Skip to main content
Log in

Effects of parasitic mites and protozoa on the flower constancy and foraging rate of bumble bees

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Parasites can affect host behavior in subtle but ecologically important ways. In the laboratory, we conducted experiments to determine whether parasitic infection by the intestinal protozoan Crithidia bombi or the tracheal mite Locustacarus buchneri alters the foraging behavior of the bumble bee Bombus impatiens. Using an array of equally rewarding yellow and blue artificial flowers, we measured the foraging rate (flowers visited per minute, flower handling time, and flight time between flowers) and flower constancy (tendency to sequentially visit flowers of the same type) of bees with varying intensities of infection. Bumble bee workers infected with tracheal mites foraged as rapidly as uninfected workers, but were considerably more constant to a single flower type (yellow or blue). In contrast, workers infected with intestinal protozoa showed similar levels of flower constancy, but visited 12% fewer flowers per minute on average than uninfected bees. By altering the foraging behavior of bees, such parasites may influence interactions between plants and pollinators, as well as the reproductive output of bumble bee colonies. Our study is the first to investigate the effects of parasitic protozoa and tracheal mites on the foraging behavior of bumble bees, and provides the first report of Crithidia bombi in commercial bumble bees in North America.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brodeur J, McNeil JN (1992) Host behavior modification by the endoparasitoid Aphidius nigripes—a strategy to reduce hyperparasitism. Ecol Entomol 17:97–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown MJF, Loosli R, Schmid-Hempel P (2000) Condition-dependent expression of virulence in a trypanosome infecting bumblebees. Oikos 91:421–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown MJF, Schmid-Hempel R, Schmid-Hempel P (2003) Strong context-dependent virulence in a host-parasite system: reconciling genetic evidence with theory. J Anim Ecol 72:994–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chittka L, Thomson JD, Waser NM (1999) Flower constancy, insect psychology, and plant evolution. Naturwissenschaften 86:361–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Durrer S, Schmid-Hempel P (1994) Shared use of flowers leads to horizontal pathogen transmission. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 258:299–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Feore SM, Bennett M, Chantrey J, Jones T, Baxby D, Begon M (1997) The effect of cowpox virus infection on fecundity in bank voles and wood mice. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 264:1457–1461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gegear RJ, Laverty TM (1998) How many flower types can bumble bees work at the same time? Can J Zool 76:1358–1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gegear RJ, Otterstatter MC, Thomson JD(in press) Does infection by an intestinal parasite impair the ability of bumble bees to learn flower handling skills? Anim Behav, in press

  • Gegear RJ, Thomson JD (2004) Does the flower constancy of bumble bees reflect foraging economics? Ethology 110:793–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goka K, Okabe K, Niwa S, Yoneda M (2000) Parasitic mite infestation in introduced colonies of European bumblebees, Bombus terrestris. Jap J Appl Entomol Zool 44:47–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulson D (1999) Foraging strategies of insects for gathering nectar and pollen, and implications for plant ecology and evolution. Perspec Plant Ecol, Syst Evol 2:185–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulson D (2003) Bumblebees: their behaviour and ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunn A, Irvine RJ (2003) Subclinical parasitism and ruminant foraging strategies—a review. Wildlife Soc Bull 31:117–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison JF, Camazine S, Marden JH, Kirkton SD, Rozo A, Yang XL (2001) Mite not make it home: Tracheal mites reduce the safety margin for oxygen delivery of flying honeybees. J Exper Biol 204:805–814

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1979) Bumblebee economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes JC, Zohar S (1990) Pathology and host behaviour. In: Behnke JM (ed) Parasitism and host behaviour. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 34–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Husband RW, Sinha RN (1970) A revision of genus Locustacarus with a key to genera of family Podapolipidae (Acarina). Ann Entomol Soc Am 63:1152–1162

    Google Scholar 

  • Imhoof B, Schmid-Hempel P (1999) Colony success of the bumble bee, Bombus terrestris, in relation to infections by two protozoan parasites, Crithidia bombi and Nosema bombi. Insectes Sociaux 46:233–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (1999) SAS User’s Guide. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Ives AR, Murray DL (1997) Can sublethal parasitism destabilize predator-prey population dynamics? A model of snowshoe hares, predators and parasites. J Anim Ecol 66:265–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Karban R, English-Loeb G (1997) Tachinid parasitoids affect host plant choice by caterpillars to increase caterpillar survival. Ecology 78:603–611

    Google Scholar 

  • Laverty TM (1994) Bumble Bee Learning and Flower Morphology. Anim Behav 47:531–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipa JJ, Triggiani O (1980) Crithidia bombi sp n. A flagellated parasite of a bumble-bee Bombus terrestris L. (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Acta Protozoologica 27:287–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore J (2002) Parasites and the behaviour of animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller CB, Schmid-Hempel P (1992a) Correlates of reproductive success among field colonies of Bombus lucorum - the importance of growth and parasites. Ecol Entomol 17:343–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller CB, Schmid-Hempel P (1992b) Variation in life-history pattern in relation to worker mortality in the bumblebee, Bombus lucorum. Functional Ecol 6:48–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Otterstatter MC, Whidden TL (2004) Patterns of parasitism by tracheal mites (Locustacarus buchneri) in natural bumble bee populations. Apidologie 35:351–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin R, Brodeur J, Moore J (1994) Parasite manipulation of host behavior—should hosts always lose? Oikos 70:479–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel P (1998) Parasites in social insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel P (2001) On the evolutionary ecology of host-parasite interactions: addressing the question with regard to bumblebees and their parasites. Naturwissenschaften 88:147–158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel P, Schmid-Hempel R (1990) Endoparasitic larvae of conopid flies alter pollination behavior of bumblebees. Naturwissenschaften 77:450–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel P, Stauffer HP (1998) Parasites and flower choice of bumblebees. Anim Behav 55:819–825

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel R, Schmid-Hempel P (1991) Endoparasitic flies, pollen-collection by bumblebees and a potential host-parasite conflict. Oecologia 87:227–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shykoff JA, Schmid-Hempel P (1991) Incidence and effects of four parasites in natural populations of bumble bees in Switzerland. Apidologie 22:117–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd edn. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamp NE (1981) Behavior of parasitized aposematic caterpillars: advantages to the parasitoid or the host? Am Naturalist 118:715–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutcliffe GH, Plowright RC (1988) The Effects of food supply on adult size in the bumble bee Bombus terricola Kirby (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Can Entomol 120:1051–1058

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael C. Otterstatter.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Giurfa

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Otterstatter, M.C., Gegear, R.J., Colla, S.R. et al. Effects of parasitic mites and protozoa on the flower constancy and foraging rate of bumble bees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 58, 383–389 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0945-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0945-3

Keywords

Navigation