@article{RoesslerSpaetheGroh2017,
  author    = {R{\"o}ssler, Wolfgang and Spaethe, Johannes and Groh, Claudia},
  title     = {Pitfalls of using confocal-microscopy based automated quantification of synaptic complexes in honeybee mushroom bodies (response to Peng and Yang 2016)},
  series = {Scientific Reports},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Scientific Reports},
  number    = {9786},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41598-017-09967-8},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-170451},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {A recent study by Peng and Yang in Scientific Reports using confocal-microscopy based automated quantification of anti-synapsin labeled microglomeruli in the mushroom bodies of honeybee brains reports potentially incorrect numbers of microglomerular densities. Whereas several previous studies using visually supervised or automated counts from confocal images and analyses of serial 3D electron-microscopy data reported consistent numbers of synaptic complexes per volume, Peng and Yang revealed extremely low numbers differing by a factor of 18 or more from those obtained in visually supervised counts, and by a factor 22-180 from numbers in two other studies using automated counts. This extreme discrepancy is especially disturbing as close comparison of raw confocal images of anti-synapsin labeled whole-mount brain preparations are highly similar across these studies. We conclude that these discrepancies may reside in potential misapplication of confocal imaging followed by erroneous use of automated image analysis software. Consequently, the reported microglomerular densities during maturation and after manipulation by insecticides require validation by application of appropriate confocal imaging methods and analyses tools that rely on skilled observers. We suggest several improvements towards more reliable or standardized automated or semi-automated synapse counts in whole mount preparations of insect brains.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SteijvenSpaetheSteffanDewenteretal.2017,
  author    = {Steijven, Karin and Spaethe, Johannes and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and H{\"a}rtel, Stephan},
  title     = {Learning performance and brain structure of artificially-reared honey bees fed with different quantities of food},
  series = {PeerJ},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {PeerJ},
  number    = {e3858},
  doi       = {10.7717/peerj.3858},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-170137},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Background Artificial rearing of honey bee larvae is an established method which enables to fully standardize the rearing environment and to manipulate the supplied diet to the brood. However, there are no studies which compare learning performance or neuroanatomic differences of artificially-reared (in-lab) bees in comparison with their in-hive reared counterparts. Methods Here we tested how different quantities of food during larval development affect body size, brain morphology and learning ability of adult honey bees. We used in-lab rearing to be able to manipulate the total quantity of food consumed during larval development. After hatching, a subset of the bees was taken for which we made 3D reconstructions of the brains using confocal laser-scanning microscopy. Learning ability and memory formation of the remaining bees was tested in a differential olfactory conditioning experiment. Finally, we evaluated how bees reared with different quantities of artificial diet compared to in-hive reared bees. Results Thorax and head size of in-lab reared honey bees, when fed the standard diet of 160 µl or less, were slightly smaller than hive bees. The brain structure analyses showed that artificially reared bees had smaller mushroom body (MB) lateral calyces than their in-hive counterparts, independently of the quantity of food they received. However, they showed the same total brain size and the same associative learning ability as in-hive reared bees. In terms of mid-term memory, but not early long-term memory, they performed even better than the in-hive control. Discussion We have demonstrated that bees that are reared artificially (according to the Aupinel protocol) and kept in lab-conditions perform the same or even better than their in-hive sisters in an olfactory conditioning experiment even though their lateral calyces were consistently smaller at emergence. The applied combination of experimental manipulation during the larval phase plus subsequent behavioral and neuro-anatomic analyses is a powerful tool for basic and applied honey bee research.},
  language  = {en}
}