1998
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.1998.tb00080.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long‐distance Homing Ability in Dasypoda altercator (Hymenoptera, Melittidae)

Abstract: L. 1998: Long-distance homing ability in Dusypodu alrercator (Hymenoptera, Melittidae). Ethology 104,421L429. AbstractHoming rates and initial orientations after release from different directions were investigated in the solitary bee Dasypodu ulrrrcator. Homing rates and the proportion of individuals returning on the day of release declined with distance, implying that homing from greater distances is not based solely on the use of landmarks. A long duration of return (often not on the same day) and high effic… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As resources become scarcer in the nest vicinity, they expand their foraging range ( Schneider & McNally, 1993;Steffan-Dewenter & Kuhn, 2003 ). This study shows that increasing the distance between the nest and the release location eventually led to a decrease in the proportion of O. lignaria females that returned to the nest, establishing the homing distance of O. lignaria females at 1200 m. Sudden drops in homing ability beyond a certain distance have been obtained with other bee species ( Rau, 1929;Roubik & Aluja, 1983;Abrol & Kapil, 1994;van Nieuwstadt & Ruano Iraheta, 1996;Chmurzy ń ski et al , 1998;Vicens & Bosch, 2000;Goulson & Stout, 2001 ). Osmia lignaria females spent more time returning to the nest when relocation distances were increased, which was consistent with previous studies on O. rufa and O. cornifrons ( Kitamura & Maeta, 1969;Gathmann & Tscharntke, 2002 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…As resources become scarcer in the nest vicinity, they expand their foraging range ( Schneider & McNally, 1993;Steffan-Dewenter & Kuhn, 2003 ). This study shows that increasing the distance between the nest and the release location eventually led to a decrease in the proportion of O. lignaria females that returned to the nest, establishing the homing distance of O. lignaria females at 1200 m. Sudden drops in homing ability beyond a certain distance have been obtained with other bee species ( Rau, 1929;Roubik & Aluja, 1983;Abrol & Kapil, 1994;van Nieuwstadt & Ruano Iraheta, 1996;Chmurzy ń ski et al , 1998;Vicens & Bosch, 2000;Goulson & Stout, 2001 ). Osmia lignaria females spent more time returning to the nest when relocation distances were increased, which was consistent with previous studies on O. rufa and O. cornifrons ( Kitamura & Maeta, 1969;Gathmann & Tscharntke, 2002 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Homing after displacement to unfamiliar regions has been investigated in various hymenopterans such as solitary sphecid wasps, Cerceris tuberculata [15] , [16] and Cerceris hortivaga [17] , social wasps, Polistes gallicus [18] and Vespa orientalis [19] , solitary bees, Dasypoda altercator and Osmia sp. [20] , [21] , the social bees Bombus terrestris [22] and Apis mellifera [23] , [24] , [25] , and several ant species (reviewed in [26] ) for more than a century. Homing success in flying hymenopterans usually declines with increasing displacement distance, but the rate of decline is quite different between species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike the sterile workers of honeybees and stingless bees, who have no option of starting their own new nests and who have no danger of losing their status on their nests, R. marginata foragers are capable of initiating their own nests (Gadagkar 2001) and are also susceptible to losing their status on their nests (Bang and Gadagkar 2012). This may account for why these wasps do not return from as large distances as many of the bee workers do (Chmurzyński et al 1998;Goulson and Stout 2001;Pahl et al 2011;Roubik and Aluja 1983;Visscher and Seeley 1982).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%