Skip to main content
Log in

Sampling and decision rules used by honey bees in a foraging arena

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Animals must continuously choose among various available options to exploit the most profitable resource. They also need to keep themselves updated about the values of all available options, since their relative values can change quickly due to depletion or exploitation by competitors. While the sampling and decision rules by which foragers profitably exploit a flower patch have attracted a great deal of attention in theory and experiments with bumble bees, similar rules for honey bee foragers, which face similar foraging challenges, are not as well studied. By presenting foragers of the honey bee Apis cerana with choice tests in a foraging arena and recording their behavior, we investigate possible sampling and decision rules that the foragers use to choose one option over another and to track other options. We show that a large part of the sampling and decision-making process of a foraging honey bee can be explained by decomposing the choice behavior into dichotomous decision points and incorporating the cost of sampling. The results suggest that a honey bee forager, by using a few simple rules as part of a Bayesian inference process, is able to effectively deal with the complex task of successfully exploiting foraging patches that consist of dynamic and multiple options.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banschbach VS (1994) Colour association influences honey bee choice between sucrose concentrations. Comp Physiol A 175:107–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan GM, Bitterman ME (1988) Learning in honeybees as a function of amount and frequency of reward. Anim Learn Behav 16:247–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartar RV (2004) Resource-tracking by bumble bees: responses to plant-level differences in quality. Ecology 85:2764–2771

    Google Scholar 

  • Chittka L, Gumbert A, Kunze, J (1997) Foraging dynamics of bumble bees: correlates of movements within and between plant species. Behav Ecol 8:239–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison M, McCarthy D (1988) The matching law: a research review. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ

  • Deneubourg JL, Pasteels JM, Verhaeghe JC (1983) Probabilistic behaviour in ants: a strategy of errors? J Theor Biol 105:259–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dukas R, Real LA (1993) Effect of recent experiences on foraging decisions by bumble bees. Oecologia 94:244–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greggers U, Menzel R (1993) Memory dynamics and foraging strategies of honeybees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greggers U, Mauelshagen J (1997) Matching behavior of honeybees in a multiple-choice situation: the differential effect of environmental stimuli on the choice process. Anim Learn Behav 25:458

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1976) The foraging specialization of individual bumblebees. Ecol Monogr 46:105–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1979) “Majoring” and “minoring” by foraging bumblebees, Bombus vagans: an experimental analysis. Ecology 60:245–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrnstein RJ (1997) The matching law: papers in psychology and economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

  • Inglis IR, Langton S, Forkman B, Lazarus J (2001) An information primacy model of exploratory and foraging behaviour. Anim Behav 62:543–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keasar T, Rashkovich E, Cohen D, Shmida A (2002) Bees in two-armed bandit situations: foraging choices and possible decision mechanisms. Behav Ecol 13:757–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koops MA (2004) Reliability and the value of information. Anim Behav 67:103–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langen TA (1999) How western scrub-jays select a nut: effects of the number of options, variation in nut size, and social competition among foragers. Anim Cogn 2:223–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loo SK, Bitterman ME (1992) Learning in honeybees (Apis mellifera) as a function of sucrose concentration. J Comp Psychol 106:29–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luttbeg B (2002) Assessing the robustness and optimality of alternative decision rules with varying assumptions. Anim Behav 63:805–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luttbeg B, Langen TA (2004). Comparing alternative models to empirical data: cognitive models of western scrub-jay foraging behavior. Am Nat 163:263–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH (1979) Optimal foraging in bumblebees: rule of movement between flowers within inflorescences. Anim Behav 27:1167–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Real LA (1992) Information processing and the evolutionary ecology of cognitive architecture. 140:S108–S145

  • Shafir S (1994) Intransitivity of preferences in honey bees: support for ‘comparative’ evaluation of foraging options. Anim Behav 48:55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thuijsman F, Peleg B, Amitai M, Shmida A (1995) Automata, matching and foraging behavior of bees. J Theor Biol 175:305–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddington KW, Gottlieb N (1990) Actual vs perceived profitability: a study of floral choice of honey bees. J Insect Behav 3:429–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Animal Behavior Society for financial support and R. Gadagkar for facilities, both of which made this study possible. Many helpful comments from Tom Waite, Cynthia Schuck-Paim and two anonymous referees substantially improved the content and clarity of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dhruba Naug.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Naug, D., Arathi, H.S. Sampling and decision rules used by honey bees in a foraging arena. Anim Cogn 10, 117–124 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0044-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0044-5

Keywords

Navigation