Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951014›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2018

Cognitive Aspects of Comb-Building in the Honeybee?

Vincent Gallo, Lars Chittka

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sub-cell scale features govern the placement of new cells by honeybees during comb construction.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2023
    Article
  9. The role of cognition in nesting.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Biopolymer Honeycomb Microstructures: A Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  12. Crystallography of honeycomb formation under geometric frustration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Stigmergy versus behavioral flexibility and planning in honeybee comb construction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  16. Imperfect comb construction reveals the architectural abilities of honeybees.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The beeJournal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2020
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Vincent GalloDepartment of Psychology, School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Lars ChittkaDepartment of Psychology, School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Queen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

European Research Council 339347
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wax-made comb of the honeybee is a masterpiece of animal architecture. The highly regular, double-sided hexagonal structure is a near-optimal solution to storing food and housing larvae, economizing on building materials and space. Elaborate though they may seem, such animal constructions are often viewed as the result of 'just instinct,' governed by inflexible, pre-programmed, innate behavior routines. An inspection of the literature on honeybee comb construction, however, reveals a different picture. Workers have to learn, at least in part, certain elements of the technique, and there is considerable flexibility in terms of how the shape of the comb and its gradual manufacture is tailored to the circumstances, especially the available space. Moreover, we explore the 2-century old and now largely forgotten work by François Huber, where glass screens were placed between an expanding comb construction and the intended target wall. Bees took corrective action before reaching the glass obstacle, and altered the ongoing construction so as to reach the nearest wooden wall. Though further experiments will be necessary, these results suggest a form of spatial planning skills. We discuss these findings in the context of what is now known about insect cognition, and ask if it is possible that the production of hexagonal wax combs is the result of behavioral heuristics where a complex structure emerges as the result of simple behavioral rules applied by each individual, or whether prospective cognition might be involved.

Indexed as

behaviorcognitionconsciousnessplanningpredictionprospective cognitionwax

Identifiers

PMID29951014
PMCPMC6008556
OpenAlexW2804038054

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.