The behavioral genetics of colony defense in honeybees: genetic variability for guarding behavior

Olfactory Strategies in the Defensive Behaviour of Insects

Most animals must defend themselves in order to survive. Defensive behaviour includes detecting predators or intruders, avoiding them by staying low-key or escaping or deterring them away by means of aggressive behaviour, i.e., attacking them. Responses vary across insect species, ranging from individual responses to coordinated group attacks in group-living species. Among different modalities of sensory perception, insects predominantly use the sense of smell to detect predators, intruders, and other threats. Furthermore, social insects, such as honeybees and ants, communicate about danger by means of alarm pheromones. In this review, we focus on how olfaction is put to use by insects in defensive behaviour. We review the knowledge of how chemical signals such as the alarm pheromone are processed in the insect brain. We further discuss future studies for understanding defensive behaviour and the role of olfaction.

Experimental increase of worker diversity benefits brood production in ants

BACKGROUND

The reproductive division of labor of eusocial insects, whereby one or several queens monopolize reproduction, evolved in a context of high genetic relatedness. However, many extant eusocial species have developed strategies that decrease genetic relatedness in their colonies, suggesting some benefits of the increased diversity. Multiple studies support this hypothesis by showing positive correlations between genetic diversity and colony fitness, as well as finding effects of experimental manipulations of diversity on colony performance. However, alternative explanations could account for most of these reports, and the benefits of diversity on performance in eusocial insects still await validation. In this study, we experimentally increased worker diversity in small colonies of the ant Lasius niger while controlling for typical confounding factors.

RESULTS

We found that experimental colonies composed of workers coming from three different source colonies produced more larvae and showed more variation in size compared to groups of workers coming from a single colony.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose that the benefits of increased diversity stemmed from an improved division of labor. Our study confirms that worker diversity enhances colony performance, thus providing a possible explanation for the evolution of multiply mated queens and multiple-queen colonies in many species of eusocial insects.

Verification of mathematical models of response threshold through statistical characterisation of the foraging activity in ant societies

The concept of response threshold (RT) has been developed to explain task allocation in social insect colonies, wherein individual workers engage in tasks depending on their responsiveness to the task-related stimulus. Moreover, a mathematical model of RT has been proposed to explain data obtained from task allocation experiments; however, its applicability range warrants clarification through adequate quantitative analysis. Hence, we used an automatic measuring system to count passage events between a nest chamber and a foraging arena in five colonies of ants, Camponotus japonicus. The events were measured using radio-frequency identification tags attached to all workers of each colony. Here, we examined the detailed forms of i) labour distribution during foraging among workers in each colony and ii) the persistence of rank-order of foraging among workers. We found that labour distribution was characterized by a generalized gamma-distribution, indicating that only few workers carried out a large part of the workload. The rank-order of foraging activity among workers in each colony was maintained for a month and collapsed within a few months. We compared the obtained data with testable predictions of the RT model. The comparison indicated that proper evaluation of the mathematical model is required based on the obtained data.

The defensive response of the honeybee Apis mellifera

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) are insects living in colonies with a complex social organization. Their nest contains food stores in the form of honey and pollen, as well as the brood, the queen and the bees themselves. These resources have to be defended against a wide range of predators and parasites, a task that is performed by specialized workers, called guard bees. Guards tune their response to both the nature of the threat and the environmental conditions, in order to achieve an efficient trade-off between defence and loss of foraging workforce. By releasing alarm pheromones, they are able to recruit other bees to help them handle large predators. These chemicals trigger both rapid and longer-term changes in the behaviour of nearby bees, thus priming them for defence. Here, we review our current understanding on how this sequence of events is performed and regulated depending on a variety of factors that are both extrinsic and intrinsic to the colony. We present our current knowledge on the neural bases of honeybee aggression and highlight research avenues for future studies in this area. We present a brief overview of the techniques used to study honeybee aggression, and discuss how these could be used to gain further insights into the mechanisms of this behaviour.

Appetitive floral odours prevent aggression in honeybees

Honeybees defend their colonies aggressively against intruders and release a potent alarm pheromone to recruit nestmates into defensive tasks. The effect of floral odours on this behaviour has never been studied, despite the relevance of these olfactory cues for the biology of bees. Here we use a novel assay to investigate social and olfactory cues that drive defensive behaviour in bees. We show that social interactions are necessary to reveal the recruiting function of the alarm pheromone and that specific floral odours-linalool and 2-phenylethanol-have the surprising capacity to block recruitment by the alarm pheromone. This effect is not due to an olfactory masking of the pheromone by the floral odours, but correlates with their appetitive value. In addition to their potential applications, these findings provide new insights about how honeybees make the decision to engage into defence and how conflicting information affects this process.

Spatial distribution of Vespa velutina individuals hunting at domestic honeybee hives: heterogeneity at a local scale

Since its recent introduction into Europe, the yellow-legged hornet, Vespa velutina, has become a major predator of the domestic honeybee, Apis mellifera, but little is known about its hunting behavior. We studied V. velutina hunting behavior by a capture-mark-recapture procedure in an experimental apiary. A total of 360 hornets were captured and tagged, and we determined: (i) the number of hornets visiting the apiary and the changes in time, (ii) the average number of individual visits per half-day and the time elapsed between consecutive recaptures, and (iii) the individual and global distribution of the hornets in the apiary. More than 50% of the marked hornets were recaptured at least once, this increased to 74% in considering the first marked individuals. We estimated 350 hornets visiting the patch daily with at least 1 visit per half-day. The number of marked hornets decreased over time while the number of unmarked ones increased, suggesting a turnover of individuals. The reduction of the delay between consecutive visits indicates that hornets became more efficient over time. Most of the hornets (88%) were recaptured in front of different hives but, overall, the global distribution was aggregative. Hornets were mainly recaptured in front of 1 hive which was neither the smallest nor the biggest colony, suggesting that the major cue used by hornets is not the amount of food. We hypothesize that the defensive behavior of the honeybee colony could explain our results which may be promising to further studies.

Context affects nestmate recognition errors in honey bees and stingless bees

Nestmate recognition studies, where a discriminator first recognises and then behaviourally discriminates (accepts/rejects) another individual, have used a variety of methodologies and contexts. This is potentially problematic because recognition errors in discrimination behaviour are predicted to be context-dependent. Here we compare the recognition decisions (accept/reject) of discriminators in two eusocial bees, Apis mellifera and Tetragonisca angustula, under different contexts. These contexts include natural guards at the hive entrance (control); natural guards held in plastic test arenas away from the hive entrance that vary either in the presence or absence of colony odour or the presence or absence of an additional nestmate discriminator; and, for the honey bee, the inside of the nest. For both honey bee and stingless bee guards, total recognition errors of behavioural discrimination made by guards (% nestmates rejected + % non-nestmates accepted) are much lower at the colony entrance (honey bee: 30.9%; stingless bee: 33.3%) than in the test arenas (honey bee: 60-86%; stingless bee: 61-81%; P<0.001 for both). Within the test arenas, the presence of colony odour specifically reduced the total recognition errors in honey bees, although this reduction still fell short of bringing error levels down to what was found at the colony entrance. Lastly, in honey bees, the data show that the in-nest collective behavioural discrimination by ca. 30 workers that contact an intruder is insufficient to achieve error-free recognition and is not as effective as the discrimination by guards at the entrance. Overall, these data demonstrate that context is a significant factor in a discriminators' ability to make appropriate recognition decisions, and should be considered when designing recognition study methodologies.

A genetic analysis of the stinging and guarding behaviors of the honey bee

In order to identify genes that are influencing defensive behaviors, we have taken a new approach by dissecting colony-level defensive behavior into individual behavioral measurements using two families containing backcross workers from matings involving European and Africanized bees. We removed the social context from stinging behavior by using a laboratory assay to measure the stinging response of individual bees. A mild shock was given to bees using a constant-current stimulator. The time it took bees to sting in response to this stimulus was recorded. In addition, bees that were seen performing guard behaviors at the hive entrance were collected. We performed QTL mapping in two backcross families with SNP probes within genes and identified two new QTL regions for stinging behavior and another QTL region for guarding behavior. We also identified several candidate genes involved in neural signaling, neural development and muscle development that may be influencing stinging and guarding behaviors. The lack of overlap between these regions and previous defensive behavior QTL underscores the complexity of this behavior and increases our understanding of its genetic architecture.

Spatial effects, sampling errors, and task specialization in the honey bee

Task allocation patterns should depend on the spatial distribution of work within the nest, variation in task demand, and the movement patterns of workers, however, relatively little research has focused on these topics. This study uses a spatially explicit agent based model to determine whether such factors alone can generate biases in task performance at the individual level in the honey bees, Apis mellifera. Specialization (bias in task performance) is shown to result from strong sampling error due to localized task demand, relatively slow moving workers relative to nest size, and strong spatial variation in task demand. To date, specialization has been primarily interpreted with the response threshold concept, which is focused on intrinsic (typically genotypic) differences between workers. Response threshold variation and sampling error due to spatial effects are not mutually exclusive, however, and this study suggests that both contribute to patterns of task bias at the individual level. While spatial effects are strong enough to explain some documented cases of specialization; they are relatively short term and not explanatory for long term cases of specialization. In general, this study suggests that the spatial layout of tasks and fluctuations in their demand must be explicitly controlled for in studies focused on identifying genotypic specialists.

Recognition errors by honey bee (Apis mellifera) guards demonstrate overlapping cues in conspecific recognition

Honey bee (Apis mellifera) entrance guards discriminate nestmates from intruders. We tested the hypothesis that the recognition cues between nestmate bees and intruder bees overlap by comparing their acceptances with that of worker common wasps, Vespula vulgaris, by entrance guards. If recognition cues of nestmate and non-nestmate bees overlap, we would expect recognition errors. Conversely, we hypothesised that guards would not make errors in recognizing wasps because wasps and bees should have distinct, non-overlapping cues. We found both to be true. There was a negative correlation between errors in recognizing nestmates (error: reject nestmate) and nonnestmates (error: accept non-nestmate) bees such that when guards were likely to reject nestmates, they were less likely to accept a nonnestmate; conversely, when guards were likely to accept a non-nestmate, they were less likely to reject a nestmate. There was, however, no correlation between errors in the recognition of nestmate bees (error: reject nestmate) and wasps (error: accept wasp), demonstrating that guards were able to reject wasps categorically. Our results strongly support that overlapping cue distributions occur, resulting in errors and leading to adaptive shifts in guard acceptance thresholds.

Flight and fight: a comparative view of the neurophysiology and genetics of honey bee defensive behavior

Honey bee nest defense involves guard bees that specialize in olfaction-based nestmate recognition and alarm-pheromone-mediated recruitment of nestmates to sting. Stinging is influenced by visual, tactile and olfactory stimuli. Both quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping and behavioral studies point to guarding behavior as a key factor in colony stinging response. Results of reciprocal F1 crosses show that paternally inherited genes have a greater influence on colony stinging response than maternally inherited genes. The most active alarm pheromone component, isoamyl acetate (IAA) causes increased respiration and may induce stress analgesia in bees. IAA primes worker bees for 'fight or flight', possibly through actions of neuropeptides and/or biogenic amines. Studies of aggression in other species lead to an expectation that octopamine or 5-HT might play a role in honey bee defensive response. Genome sequence and QTL mapping identified 128 candidate genes for three regions known to influence defensive behavior. Comparative bioinformatics suggest possible roles of genes involved in neurogenesis and central nervous system (CNS) activity, and genes involved in sensory tuning through G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), such as an arrestin (AmArr4) and the metabotropic GABA(B) receptor (GABA-B-R1).

High recombination frequency creates genotypic diversity in colonies of the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex echinatior

Honeybees are known to have genetically diverse colonies because queens mate with many males and the recombination rate is extremely high. Genetic diversity among social insect workers has been hypothesized to improve general performance of large and complex colonies, but this idea has not been tested in other social insects. Here, we present a linkage map and an estimate of the recombination rate for Acromyrmex echinatior, a leaf-cutting ant that resembles the honeybee in having multiple mating of queens and colonies of approximately the same size. A map of 145 AFLP markers in 22 linkage groups yielded a total recombinational size of 2076 cM and an inferred recombination rate of 161 kb cM(-1) (or 6.2 cM Mb(-1)). This estimate is lower than in the honeybee but, as far as the mapping criteria can be compared, higher than in any other insect mapped so far. Earlier studies on A. echinatior have demonstrated that variation in division of labour and pathogen resistance has a genetic component and that genotypic diversity among workers may thus give colonies of this leaf-cutting ant a functional advantage. The present result is therefore consistent with the hypothesis that complex social life can select for an increased recombination rate through effects on genotypic diversity and colony performance.

Genomic analysis in the sting-2 quantitative trait locus for defensive behavior in the honey bee, Apis mellifera

We have sequenced an 81-kb genomic region from the honey bee, Apis mellifera, associated with a quantitative trait locus (QTL) sting-2 for aggressive behavior. This sequence represents the first extensive study of the honey-bee genome structure encompassing putative genes in a QTL for a behavioral trait. Expression of 13 putative genes, as well as two transcripts that were present in a honey-bee EST database, was confirmed through reverse transcription analysis of mRNA from the honey-bee head. Whereas most transcripts exhibited little or no variation between European and Africanized honey-bee alleles, one transcript demonstrated significant nonsynonymous substitutions, deletions, and insertions. All 13 putative genes lacked similarity to known invertebrate or vertebrate proteins or transcripts. This observation may be reflective of the processes that determine the genomic evolution of an insect with social behavior and/or haplo-diploidy and are an indication of the unique nature of the honey-bee genome. These results make this sequence an invaluable research tool for the ongoing honey-bee whole-genome sequencing effort.

Defensive behavior of honey bees: organization, genetics, and comparisons with other bees

One key advantage of eusociality is shared defense of the nest, brood, and stored food; nest defense plays an important role in the biology of eusocial bees. Recent studies on honey bees, Apis mellifera, have focused on the placement of defensive activity in the overall scheme of division of labor, showing that guard bees play a unique and important role in colony defense. Alarm pheromones function in integrating defensive responses; honey bee alarm pheromone is an excellent example of a multicomponent pheromonal blend. The genetic regulation of defensive behavior is now better understood from the mapping of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) associated with variation in defensiveness. Colony defense in other eusocial bees is less well understood, but enough information is available to provide interesting comparisons between A. mellifera and other species of Apis, as well as with allodapine, halictine, bombine, and meliponine bees. These comparative studies illustrate the wide variety of evolutionary solutions to problems in colony defense in the Apoidea.

Juvenile hormone and aggression in honey bees

We determined whether defense by individual bees against non-nestmates in honey bees (Apis mellifera) is correlated with their juvenile hormone (JH) titers, which are known to vary developmentally and seasonally. We bioassayed winter and summer bees for aggressive and non-aggressive individuals. Bees in winter could not be distinguished by task group, but bees in summer were segregated into nurses and guards. JH titers were correlated with aggressive behavior at two levels. First, winter bees and summer nurses, known to have lower JH titers, both showed less aggression toward foreign bees than did summer guards. Second, aggressive individuals had significantly higher JH titers than did non-aggressive bees within each colony. Inter-colonial variation in aggressiveness was maintained during summer and winter, suggesting a genetic basis for these differences. An alarm pheromone test further substantiated the existence of inter-colonial differences. We found significant variation in JH titers among different colonies, but this variation was not significantly associated with colony-level aggressiveness. The correlation between JH and levels of aggressiveness within a colony suggests a regulatory role for JH, but variation among colonies involves factors other than JH.