Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28430801›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Honey bees preferentially consume freshly-stored pollen.

Mark J Carroll, Nicholas Brown, Craig Goodall, Alexandra M Downs, Timothy H Sheenan, Kirk E Anderson

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Microbial communities associated with honey bees in Brazil and in the United States.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2021
    Article
  11. Characterization ofCells · 2021
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mark J CarrollCarl Hayden Bee Research Center USDA-ARS, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9149-4282
Nicholas BrownCarl Hayden Bee Research Center USDA-ARS, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.
Craig GoodallCarl Hayden Bee Research Center USDA-ARS, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.
Alexandra M DownsDepartment of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.
Timothy H SheenanCarl Hayden Bee Research Center USDA-ARS, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.
Kirk E AndersonCarl Hayden Bee Research Center USDA-ARS, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) collect and store both honey and pollen in preserved forms. Pollen storage involves the addition of honey or nectar and oral secretions to pollen granules. It is controversial whether the duration of pollen storage alters the palatability or nutritive value of the pollen storage medium. We examined how bees utilize different-aged stored pollen during an extended pollen flow. The deposition of pollen into wax cells and subsequent consumption were monitored daily on 18 brood frames from 6 colonies over an 8d observation period. Despite a greater abundance of older stored pollen cells on brood frames, bees showed a marked preference for the consumption of freshly-stored pollen. Two to four day-old pollen cell contents were significantly more likely to be consumed, while pollen cell contents more than seven days old were eaten at much lower rates. Similar experiments that controlled for cell abundance and spatial effects using cage assays yielded the same result. One day-old stored pollen was consumed approximately three times more often than 10d-old stored pollen, and two times more often than 5d-old stored pollen. These consumption preferences for freshly-stored pollen occurred despite a lack of clear developmental advantages. Young adult workers reared for 7 days on 1d-, 5d-, or 10d-old stored pollen showed no difference in body mass, stored pollen consumption, hindgut fecal material accumulation, or hypopharyngeal gland (HPG) protein titers, suggesting that different-aged pollen stores did not vary in their nutritional value to adult bees. These findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis promoting a period of microbially-mediated, "beebread maturation" that results in greater palatability or nutritive value for aged pollen stores. Rather, stored pollen that is not eaten in the first few days accumulates as excess stores preserved in a less preferred, but nutritionally-similar state.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorPollenAnimalsBees

Identifiers

PMID28430801
PMCPMC5400263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.