ArticlePloS one2022
Discrimination of edge orientation by bumblebees.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The concentration and energetic content of floral nectar sugars: calculation, conversions, and common confusions.Journal of pollination ecology · 2025Article
- Article
- How bumblebees manage conflicting information seen on arrival and departure from flowers.Animal cognition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simple feature detectors in the visual system, such as edge-detectors, are likely to underlie even the most complex visual processing, so understanding the limits of these systems is crucial for a fuller understanding of visual processing. We investigated the ability of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) to discriminate between differently angled edges. In a multiple-choice, "meadow-like" scenario, bumblebees successfully discriminated between angled bars with 7° differences, significantly exceeding the previously reported performance of eastern honeybees (Apis cerana, limit: 15°). Neither the rate at which bees learned, nor their final discrimination performance were affected by the angular orientation of the training bars, indicating a uniform performance across the visual field. Previous work has found that, in dual-choice tests, eastern honeybees cannot reliably discriminate between angles with less than 25° difference, suggesting that performance in discrimination tasks is affected by the training regime, and doesn't simply reflect the perceptual limitations of the visual system. We used high resolution LCD monitors to investigate bumblebees' angular resolution in a dual-choice experiment. Bumblebees could still discriminate 7° angle differences under such conditions (exceeding the previously reported limit for Apis mellifera, of 10°, as well as that of A. cerana). Bees eventually reached similar levels of accuracy in the dual-choice experiment as they did under multiple-choice conditions but required longer learning periods. Bumblebees show impressive abilities to discriminate between angled edges, performing better than two previously tested species of honeybee. This high performance may, in turn, support complex visual processing in the bumblebee brain.
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.