Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39881791›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

Consistency and individuality of honeybee stinging behaviour across time and social contexts.

Kavitha Kannan, C Giovanni Galizia, Morgane Nouvian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Kavitha KannanDepartment of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
C Giovanni GaliziaDepartment of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8292-6031
Morgane NouvianDepartment of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4882-2372

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whether individuals exhibit consistent behavioural variation is a central question in the field of animal behaviour. This question is particularly interesting in the case of social animals, as their behaviour may be strongly modulated by the collective. In this study, we ask whether honeybees exhibit individual differences in stinging behaviour. We demonstrate that bees are relatively stable in their decision to sting-or not-in a specific context and show temporal consistency suggestive of an internal state modulation. We also investigated how social factors such as the alarm pheromone or another bee modulated this behaviour. The presence of alarm pheromone increased the likelihood of a bee to sting but this response decayed over trials, while the presence of a conspecific decreased individual stinging likelihood. These factors, however, did not alter stinging consistency. We therefore propose that social modulation acts by shifting the stinging threshold of individuals. Finally, experimental manipulation of group composition with respect to the ratio of aggressive and gentle bees within a group did not affect the behaviour of focal bees. Overall, our results establish honeybee stinging behaviour as a promising model for studying mechanistically how collective and individual traits interact to regulate individual variability.

Indexed as

alarm pheromoneconsistencydefensive behaviourhoneybeesinter-individual variabilitysocial modulation

Identifiers

PMID39881791
PMCPMC11774586

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.