The loci of olfactory end‐organs in the honey‐bee, Apis mellifera Linn

Frings, Hubert

doi:10.1002/jez.1400970203

Cited by 79 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But, he also observed that the bees still presented some ability to find the odor they had been trained for, when three quarters or less of one antennal segment were maintained. These observations were also confirmed by Frings (1944) and Ribbands (1955) in independent experiments.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Antennal malformations in light ocelli drones of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera, Apidae)

Chaud-Netto

2000

Rev. Bras. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Malformed antennae of Apis mellifera light ocelli drones were drawn, dissected and mounted permanently on slides containing Canada balsam, in order to count the olfactory discs present in each segment, in comparison with the number of those structures in normal antennae of their brothers. Some drones presented morphological abnormalities in a single segment of the right or left antenna, but others had two or more malformed segments in a same antenna. Drones with malformations in both antennae were also observed. The 4 th and 5 th flagellum segments were the most frequently affected. In a low number of cases the frequency of olfactory discs in malformed segments did not differ from that one recorded for normal segments. However, in most cases studied, the antennal malformations brought about a significant reduction in the number of olfactory discs from malformed segments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Antennal malformations in light ocelli drones of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera, Apidae)

Chaud-Netto

2000

Rev. Bras. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, as shown by the experiment with small color marks, a single color is also not sufficient to code for locating a feeding place. In contrast to colors, in the classical PER conditioning bees learn to associate odors with sucrose solution after a single conditioning trial (Bitterman et a!., 1983;Frings, 1944;Takeda, 1957Takeda, , 1961. According to the results described above, such direct associations between odor and sucrose reward also seem to be a component of natural foraging behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Matching behavior of honeybees in a multiple-choice situation: The differential effect of environmental stimuli on the choice process

Greggers

Mauelshagen

1997

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The matching behavior of honeybees in a patch of four artificial feeders was studied under two different environmental conditions in order to examine the involvement of different stimuli in the choice process. Matching fails if all nearby landmarks are removed but can, under certain conditions, be restored by subsequently introducing odors, colors, or landmarks showing that there is no unique stimulus modality that provides matching. We propose two fundamentally different memory processes, both of which affect feeding behavior and support matching. Wesuggest that in one case, the probability of choice is determined by the strength of direct associations between locally perceived odor stimuli and reward rates. In the second case, simultaneously perceived color stimuli predict the relative reward rates indirectly by the spatial representation of the four feeders. Both memory processes are likely to interact and lead to efficient feeding behavior during foraging under natural conditions. Foraging honeybees exhibit a great variety ofbehaviors, which have interested researchers for almost a century (Bitterman, 1988;Gould, 1984;Lindauer, 1963;Menzel, 1990;Opfinger, 1931;Seeley, 1989;von Frisch, 1967). Although the literature on foraging is strongly influenced by ultimate arguments and revolves around optimality criteria (Cheverton, Kacelnik, & Krebs, 1985;Kacelnik, Houston, & Schmid-Hempel, 1986), it is well known that honeybees have phenomenal learning capabilities with respect to the location, efficiency, and production cycles (timing) of different food sources (von Frisch, 1967;Gould, 1984;Heinrich, 1985;Menzel, 1990). Thus an analysis of the proximate mechanisms in the natural setting is called for. Supporting the idea that honeybees make specific use oftheir learning capabilities during foraging, Greggers and Menzel (1993) recently showed that honeybees foraging in a patch of four artificial feeding sites (feeders) matched their choice frequencies to the relative reward rates of the feeders-that is, they visited the higher rewarding feeders more frequently than the lower rewarding feeders. This applied to both "stay" flights (the bee revisits the feeder just visited) and "shift" flights (the bee chooses one ofthe three alternative feeders). Matching was first described by Herrnstein (1961) and refers to an appetitive choice behavior produced by concurrent reinforcement schedules of at least two alternatives. If the animal matches, the response rates to the We are thankful to the referees for providing many constructive criticisms. We thank T. 1. Carew, S. Fisher, M. Hammer, and R. Menzel for valuable commentary and criticism on earlier versions of the manuscript and A. Carney for essential help in preparing the English manuscript. Correspondence should be addressed to U. Greggers, Institut fur Neurobiologie, Freie Universitiit Berlin, Konigin-Luise-Str. 28-30, Berlin, Germany (e-mail: greggers@neuro.biologie.fu-berlin.de).alternatives reflect their relative reward rates (Herrnstein, 1961) or the relative amount o...

show abstract

“…The PER had thus been detected in bees (Frings 1944;Frings and Frings 1949), flies (Minnich 1926), and butterflies (Minnich 1921), among others.…”

Section: The Originsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Invertebrate learning and memory: Fifty years of olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response in honeybees

Giurfa

Sandoz²

2012

Learn. Mem.

353

334

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The honeybee Apis mellifera has emerged as a robust and influential model for the study of classical conditioning, thanks to the existence of a powerful Pavlovian conditioning protocol, the olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER). In 2011, the olfactory PER conditioning protocol celebrates 50 years since it was first introduced by Kimihisa Takeda in 1961. Here, we review its origins, developments, and perspectives in order to define future research avenues and necessary methodological and conceptual evolutions. We show that olfactory PER conditioning has become a versatile tool for the study of questions in extremely diverse fields in addition to the study of learning and memory and that it has allowed behavioral characterizations, not only of honeybees, but also of other insect species, for which the protocol was adapted. We celebrate, therefore, Takeda's original work and prompt colleagues to conceive and establish further robust behavioral tools for an accurate characterization of insect learning and memory at multiple levels of analysis.Classical conditioning (Pavlov 1927) is a form of conditioning in which a subject learns to associate a neutral stimulus (the "conditioned stimulus," or CS), which does not originally elicit a behavioral response, with a stimulus of biological significance (the "unconditioned stimulus," or US), which elicits an innate, often reflexive, response. Through this association, the originally neutral stimulus acquires the capacity to elicit a conditioned response.Decades of research on animal learning and memory have established some invertebrates (e.g., the sea hare, Aplysia californica, the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, the honeybee, Apis mellifera) as standard models for the study of classical conditioning (Giurfa 2007b;Menzel et al. 2007). This success can be attributed to the fact that these animals can learn nonassociative as well as Pavlovian and operant associations and possess relatively simple nervous systems that allow retracing of these phenomena to the cellular and molecular levels in different kinds of laboratory preparations. Among these invertebrates, the honeybee, Apis mellifera, has emerged as a robust and influential model for the study of

show abstract

The loci of olfactory end‐organs in the honey‐bee, Apis mellifera Linn

Cited by 79 publications

References 7 publications

Antennal malformations in light ocelli drones of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera, Apidae)

Antennal malformations in light ocelli drones of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera, Apidae)

Matching behavior of honeybees in a multiple-choice situation: The differential effect of environmental stimuli on the choice process

Invertebrate learning and memory: Fifty years of olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response in honeybees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About