ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Consistency and individuality of honeybee stinging behaviour across time and social contexts.
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.
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.
- Establishment and Validation of a CUMS Model for Depression-like Behavior in Honeybees: A Tool for Pollinator Stress Research.Insects · 2026Article
- The social circumstances of the maternal experience and its biobehavioral associations, in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta).Animal reproduction science · 2026Article
- Associations of bee sting injuries with environmental and social factors: an exploratory study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Consistency and individuality of honeybee stinging behaviour across time and social contexts.Royal Society open science · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.