Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39079662›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024

Age dominates flight distance and duration, while body size shapes flight speed in

Milena Gilgenreiner, Christoph Kurze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Milena GilgenreinerInstitute for Zoology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Regensburg , Regensburg, Germany.
Christoph KurzeInstitute for Zoology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Regensburg , Regensburg, Germany.ORCID 0009-0001-9444-4846

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flight plays a crucial role in the fitness of insect pollinators, such as bumblebees. Despite their relatively large body size compared with their wings, bumblebees can fly under difficult ambient conditions, such as cooler temperatures. While their body size is often positively linked to their foraging range and flight ability, the influence of age remains less explored. Here, we studied the flight performance (distance, duration and speed) of ageing bumblebee workers using tethered flight mills. Additionally, we measured their intertegular distance and dry mass as proxies for their body size. We found that the flight distance and duration were predominantly influenced by age, challenging assumptions that age does not play a key role in foraging and task allocation. From the age of 7 to 14 days, flight distance and duration increased sixfold and fivefold, respectively. Conversely, the body size primarily impacted the maximum and average flight speed of workers. Our findings indicate that age substantially influences the flight distance and duration in bumblebee workers, affecting foraging performance and potentially altering task allocation strategies. This underscores the importance of considering individual age and physiological changes alongside body size/mass in experiments involving bumblebee workers.

Indexed as

Body SizeFlight, AnimalAge FactorsAnimalsBeesage-based polyethismalloethismflight behaviourforaging rangesocial insects

Identifiers

PMID39079662
PMCPMC11288671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.