Abstract
We proposed “foundress-max” hypothesis that a bumble bee foundress chooses her nest site to maximize her energy intake rate from nectar. To examine the hypothesis, we estimated the maximum energy intake rate at each site in the study area and compared the distribution of the maximum energy intake rates with those of actual nest sites. We also calculated rank correlations of the maximum energy intake rate with the number of nest-searching foundresses at 54 sites. The nest locations supported the foundress-max hypothesis, but the number of nest-searching foundresses did not. This could be attributed to the density of food sites: many food sites may attract many foundresses. Therefore, we subsequently proposed “foundress-sum” hypothesis that a foundress chooses her nest site to maximize the sum of energy intake rates. The nest locations supported the foundress-max hypothesis more than the foundress-sum hypothesis. A profitable food site would affect foundresses’ nest site selection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen T, Cameron S, McGinley R, Heinrich B (1978) The role of workers and new queens in the ergonomics of a bumblebee colony (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). J Kans Entomol Soc 51:329–342
Beekman M, van Stratum P (2000) Does the diapause experience of bumblebee queens Bombus terrestris affect colony characteristics? Ecol Entomol 25:1–6
Bowers MA (1985) Bumble bee colonization, extinction, and reproduction in subalpine meadows in Northeastern Utah. Ecology 66:914–927
Burns JG, Thomson JD (2006) A test of spatial memory and movement patterns of bumblebees at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Behav Ecol 17:48–55
Cartar RV, Dill LM (1991) Costs of energy shortfall for bumble bee colonies: predation, social parasitism, and brood development. Can Entomol 123:283–293
Comba L, Corbet SA, Barron A, Bird A, Collinge S, Miyazaki N, Powell M (1999) Garden flowers: Insect visits and the floral reward of horticulturally-modified variants. Ann Bot 83:73–86
Cresswell JE, Osborne JL, Goulson D (2000) An economic model of the limits to foraging range in central place foragers with numerical solutions for bumblebees. Ecol Entomol 25:249–255
Dukas R, Edelstein-Keshet L (1998) The spatial distribution of colonial food provisioners. J Theor Biol 190:121–134
Ellington CP, Machin KE, Casey TM (1990) Oxygen consumption of bumblebees in forward flight. Nature 347:472–473
Heinrich B (1979) Bumblebee economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Kells AR, Goulson D (2003) Preferred nesting sites of bumblebee queens (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in agroecosystems in the UK. Biol Conserv 109:165–174
Korn EL (1984) Kendall-tau with a blocking variable. Biometrics 40:209–214
Lonsdorf E, Kremen C, Ricketts T, Winfree R, Williams N, Greenleaf S (2009) Modelling pollination services across agricultural landscapes. Ann Bot . doi:10.1093/aob/mcp069
Osborne JL, Clark SJ, Morris RJ, Williams IH, Riley JR, Smith AD, Reynolds DR, Edwards AS (1999) A landscape-scale study of bumble bee foraging range and constancy, using harmonic radar. J Appl Ecol 36:519–533
Plowright RC, Pendrel BA (1977) Larval growth in bumble bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Can Entomol 109:967–973
Renton K (2004) Agonistic interactions of nesting and nonbreeding macaws. The Condor 106:354–362
Schmid-Hempel R, Schmid-Hempel P (1998) Colony performance and immunocompetence of a social insect, Bombus terrestris, in poor and variable environments. Funct Ecol 12:22–30
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
Sutcliffe GH, Plowright RC (1990) The effects of pollen availability on development time in the bumble bee Bombus terricola K. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Can J Zool 68:1120–1123
Suzuki Y, Kawaguchi LG, Toquenaga Y (2007) Estimating nest locations of bumblebee Bombus ardens from flower quality and distribution. Ecol Res 22:220–227
Svensson B, Lagerlöf J, Svensson BG (2000) Habitat preferences of nest-seeking bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in an agricultural landscape. Agric Ecosyst Environ 77:247–255
Williams NM, Kremen C (2007) Resource distributions among habitats determine solitary bee offspring production in a mosaic landscape. Ecol Appl 17:910–921
Worden BD, Papaj DR (2005) Flower choice copying in bumblebees. Biol Lett 1:504–507
Acknowledgements
We thank Kazuharu Ohashi, Teruyoshi Nagamitsu, and Yoh Iwasa for their helpful advice. We also thank Maki Inoue for her fruitful input. Yoshiko Shimono, Takashi T. Makino, Hiroyuki Mano, Chikako Ishida, Takumi Komuro, and Tomonori Yanaka helped us to search for the nests of bumble bees and investigate the nest-searching behaviors of foundresses. This experiment was conducted in compliance with current laws in Japan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by R. Moritz
Appendices
Appendix 1: worker-sum hypothesis
In our previous study, we had proposed the worker-sum hypothesis that nest site is located to maximize the sum of net rates of energy intake of a foraging worker after colony establishment (Suzuki et al. 2007). In adopting the worker-sum hypothesis, we had assumed that a given candidate nest site (x, y) is evaluated according to the sum of net rates of energy intake of a foraging worker from the candidate nest site, denoted by I(x, y), after the nest-building season. The equation of I(x, y) is the same as Eq. 8 in the foundress-sum hypothesis; however, the net rate of energy intake of a foraging worker after colony establishment is used in the equation of I(x, y). We had hypothesized that the probability of colony establishment at (x, y) increases as the evaluation value I(x, y) increases.
The worker-sum hypothesis was not supported in this study. I(x, y) predicted no actual nest sites in May and June (Table 4). In Suzuki et al. (2007), the sum of I(x, y) at the actual nest sites using the net rate of energy intake of a foraging worker in mid-May was significantly higher than that of sites sampled randomly in a randomization test. However, the sum of I(x, y) at actual nest sites was not significantly higher than those of sites sampled randomly in this study (e.g., P = 0.334887 in mid-May).
Appendix 2: measurement of colony development
We dug out colonies II and III from site B and colonies IV and V from site C after maturation of sexuals in colonies. The physical size of each nest and the total number of cocoons were measured as the indicators of colony development. Large cocoons were also counted because they can be considered as cocoons of sexuals. Cocoons having a width greater than 10 mm were regarded as large cocoons.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Suzuki, Y., Kawaguchi, L.G., Munidasa, D.T. et al. Do bumble bee queens choose nest sites to maximize foraging rate? Testing models of nest site selection. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63, 1353–1362 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-009-0789-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-009-0789-3