An automated system for tracking and identifying individual nectar foragers at multiple feeders

Nectar-feeding animals have served as the subjects of many experimental studies and theoretical models of foraging. Their willingness to visit artificial feeders renders many species amenable to controlled experiments using mechanical “flowers” that replenish nectar automatically. However, the structural complexity of such feeders and the lack of a device for tracking the movements of multiple individuals have limited our ability to ask some specific questions related to natural foraging contexts, especially in competitive situations. To overcome such difficulties, we developed an experimental system for producing computer records of multiple foragers harvesting from simple artificial flowers with known rates of nectar secretion, using radio frequency identification (RFID) tags to identify individual animals. By using infrared detectors (light-emitting diodes and phototransistors) to activate the RFID readers momentarily when needed, our system prevents the RFID chips from heating up and disturbing the foraging behavior of focal animals. To demonstrate these advantages, we performed a preliminary experiment with a captive colony of bumble bees, Bombus impatiens. In the experiment, two bees were tagged with RFID chips (2.5 × 2.5 mm, manufactured by Hitachi-Maxell, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) and allowed to forage on 16 artificial flowers arranged in a big flight cage. Using the resulting data set, we present details of how the bees increased their travel speed between flowers, while decreasing the average nectar crop per flower, as they gained experience. Our system provides a powerful tool to track the movement patterns, reward history, and long-term foraging performance of individual foragers at large spatial scales.

[1]  Sarah E. J. Arnold,et al.  Behavioural ecology: Bees associate warmth with floral colour , 2006, Nature.

[2]  Alison Leslie,et al.  Trapline foraging by bumble bees: V. Effects of experience and priority on competitive performance , 2008 .

[3]  Lars Chittka,et al.  Colony nutritional status modulates worker responses to foraging recruitment pheromone in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris , 2008, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[4]  L. Moffatt.  Metabolic rate and thermal stability during honeybee foraging at different reward rates. , 2001, The Journal of experimental biology.

[5]  L. Hartling,et al.  Foraging by bumble bees on patches of artificial flowers: a laboratory study , 1979 .

[6]  J C Stout,et al.  The influence of nectar secretion rates on the responses of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) to previously visited flowers , 2002, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[7]  P. Kevan.  Sun-Tracking Solar Furnaces in High Arctic Flowers: Significance for Pollination and Insects , 1975, Science.

[8]  C. R. White,et al.  Environmental biology: Heat reward for insect pollinators , 2003, Nature.

[9]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  The Distribution and Abundance of Resources Encountered by a Forager , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[10]  H. Possingham.  A Model of Resource Renewal and Depletion - Applications to the Distribution and Abundance of Nectar in Flowers , 1988 .

[11]  Flavio Roces,et al.  Assessment of nectar flow rate and memory for patch quality in the ant Camponotus rufipes , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[12]  W. Pflumm.  Rate of Supply of Sugar Solution and Behaviour of Collector Wasps (Paravespula germanica) , 2010 .

[13]  Daniel W. Engels,et al.  RFID Systems and Security and Privacy Implications , 2002, CHES.

[14]  Martin Giurfa.  Movement Patterns of Honeybee Foragers: Motivation and Decision Rules Dependent On the Rate of Reward , 1996 .

[15]  A. Bertsch,et al.  Foraging in male bumblebees (Bombus lucorum L.): maximizing energy or minimizing water load? , 1984, Oecologia.

[16]  Roy Want,et al.  The Magic of RFID , 2004, ACM Queue.

[17]  T. Keasar,et al.  Overnight memory retention of foraging skills by bumblebees is imperfect , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  R. Kadmon.  Dynamics of forager arrivals and nectar renewal in flowers of Anchusa strigosa , 1992, Oecologia.

[19]  S. Sakai,et al.  Experience changes pollinator responses to floral display size: from size‐based to reward‐based foraging , 2007 .

[20]  J. Tautz,et al.  Automatic life-long monitoring of individual insect behaviour now possible. , 2003, Zoology.

[21]  N. Isaac,et al.  Radio-Tagging Technology Reveals Extreme Nest-Drifting Behavior in a Eusocial Insect , 2007, Current Biology.

[22]  D. Papaj,et al.  Flower Choice and Learning in Foraging Bumblebees: Effects of Variation in Nectar Volume and Concentration , 2006 .

[23]  F. Gill,et al.  TRAPLINE FORAGING BY HERMIT HUMMINGBIRDS: COMPETITION FOR AN UNDEFENDED, RENEWABLE RESOURCE' , 1988 .

[24]  Neal M. Williams,et al.  Trapline foraging by bumble bees: III. Temporal patterns of visitation and foraging success at single plants , 1998 .

[25]  J. Thomson,et al.  Efficient harvesting of renewing resources , 2005 .

[26]  A. Dafni,et al.  Practical Pollination Biology , 1995 .

[27]  Paul Wilson,et al.  Dynamic nectar replenishment in flowers of Penstemon (Scrophulariaceae). , 2002, American journal of botany.

[28]  James D. Thomson,et al.  Trapline foraging by bumble bees: IV. Optimization of route geometry in the absence of competition , 2007 .

[29]  T. O. Richardson,et al.  Radio tagging reveals the roles of corpulence, experience and social information in ant decision making , 2009, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.