Temporal variation in homing ability of the neotropical stingless bee Scaptotrigona aff. postica (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini)

Abstract

Body size is a known predictor of foraging distance in stingless bees (Apidae: Meliponini). However, effects of seasonality on foraging distances, particularly in tropical regions, are poorly understood. Here, we use translocation ('homing') experiments, the release of marked individuals at various distances from the nest, to investigate how homing abilities of the Neotropical stingless bee, Scaptotrigona aff. postica differ across the transition between wet and dry seasons (February-August) in a heterogenous tropical landscape in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. We also determined nectar sugar concentrations of unmanipulated returning foragers to assess temporal changes in collected resource quality. Maximum and typical homing distances (i.e. distances where 90% and 50% of released bees are lost) were estimated to be 860 and 392 m, respectively, confirming that while some individuals travel long distances, most workers must remain close to nests during foraging trips. Homing distances and collected nectar sugar concentrations showed inverse temporal patterns, as homing range declined in later months (May to August), whereas nectar sugar concentrations increased over the same period. Thus, shorter homing distances in later 'dry season' months probably reflected an increased availability of floral resources compared with earlier months. Together, our findings highlight the limited spatial extent of foraging activities in S. aff. postica workers, and that bee homing distances vary with environmental conditions. These results provide useful information for both stingless bee colony management and conservation in humid tropical regions.

Radiofrequency identification (RFID) reveals long-distance flight and homing abilities of the stingless bee Melipona fasciculata

“…Therefore, spatially explicit models for bee conservation and crop pollination services based on such data may be severely underestimating flight distance and dispersal capacity in stingless bees. As expected, there was a decrease in bee return rate with release distance and an increase on the duration of return (Table II), as observed for other bee species (Guédot et al 2009;Rodrigues and Ribeiro 2014;Silva et al 2014;Smith et al 2017;Campbell et al 2019). However, we found great variability in the return time of the foragers (Table II).…”

“…Consequently, more studies are needed to evaluate the relationship between the homing ability of Melipona and actual flight distances to determine their foraging range and habitat requirements. Bee foraging distances are also influenced by spatio-temporal variability in resource availability due to seasonal changes and surrounding landscape structure (Steffan-Dewenter and Kuhn 2003;Couvillon et al 2014;Campbell et al 2019). Accordingly, foraging distances and habitat area are not species-specific traits, and smaller homing distances may be recorded in unfamiliar (i.e., unexploited) habitats (Van Nieuwstadt and Iraheta 1996;Guédot et al 2009).…”

“…Most studies use bee homing ability as a proxy of flight distance, as a common method involving displacing bees from the hive (translocation), rather than actual observations of foraging activities (Janzen 1971;Roubik and Aluja 1983;van Nieuwstadt and Iraheta 1996;Menzel et al 1998;Gathmann and Tscharntke 2002;Guédot et al 2009;Rodrigues and Ribeiro 2014;Leonhardt et al 2016;Campbell et al 2019). Translocation experiments are time-consuming, because the observer needs to monitor the nest until a marked individual returns, and in the case of social bees, several foragers can return at the same time, meaning it is possible that the observer loses track of marked foragers returning to the hive.…”

A dataset of multi-functional ecological traits of Brazilian bees

“…The estimation of the flight distance of each bee species was calculated from the ITD measurement and taxonomic www.nature.com/scientificdata www.nature.com/scientificdata/ position using equations presented in 27 . Flight range estimations were based on models generated from previous on-site experiments for both social 43,44 and solitary bees 45,46 . Recorded flight range experiments used two standard methodologies: (1) the release of marked bees at known distances from their nests and their recapture at the nest entrance (homing distance), considering the maximum homing distance (mhd -90% return rate) and typical homing distance (thd -50% return rate) and (2) feeder training techniques, which record the maximum energetically profitable foraging distance for a bee to forage at an artificial feeder (maximum foraging distancemfd) and the distance to which bees stop recruiting nest mates to an artificial feeder (maximum communication distance -mcd) 26 .…”

RFID-tagged amazonian stingless bees confirm that landscape configuration and nest re-establishment time affect homing ability

“…Apis mellifera, for example, shows different homing abilities when released in different directions, demonstrating that the area of activity is not circular but rather is motivated by landscape elements, which allow them to learn the landscape (Pahl et al 2011). Another component is resource availability (Campbell et al 2019;Garbuzov and Ratnieks 2014;Southwick and Buchmann 1995). Thus, because the return rate was higher for the bees released in the direction of the forest (south side) than for bees released at the same distance in the mining area, we conclude that the landscape has an effect on the flight capacity of M. seminigra, as observed in other bee species.…”