@phdthesis{Dornhaus2002,
  author    = {Dornhaus, Anna},
  title     = {The role of communication in the foraging process of social bees},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-3468},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2002},
  abstract  = {In the various groups of social bees, different systems of communication about food sources occur. These communication systems are different solutions to a common problem of social insects: efficiently allocating the necessary number of workers first to the task of foraging and second to the most profitable food sources. The solution chosen by each species depends on the particular ecological circumstances as well as the evolutionary history of that species. For example, the outstanding difference between the bumble bee and the honey bee system is that honey bees can communicate the location of profitable food sources to nestmates, which bumble bees cannot. To identify possible selection pressures that could explain this difference, I have quantified the benefits of communicating location in honey bees. I show that these strongly depend on the habitat, and that communicating location might not benefit bees in temperate habitats. This could be due to the differing spatial distributions of resources in different habitats, in particular between temperate and tropical regions. These distributions may be the reason why the mostly temperate-living bumble bees have never evolved a communication system that allows them to transfer information on location of food sources, whereas most tropical social bees (all honey bees and many stingless bees) are able to recruit nestmates to specific points in their foraging range. Nevertheless, I show that in bumble bees the allocation of workers to foraging is also regulated by communication. Successful foragers distribute in the nest a pheromone which alerts other bees to the presence of food. This pheromone stems from a tergite gland, the function of which had not been identified previously. Usage of a pheromone in the nest to alert other individuals to forage has not been described in other social insects, and might constitute a new mode of communicating about food sources. The signal might be modulated depending on the quality of the food source. Bees in the nest sample the nectar that has been brought into the nest. Their decision whether to go out and forage depends not only on the pheromone signal, but also on the quality of the nectar they have sampled. In this way, foraging activity of a bumble bee colony is adjusted to foraging conditions, which means most bees are allocated to foraging only if high-quality food sources are available. In addition, foraging activity is adjusted to the amount of food already stored. In a colony with full honeypots, no new bees are allocated to foraging. These results help us understand how the allocation of workers to the task of food collection is regulated according to external and internal nest conditions in bumble bees.},
  subject      = {Hummel},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Thom2002,
  author    = {Thom, Corinna},
  title     = {Dynamics and Communication Structures of Nectar Foraging in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera)},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-3601},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2002},
  abstract  = {In this thesis, I examined honey bee nectar foraging with emphasis on the communication system. To document how a honey bee colony adjusts its daily nectar foraging effort, I observed a random sample of individually marked workers during the entire day, and then estimated the number and activity of all nectar foragers in the colony. The total number of active nectar foragers in a colony changed frequently between days. Foraging activity did not usually change between days. A honey bee colony adjusts its daily foraging effort by changing the number of its nectar foragers rather than their activity. I tested whether volatiles produced by a foraging colony activated nectar foragers of a non-foraging colony by connecting with a glass tube two colonies. Each colony had access to a different green house. In 50\% of all experiments, volatile substances from the foraging colony stimulated nectar foragers of the non-foraging colony to fly to an empty feeder. The results of this study show that honey bees can produce a chemical signal or cue that activates nectar foragers. However, more experiments are needed to establish the significance of the activating volatiles for the foraging communication system. The brief piping signal of nectar foragers inhibits forager recruitment by stopping waggle dances (Nieh 1993, Kirchner 1993). However, I observed that many piping signals (approximately 43\%) were produced off the dance floor, a restricted area in the hive where most waggle dances are performed. If the inhibition of waggle dances would be the only function of the brief piping signal, tremble dancers should produce piping signals mainly on the dance floor, where the probability to encounter waggle dancers is highest. To therefore investigate the piping signal in more detail, I experimentally established the foraging context of the brief piping signal, characterized its acoustic properties, and documented for the first time the unique behavior of piping nectar foragers by observing foragers throughout their entire stay in the hive. Piping nectar foragers usually began to tremble dance immediately upon their return into the hive, spent more time in the hive, more time dancing, had longer unloading latencies, and were the only foragers that sometimes unloaded their nectar directly into cells instead of giving it to a nectar receiver bee. Most of the brief piping signals (approximately 99\%) were produced by tremble dancers, yet not all tremble dancers (approximately 48\%) piped. This suggests that piping and tremble dancing have related, but not identical functions in the foraging system. Thus, the brief piping signals may not only inhibit forager recruitment, but have an additional function both on and off the dance floor. In particular, the piping signal might function 1. to stop the recruitment of additional nectar foragers, and 2. as a modulatory signal to alter the response threshold of signal receivers to the tremble dance. The observation that piping tremble dancers often did not experience long unloading delays before they started to dance gave rise to a question. A forager's unloading delay provides reliable information about the relative work capacities of nectar foragers and nectar receivers, because each returning forager unloads her nectar to a nectar receiver before she takes off for the next foraging trip. Queuing delays for either foragers or receivers lower foraging efficiency and can be eliminated by recruiting workers to the group in shortage. Short unloading delays indicate to the nectar forager a shortage of foragers and stimulate waggle dancing which recruits nectar foragers. Long unloading delays indicate a shortage of nectar receivers and stimulate tremble dancing which recruits nectar receivers (Seeley 1992, Seeley et al. 1996). Because the short unloading delays of piping tremble dancers indicated that tremble dancing can be elicited by other factors than long unloading delays, I tested whether a hive-external stimulus, the density of foragers at the food source, stimulated tremble dancing directly. The experiments show that tremble dancing can be caused directly by a high density of foragers at the food source and suggest that tremble dancing can be elicited by a decrease of foraging efficiency either inside (e.g. shortage of receiver bees) or outside (e.g. difficulty of loading nectar) the hive. Tremble dancing as a reaction to hive-external stimuli seems to occur under natural conditions and can thus be expected to have some adaptive significance. The results imply that if the hive-external factors that elicit tremble dancing do not indicate a shortage of nectar receiver bees in the hive, the function of the tremble dance may not be restricted to the recruitment of additional nectar receivers, but might be the inhibition or re-organization of nectar foraging.},
  subject      = {Bienen <Familie>},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Stangler2015,
  author    = {Stangler, Eva},
  title     = {Effects of habitat fragmentation on trap-nesting bees, wasps and their natural enemies in small secondary rainforest fragments in Costa Rica},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-108254},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Summary (English) I. Human induced global change threatens biodiversity and trophic interactions. Fragmentation is considered as one of the major threats to biodiversity and can cause reduced species richness, population declines, loss of genetic diversity and disruption of trophic interactions such as predation and parasitism. However forest fragmentation effects can be eclectic due to species specific traits. Specialist species with narrower niches or at higher trophic levels may be in danger of extinction whereas generalist species with less specific habitat requirements may even profit from fragmentation. In the tropics, known as "the" terrestrial biodiversity hotspots, even biodiversity inventories are often lacking, especially in forest canopies. Ongoing deforestation and resulting fragmentation in tropical regions are expected to heavily affect ecosystem functions by changes in biodiversity, community compositions and disruption of trophic interactions. It is even less unknown in what extent different global change drivers for example climate change and fragmentation interact. It is unlikely that deforestation will end, so that small secondary forest fragments will be important habitat elements that must be investigated to optimize their potential contribution to biodiversity conservation. This dissertation aimed to disentangle the effects of forest fragmentation on trap-nesting bee and wasp communities in small secondary forest fragments addressing the following main questions: 1) Are there interactive effects between microclimate and fragmentation on the abundance of bees and wasps, their mortality - and parasitism rates (Chapter II)? 2) How does fragmentation affect bee biodiversity from canopy to the understory with considerations of single species patterns (Chapter III)? 3) How is fragmentation affecting diversity and community composition of different trophic levels between understory and canopy with emphasis on the host-antagonist relation? (Chapter IV). II. A variety of global change drivers affect biodiversity and trophic interactions. The combined effects of habitat fragmentation and climate change are poorly understood and with ongoing deforestation and agricultural intensification secondary rainforest fragments might contribute to biodiversity conservation and mitigation of climate warming. This chapter investigated the interactive effects of habitat fragmentation and microclimate on the abundance and biotic interactions of trap-nesting bees and wasps in secondary forest fragments in the Northeastern lowlands of Costa Rica. Habitat area did not affect hymenopteran abundance, parasitism and mortality rates, but tree location- from the forest border to the forest center- influenced all variables. Interactive effects were found such as in the higher mortality rates at interior locations in larger fragments. Mean temperature at edge and interior locations led to significant effects on all tested variables and interactive effects between temperature and tree locations were found. Abundances at interior locations were significantly higher with increasing temperatures. Mortality rates at interior location increased at lower mean temperatures, whereas higher temperatures at edges marginally increased mortality rates. Our results indicate, that edge effects, mediated by altered microclimatic conditions, significantly change biotic interactions of trap-nesting hymenopterans in small secondary fragments. III. This chapter focusses on the vertical distribution of bees, their parasitism and mortality rates as well as single species patterns in relation to fragment size and edge effects in secondary rainforest remnants. No size effects on bee abundance, bee diversity and on parasitism- and mortality rates were found. Bees were least abundant at the intermediate height and were most abundant in the understory; whereas the highest diversity was found in the canopy. Tree location had no effect on bee abundance, but on bee diversity since most species were found in the forest interior. The cuckoo bees Aglaomelissa duckei and Coelioxys sp. 1 only partly followed the patterns of their hosts, two Centris species. Edge effects greatly influenced the bee community, so that the amount of edge habitat in secondary forest fragments will influence the conservation value for bees. IV. In this section the effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity, on community structure of hosts and natural enemies as well as the relation of hosts and antagonists were investigated from the understory to the canopy. The results stress the importance to monitor biodiversity, community composition and trophic interactions from the understory to the canopy. The higher trophic level of the antagonists was found to be more sensitive to fragment size compared to their hosts. Again edge effects were found to be the dominant driver since both host and antagonist richness, as well as community compositions were strongly affected. Ongoing fragmentation and increased amount of edge habitat could favor few abundant disturbance-adapted species over the rare and more diverse forest-adapted species. A positive-density dependent parasitism rate was demonstrated, as well as an increase of the parasitism rate not only with antagonist abundance but also diversity. Small secondary forest fragments surely can contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and trophic interactions, but increase of edge habitat will have negative consequences on above-ground nesting Hymenoptera, so that important interactions such as pollination, predation and parasitism could be disrupted. Therefore small forest fragments could contribute to biodiversity conservation but will not be able to compensate for the loss of large areas of primary forests. V. This dissertation contributes to the understanding of habitat area - and edge effects as well as the interaction of those with microclimatic conditions in small secondary rainforest fragments. As study system trap nests inhabited by solitary above-ground nesting bees, wasps and their natural enemies were chosen because they allow to study trophic interactions along their whole vertical distribution from the understory to the canopy. The effect of fragment size was rather weak, however, larger sizes affected the diversity of natural enemies positively, proofing the hypothesis that higher trophic levels react more sensitive to habitat loss. Edge effects heavily affected the abundance, diversity and community composition of hosts and their natural enemies as well as parasitism and mortality rates. Increased edge conditions resulting from ongoing fragmentation and deforestation will therefore negatively affect bees, wasps and their trophic interactions with natural enemies. Those changes affect important processes such as pollination, predation and parasitism, which could result in changes of ecosystem functioning. This study showed the importance to include all strata in biodiversity monitoring since height did matter for the trap-nesting communities. Diversity was shown to be higher in the canopy and community composition did change significantly. To conclude we could show that secondary forest fragments can sustain a trap-nesting bee and wasp community, but the amount of interior habitat is highly important for the conservation of forest-adapted species. Probably the conservation of large primary forest in combination with a high habitat connectivity, for example with small secondary forest fragments, will help to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem functioning better than the mere presence of small forest fragments.},
  subject      = {Costa Rica},
  language  = {en}
}