriminations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About