Recall of flower handling skills by bumble bees: a test of Darwin's interference hypothesis
Fuente:
Zenodo
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Zenodo
1992
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866901038226735104 |
|---|---|
| author | Woodward, Graham L. Laverty, Terence M. |
| author_facet | Woodward, Graham L. Laverty, Terence M. |
| contents | (Uploaded by Plazi for the Bat Literature Project) Pollinators tend to visit flowers of one plant species repeatedly even when flowers of other rewarding plant species are available. Darwin proposed that such flower constancy occurs because flower handling methods learned on one plant species interfere with previously learned flower handling methods of other plant species. Darwin's interference hypothesis was tested by first allowing bumble bees, Bombus bimaculatus, to learn flower handling methods on one plant species (comfrey, Symphytum officinale), and then retesting the bees on comfrey after they had learned to handle flowers o f a second species (vetch, Vicia cracca). The same experiment was repeated with different bees and with the order of the plant species reversed. Interference effects were detected by comparing flower access times (time to insert tongue into the flower) during the retesting period with the initial flower access times. Bees relearning handling methods for comfrey returned to their initial access times after one flower visit; bees relearning handling methods for vetch took two flower visits. The interference effects detected were 0-8 s for comfrey (a 47% increase over initial access times) and 2.0 s for vetch (a 120% increase). These results indicate that learning to handle flowers of one plant species does interfere with remembering previously learned flower handling methods. However, interference effects resulting from switches between comfrey and vetch under biologically realistic conditions appear to be relatively small, and are unlikely to account fully for flower constancy by bumble bees. |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_13413038 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 1992 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Recall of flower handling skills by bumble bees: a test of Darwin's interference hypothesis Woodward, Graham L. Laverty, Terence M. Biodiversity Mammalia Chiroptera Chordata Animalia bats bat (Uploaded by Plazi for the Bat Literature Project) Pollinators tend to visit flowers of one plant species repeatedly even when flowers of other rewarding plant species are available. Darwin proposed that such flower constancy occurs because flower handling methods learned on one plant species interfere with previously learned flower handling methods of other plant species. Darwin's interference hypothesis was tested by first allowing bumble bees, Bombus bimaculatus, to learn flower handling methods on one plant species (comfrey, Symphytum officinale), and then retesting the bees on comfrey after they had learned to handle flowers o f a second species (vetch, Vicia cracca). The same experiment was repeated with different bees and with the order of the plant species reversed. Interference effects were detected by comparing flower access times (time to insert tongue into the flower) during the retesting period with the initial flower access times. Bees relearning handling methods for comfrey returned to their initial access times after one flower visit; bees relearning handling methods for vetch took two flower visits. The interference effects detected were 0-8 s for comfrey (a 47% increase over initial access times) and 2.0 s for vetch (a 120% increase). These results indicate that learning to handle flowers of one plant species does interfere with remembering previously learned flower handling methods. However, interference effects resulting from switches between comfrey and vetch under biologically realistic conditions appear to be relatively small, and are unlikely to account fully for flower constancy by bumble bees. |
| title | Recall of flower handling skills by bumble bees: a test of Darwin's interference hypothesis |
| topic | Biodiversity Mammalia Chiroptera Chordata Animalia bats bat |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13413038 |