Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28878985›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2017

Task allocation and site fidelity jointly influence foraging regulation in honeybee colonies.

Thiago Mosqueiro, Chelsea Cook, Ramon Huerta, Jürgen Gadau, Brian Smith, Noa Pinter-Wollman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Reinforcement expectation in the honeybee (Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Tyramine and itseLife · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Individual learning phenotypes drive collective behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Thiago MosqueiroBioCircuits Institute, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5808-8189
Chelsea CookSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Ramon HuertaBioCircuits Institute, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Jürgen GadauSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Brian SmithSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Noa Pinter-WollmanDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

Multiscale model of exploration-exploitation tradeoff: from genes to collectivesR01GM113967 · NIGMS · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI SMITH, BRIAN H. · 2015 to 2018
$1.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM113967
6 · The paper itself

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

Apis melliferacollective behaviourexploitationexplorationgroup compositionpersistence

Identifiers

PMID28878985
PMCPMC5579100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.