ArticleRoyal Society open science2017
Task allocation and site fidelity jointly influence foraging regulation in honeybee colonies.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Octopamine and tyramine dynamics predict learning rate phenotypes during associative conditioning in honey bees.Science advances · 2026Article
- Cognition from genes to ecology: individual differences incognition and its potential role in a social network.Animal cognition · 2025Review
- Reinforcement expectation in the honeybee (Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Formal analyses are fundamental for the definition of honey, a product representing specific territories and their changes: the case of North Tyrrhenian dunes (Italy).Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Tyramine and itseLife · 2023Article
- Colonies of ants allocate exploratory individuals to where they are ecologically needed.Current zoology · 2023Article
- Multidisciplinary analysis of Italian Alpine wildflower honey reveals criticalities, diversity and value.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Heritable Cognitive Phenotypes Influence Appetitive Learning but not Extinction in Honey Bees.Annals of the Entomological Society of America · 2021Article
- Individual learning phenotypes drive collective behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Construction, comparison and evolution of networks in life sciences and other disciplines.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2020Article
- A Multiscale Review of Behavioral Variation in Collective Foraging Behavior in Honey Bees.Insects · 2019Review
- Challenges and recommendations to improve the installability and archival stability of omics computational tools.PLoS biology · 2019Article
- Individual differences in learning and biogenic amine levels influence the behavioural division between foraging honeybee scouts and recruits.The Journal of animal ecology · 2019Article
- Task allocation and site fidelity jointly influence foraging regulation in honeybee colonies.Royal Society open science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Variation in behaviour among group members often impacts collective outcomes. Individuals may vary both in the task that they perform and in the persistence with which they perform each task. Although both the distribution of individuals among tasks and differences among individuals in behavioural persistence can each impact collective behaviour, we do not know if and how they jointly affect collective outcomes. Here, we use a detailed computational model to examine the joint impact of colony-level distribution among tasks and behavioural persistence of individuals, specifically their fidelity to particular resource sites, on the collective trade-off between exploring for new resources and exploiting familiar ones. We developed an agent-based model of foraging honeybees, parametrized by data from five colonies, in which we simulated scouts, who search the environment for new resources, and individuals who are recruited by the scouts to the newly found resources, i.e. recruits. We varied the persistence of returning to a particular food source of both scouts and recruits and found that, for each value of persistence, there is a different optimal ratio of scouts to recruits that maximizes resource collection by the colony. Furthermore, changes to the persistence of scouts induced opposite effects from changes to the persistence of recruits on the collective foraging of the colony. The proportion of scouts that resulted in the most resources collected by the colony decreased as the persistence of recruits increased. However, this optimal proportion of scouts increased as the persistence of scouts increased. Thus, behavioural persistence and task participation can interact to impact a colony's collective behaviour in orthogonal directions. Our work provides new insights and generates new hypotheses into how variations in behaviour at both the individual and colony levels jointly impact the trade-off between exploring for new resources and exploiting familiar ones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.