ArticleThe Journal of experimental biology2023
Visual guidance of honeybees approaching a vertical landing surface.
Article in The Journal of experimental biology, 2023. 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.
- Flight Performance and Flight in Wind in Three Phylogenetically Distinct Miniature Insects.Integrative and comparative biology · 2026Article
- Clocks, events, and the ontology of perceiving and acting.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Biomechanics and ontogeny of gliding in wingless stick insect nymphs (Extatosoma tiaratum).The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
- Bumblebees compensate for the adverse effects of sidewind during visually guided landings.The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Landing is a critical phase for flying animals, whereby many rely on visual cues to perform controlled touchdown. Foraging honeybees rely on regular landings on flowers to collect food crucial for colony survival and reproduction. Here, we explored how honeybees utilize optical expansion cues to regulate approach flight speed when landing on vertical surfaces. Three sensory-motor control models have been proposed for landings of natural flyers. Landing honeybees maintain a constant optical expansion rate set-point, resulting in a gradual decrease in approach velocity and gentile touchdown. Bumblebees exhibit a similar strategy, but they regularly switch to a new constant optical expansion rate set-point. In contrast, landing birds fly at a constant time to contact to achieve faster landings. Here, we re-examined the landing strategy of honeybees by fitting the three models to individual approach flights of honeybees landing on platforms with varying optical expansion cues. Surprisingly, the landing model identified in bumblebees proved to be the most suitable for these honeybees. This reveals that honeybees adjust their optical expansion rate in a stepwise manner. Bees flying at low optical expansion rates tend to increase their set-point stepwise, while those flying at high optical expansion rates tend to decrease it stepwise. This modular landing control system enables honeybees to land rapidly and reliably under a wide range of initial flight conditions and visual landing platform patterns. The remarkable similarity between the landing strategies of honeybees and bumblebees suggests that this may also be prevalent among other flying insects. Furthermore, these findings hold promising potential for bioinspired guidance systems in flying robots.
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.