Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30289166›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2019

Individual differences in learning and biogenic amine levels influence the behavioural division between foraging honeybee scouts and recruits.

Chelsea N Cook, Thiago Mosqueiro, Colin S Brent, Cahit Ozturk, Jürgen Gadau, Noa Pinter-Wollman, Brian H Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2019. 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
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  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. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Early olfactory, but not gustatory processing, is affected by the selection of heritable cognitive phenotypes in honey bee.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Individual learning phenotypes drive collective behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

7 authors.

Chelsea N CookSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.ORCID 0000-0003-3310-2161
Thiago MosqueiroDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Colin S BrentDepartment of Pest Management, USDA-ALARC, Maricopa, Arizona.
Cahit OzturkSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
Jürgen GadauInstitute for Evolution and Biodiversity, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Noa Pinter-WollmanDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Brian H SmithSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.

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
The Role of Social Environment on Learning and Gene RegulationF32GM126728 · NIGMS · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI COOK, CHELSEA · 2017 to 2019
$118k
NIGMS NIH HHS F32 GM126728NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM113967
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals must effectively balance the time they spend exploring the environment for new resources and exploiting them. One way that social animals accomplish this balance is by allocating these two tasks to different individuals. In honeybees, foraging is divided between scouts, which tend to explore the landscape for novel resources, and recruits, which tend to exploit these resources. Exploring the variation in cognitive and physiological mechanisms of foraging behaviour will provide a deeper understanding of how the division of labour is regulated in social insect societies. Here, we uncover how honeybee foraging behaviour may be shaped by predispositions in performance of latent inhibition (LI), which is a form of non-associative learning by which individuals learn to ignore familiar information. We compared LI between scouts and recruits, hypothesizing that differences in learning would correlate with differences in foraging behaviour. Scouts seek out and encounter many new odours while locating novel resources, while recruits continuously forage from the same resource, even as its quality degrades. We found that scouts show stronger LI than recruits, possibly reflecting their need to discriminate forage quality. We also found that scouts have significantly elevated tyramine compared to recruits. Furthermore, after associative odour training, recruits have significantly diminished octopamine in their brains compared to scouts. These results suggest that individual variation in learning behaviour shapes the phenotypic behavioural differences between different types of honeybee foragers. These differences in turn have important consequences for how honeybee colonies interact with their environment. Uncovering the proximate mechanisms that influence individual variation in foraging behaviour is crucial for understanding the ecological context in which societies evolve.

Indexed as

IndividualityLearningAnimalsBeesBiogenic AminesMemorySocial BehaviorBiogenic Aminesexploration-exploitation trade-offforaginghoneybeelatent inhibitionnon-associative learningscouttyramine

Identifiers

PMID30289166
PMCPMC6379132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.