Why are bumble bees risk-sensitive foragers?

SummaryIn a controlled laboratory experiment, we re-examined the question of bumble bee risk-sensitivity. Harder and Real's (1987) analysis of previous work on bumble bee risk aversion suggests that risk-sensitivity in these organisms is a result of their maximizing the net rate of energy return (calculated as the average of expected per flower rates). Whether bees are risk-sensitive foragers with respect to minimizing the probability of energetic shortfall is therefore still an open question. We examined how the foraging preferences of bumble bees for nectar reward variation were affected by colony energy reserves, which we manipulated by draining or adding sucrose solution to colony honey pots. Nine workers from four confined colonies of Bombus occidentalis foraged for sucrose solution in two patches of artificial flowers. These patches yielded the same expected rate of net energy intake, but floral volumes were variable in one patch and constant in the other. Our results show that bumble bees can be both risk-averse (preferring constant flowers) and risk-prone (preferring variable flowers), depending on the status of their colony energy reserves. Diet choice in bumble bees appears to be sensitive to the “target value” a colony-level energetic requirement.

[1]  A. Houston,et al.  Risk‐Averse Foraging in Bees: A Comment on the Mode of Harder and Real , 1990 .

[2]  T. Caraco.  Aspects of risk-aversion in foraging white-crowned sparrows , 1982, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  Alan R. Templeton,et al.  The Fallacy of the Averages in Ecological Optimization Theory , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[4]  F. W. Sladen.  The humble-bee, its life-history and how to domesticate it, with descriptions of all the British species of Bombus and Psithyrus, by F. W. L. Sladen ... , 1912 .

[5]  F. Moore,et al.  Risk-sensitive foraging by a migratory bird (Dendroica coronata) , 1986, Experientia.

[6]  T. Laverty,et al.  The Ecology and Sociobiology of Bumble Bees , 1984 .

[7]  A. Townsend Peterson,et al.  The Fallacy of Averages , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[8]  C. Barnard,et al.  Risk-sensitive foraging in common shrews (Sorex araneus L.) , 2004, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[9]  L. Real.  UNCERTAINTY AND POLLINATOR-PLANT INTERACTIONS: THE FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF BEES AND WASPS ON ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS' , 1981 .

[10]  D. W. Stephens,et al.  How constant is the constant of risk-aversion? , 1986, Animal Behaviour.

[11]  Caste and ecology in the social insects , 1979 .

[12]  L. Real,et al.  Why are Bumble Bees Risk Averse , 1987 .

[13]  L. Real,et al.  On the Tradeoff Between the Mean and the Variance in Foraging: Effect of Spatial Distribution and Color Preference , 1982 .

[14]  T. Caraco.  Energy budgets, risk and foraging preferences in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis) , 1981, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[15]  T. Caraco,et al.  RISK AND FORAGING IN STOCHASTIC ENVIRONMENTS , 1986 .

[16]  T. Caraco.  White-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys): foraging preferences in a risky environment , 1983, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[17]  John McNamara,et al.  A sequential approach to risk-taking , 1982, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  T. Caraco,et al.  An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences , 1980, Animal Behaviour.

[19]  Thomas Caraco,et al.  Foraging preferences: Response to reward skew , 1984, Animal Behaviour.

[20]  B. Heinrich.  Thermoregulation in bumblebees , 1975, Journal of comparative physiology.

[21]  F. W. Sladen.  The humble-bee. , 1989 .

[22]  Thomas Caraco,et al.  Risk‐Sensitive Foraging Strategies of Two Spider Populations , 1987 .

[23]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Foraging juncos: interaction of reward mean and variability , 1985, Animal Behaviour.

[24]  L. Harder.  Effects of nectar concentration and flower depth on flower handling efficiency of bumble bees , 1986, Oecologia.

[25]  D. Stephens,et al.  Optimal foraging: Some simple stochastic models , 1982, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.