| EMBARGOED
UNTIL JUNE 15, 4:01 P.M. PACIFIC TIME (JUNE 16, 12:01 A.M. GMT)
Espionage May Have Driven The Evolution
Of Bee
Language According To UCSD-Led Study In Brazil
By Sherry
Seethaler
A
discovery by a University of California, San Diego biologist
that some species of bees exploit chemical clues left by other
bee species to guide their kin to food provides evidence that
eavesdropping may be an evolutionary driving force behind some
bees’ ability to conceal communication inside the hive,
using a form of animal language to encode food location.
Bees can use two main
forms of communication to tell their hive mates where to find
food: abstract representations such as sounds or dances within
the hive or scent markings outside the hive to mark the food
and/or the route to it. In 1999, James Nieh, an assistant professor
of biology at UCSD, published a paper in which he hypothesized
communication within the hive may have evolved as a way of avoiding
espionage by competitors.
Nieh’s most recent
study, a collaboration with Brazilian biologists published June
16 in the early on-line version of the journal Proceedings
of the Royal Society, is strong support for that hypothesis
because it shows that bees can indeed use the chemical markings
deposited by bees of other species to home in on and take over
their food source. The paper will appear in print in Proceedings
of the Royal Society in August.
 |
Close-up
of aggressive stingless bee
Photo
Credit: James Nieh, UCSD
|
“We show that
foragers of an aggressive species searching for an unscented
food source at a new location, detected and preferentially oriented
to odor marks deposited by a competitor and then rapidly dominated
the food source, killing or driving off all of the competitors
within ten minutes,” says Nieh. “The ability of
foragers to communicate food location within the confines of
the hive, where other bees cannot eavesdrop, would be a clear
evolutionary advantage where floral resources are seasonally
scarce.”
Nieh along with Felipe
Contrera and Vera Imperatriz-Fonseca from the University of
São Paulo, Brazil and Lillian Barreto from Agricultural
Development Agency of the the State of Bahia, Brazil studied
interactions between two species of bees, Trigona spinipes
and Melipona rufiventris. Both species are stingless
bees, a diverse group prevalent in South and Central America.
Because Trigona spinipes is a highly aggressive species,
the researchers hypothesized that if these bees could use olfactory
eavesdropping they would be able to gain control of a food source
that competitors had discovered and identified with scent markings.
|
Aggressive
stingless bee attacking an Africanized honeybee (a "killer"
bee)
Photo
Credit: James Nieh, UCSD |
“These bees (Trigona
spinipes) are so aggressive that they attack Africanized
honey bees—popularly known as killer bees—and even
attack several species of birds, driving them off flowers,”
says Nieh. “In our study, we observed that when they took
over the food source from the victim species (Melipona rufiventris)
they used a range of forms of aggression from threats to intense
grappling followed by decapitation.”
In their experiments,
the researchers trained bees of each species to feed at separate
dishes of unscented sugar water more than 100 yards away from
each other. On discs of paper, the researchers collected scent
markings from bees of each species as they were feeding. Scent
markings are glandular secretions from bees’ heads or
other body parts that many bee species use to indicate a food
source. The researchers then covered the original feeder of
either the aggressor or victim species and put out dummy feeders
at a new location with paper marked by bees of their own species,
paper marked by the other species, or unmarked paper. Bees of
both species were able to distinguish their kin’s odor
marks from the marks of the other species.
 |
"Victim"
stingless bees feeding
Photo
Credit: James Nieh, UCSD |
“The victim species
preferred their own odor marks and avoided those of the aggressor
species, but bees of the aggressor species, when searching for
a new food source, preferred the odor marks of the victim species
to their own odor marks or no odor marks,” says Nieh.
In their paper, the
researchers point out that the bees’ responses are adaptive
in both cases. The victim species avoids attack by avoiding
resources marked by the aggressor species. On the other hand,
exploiting the discoveries of other species provides the aggressor
species with a steady means to find new rich food sources.
Bees are among a very
limited number of species, besides humans, able to abstractly
encode information about the physical world into signals understood
by receivers. While scientists do not know what kind of communication
the two species of bees employ within their hives, Nieh says
his team’s finding that they are able to spy on each other’s
olfactory markings sheds light on the long-standing mystery
of why some other stingless bees and honeybees evolved one of
the most sophisticated forms of animal language, strategies
that would allow them to inform their kin about distance and
direction to a food source while inside the hive.
Funding for this research
was provided by the National Science Foundation, the University
of California Academic Senate and the Heiligenberg Chair Endowment
at UCSD.
Media Contact: Sherry
Seethaler (858) 534-4656
Comment: James
Nieh (858) 822-5010
|