Resource-tracking by bumble bees: What explains local responses to density of bergamot (Monarda fistulosa) flowers?

Ecoscience

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 470-475

  Cartar, Ralph V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bombus; Foraging behaviour; Ideal free distribution; Resource tracking; Undermatching; Wing wear

Indexed keywords

BEE; DICOTYLEDON; FLOWER VISITING; IDEAL FREE DISTRIBUTION; MEDICINAL PLANT; PLANT-POLLINATOR INTERACTION; TRACKING; WING MORPHOLOGY;

ALBERTA; CANADA;

APOIDEA; BOMBUS (GENUS); MONARDA; MONARDA FISTULOSA;

EID: 76749100293     PISSN: 11956860     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2980/16-4-3209     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abrahams, M. V., 1996. Patch choice under perceptual constraints: A cause for departures from an ideal free distribution. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 19: 409-415.
2. Bauer, P. J., 1983. Bumblebee pollination relationships on the Beartooth plateau tundra of southern Montana. American Journal of Botany, 70: 134-144.
3. Bosch, M. & N. M. Waser, 1999. Effects of local density on pollination and reproduction in Delphinium nuttallianum and Aconitum columbianum (Ranunculaceae). American Journal of Botany, 86:871-879.
4. Burd, M., 1994. Bateman's principle and plant reproduction: The role of pollen limitation in fruit and seed set. Botanical Review, 60: 83-139. (Pubitemid 2073006)
5. Cartar, R. V, 1992. Morphological senescence and longevity: An experiment relating wing wear and life span in foraging bumble bees. Journal of Animal Ecology, 61: 225-231.
6. Cartar, R. V, 2004. Resource-tracking by bumble bees: Responses to plant-level differences in quality. Ecology, 85: 2764-2771.
7. Cartar, R. V., 2005. Short-term effects of experimental boreal forest logging disturbance on bumble bees, bumble bee-pollinated flowers and the bee-flower match. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14: 1895-1907.
8. Cartar, R. V. & L. M. Dill, 1990. Colony energy requirements affect the foraging currency of bumble bees. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 27: 377-383.
9. Caruso, C. M., 1999. Pollination of Ipomopsis aggregata (Plemoniaceae): Effects of intra- versus interspecific competition. American Journal of Botany, 86: 663-668.
10. Comba, L., 1999. Patch use by bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae): Temperature, wind, flower density and traplining. Ethology, Ecology and Evolution, 11: 243-264. (Pubitemid 29463988)
11. Cresswell, J. E., 1997. Spatial heterogeneity, foraging behaviour and pollinator-mediated gene flow: Bumblebee movements in variously aggregated rows of oil-seed rape. Oikos, 78: 546-556.
12. Cresswell, J. E., 2000. A comparison of bumblebees' movements in uniform and aggregated distributions of their forage plant. Ecological Entomology, 25: 19-25.
13. Delph, L. F. & C. M. Lively, 1992. Pollinator visitation, floral display, and nectar production of sexual morphs of a gynodioecious shrub. Oikos, 63: 161-170.
14. Dreisig, H., 1995. Ideal free distributions of nectar foraging bumblebees. Oikos, 72: 161-172.
15. Foster, D. J., 2009. Causes and consequences of wing wear in foraging bumble bees. M.Sc. thesis. University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
16. Fretwell, S. D. & H. L. J. Lucas, 1970. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheoretica, 19: 16-36.
17. Giurfa, M., M. Vorobyev, P. Kevan & R. Menzel, 1996. Detection of coloured stimuli by honeybees: Minimum visual angles and receptor-specific contrasts. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 178: 699-709.
18. Goulson, D., 2000. Why do pollinators visit proportionally fewer flowers in large patches? Oikos, 91: 485-492.
19. Goulson, D., J. C. Stout, S. A. Hawson & J. A. Allen, 1998. Floral display size in comfrey, Symphytum officinale L. (Boraginaceae): Relationships with visitation by three bumblebee species and subsequent seed set. Oecologia (Berl.), 113: 502-508.
20. Heinrich, B., 1975. Thermoregulation in bumblebees II. Energetics of warm-up and free flight. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 96: 155-166.
21. Heinrich, B., 1976. The foraging specializations of individual bumblebees. Ecological Monographs, 46: 105-128.
22. Ishihama, F. & I. Washitani, 2007. Behavior of queen bumblebee pollinators on Primula sieboldii (Primulaceae) in response to different patch sizes and spacing. Plant Species Biology, 22: 167-174.
23. Jennersten, O. & S. G. Nilsson, 1993. Insect flower visitation frequency and seed production in relation to patch size of Visearia vulgaris (Caryophyllaceae). Oikos, 68: 283-292.
24. Kawaguchi, L. G., K. Ohashi & Y. Toquenaga, 2007. Contrasting responses of bumble bees to feeding conspecifics on their familiar and unfamiliar flowers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274: 2661-2667.
25. Kennedy, M. & R. D. Gray, 1993. Can ecological theory predict the distribution of foraging animals? A critical analysis of experiments on the ideal free distribution. Oikos, 68: 158-166.
26. Klinkhamer, P. G. L. & T. J. de Jong, 1990. Effects of plant size, plant density and sex differential nectar reward on pollinator visitation in the protandrous Echium vulgare (Boraginaceae). Oikos, 57: 399-405.
27. Klinkhamer, P. G. L., T. J. de Jong & G. J. de Bruyn, 1989. Plant size and pollinator visitation in Cynoglossum officinale. Oikos, 54: 201-204.
28. Kunin, W. E., 1997. Population size and density effects in pollination: Pollinator foraging and plant reproductive success in experimental arrays of Brassica kaber. Journal of Ecology, 85: 225-234.
29. Morris, D. W., 1987. Spatial scale and the cost of density-dependent habitat selection. Evolutionary Ecology, 1: 379-388.
30. nd Edition. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario.
31. Natural History Museum, 2009. Bomhus. London. [Online] URL: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/projects/bombus/alphabet.html
32. Ohashi, K. & T. Yahara, 1998. Effects of variation in flower number on pollinator visits in Cirsium purpuratum (Asteraceae). American Journal of Botany, 85: 219-224.
33. Ohashi, K. & T. Yahara, 2002. Visit larger displays but probe proportionally fewer flowers: Counterintuitive behaviour of nectarcollecting bumble bees achieves an ideal free distribution. Functional Ecology, 16: 492-503. (Pubitemid 34890882) (Pubitemid 34890882)
34. Pelletier, L. & J. N. McNeil, 2003. The effect of food supplementation on reproductive success in bumblebee field colonies. Oikos, 103: 688-694. (Pubitemid 37435879) (Pubitemid 37435879)
35. Pleasants, J. M., 1981. Bumblebee response to variation in nectar availability. Ecology, 62: 1648-1661.
36. Possingham, H. P., 1992. Habitat selection by two species of nectarivore: Habitat quality isoclines. Ecology, 73: 1903-1912.
37. Pyke, G. H., 1980. Optimal foraging in bumblebees: Calculation of net rate of energy intake and optimal patch choice. Theoretical Population Biology, 17: 232-246.
38. Ranta, E., P. Lundberg & V. Kaitala, 1999. Resource matching with limited knowledge. Oikos, 86: 383-385.
39. Roll, J., R. Mitchell, R. J. Cabin & D. L. Marshall, 1997. Reproductive success increases with local density of conspecifics in a desert mustard (Lesquerella fendleri). Conservation Biology, 11: 738-746.
40. Rosenzweig, M. L., 1981. A theory of habitat selection. Ecology, 62: 327-335.
41. SAS Institute, 2007. JMP Statistical Software. V7.0.2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
42. Sin, A. & M.-S. Baltus, 1987. Patch size, pollinator behavior, and pollinator limitation in catnip. Ecology, 68: 1679-1690. (Pubitemid 18289597)
43. Sowig, P., 1989. Effects of flowering plant's patch size on species composition of pollinator communities, foraging strategies and resource partitioning in bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Oecologia (Berl), 78: 550-558. (Pubitemid 20426276)
44. Sutherland, W. J., 1983. Aggregation and the 'ideal free' distribution. Journal of Animal Ecology, 52: 821-828.
45. Westphal, C., I. Steffan-Dewenter & T. Tscharntke, 2006. Bumblebees experience landscapes at different spatial scales: Possible implications for coexistence. Oecologia (Berl.), 149: 289-300. (Pubitemid 44215596) (Pubitemid 44215596)