@phdthesis{Nuernberger2018,
  author    = {N{\"u}rnberger, Fabian},
  title     = {Timing of colony phenology and foraging activity in honey bees},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-155105},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {I. Timing is a crucial feature in organisms that live within a variable and changing environment. Complex mechanisms to measure time are wide-spread and were shown to exist in many taxa. These mechanisms are expected to provide fitness benefits by enabling organisms to anticipate environmental changes and adapt accordingly. However, very few studies have addressed the adaptive value of proper timing. The objective of this PhD-project was to investigate mechanisms and fitness consequences of timing decisions concerning colony phenology and foraging activity in the honey bee (Apis mellifera), a social insect species with a high degree of social organization and one of the most important pollinators of wild plants and crops. In chapter II, a study is presented that aimed to identify the consequences of disrupted synchrony between colony phenology and the local environment by manipulating the timing of brood onset after hibernation. In a follow-up experiment, the importance of environmental factors for the timing of brood onset was investigated to assess the potential of climate change to disrupt synchronization of colony phenology (Chapter III). Chapter IV aimed to prove for the first time that honey bees can use interval time-place learning to improve foraging activity in a variable environment. Chapter V investigates the fitness benefits of information exchange between nest mates via waggle dance communication about a resource environment that is heterogeneous in space and time. II. In the study presented in chapter II, the importance of the timing of brood onset after hibernation as critical point in honey bee colony phenology in temperate zones was investigated. Honey bee colonies were overwintered at two climatically different sites. By translocating colonies from each site to the other in late winter, timing of brood onset was manipulated and consequently colony phenology was desynchronized with the local environment. Delaying colony phenology in respect to the local environment decreased the capability of colonies to exploit the abundant spring bloom. Early brood onset, on the other hand, increased the loads of the brood parasite Varroa destructor later in the season with negative impact on colony worker population size. This indicates a timing related trade-off and illustrates the importance of investigating effects of climate change on complex multi-trophic systems. It can be concluded that timing of brood onset in honey bees is an important fitness relevant step for colony phenology that is highly sensitive to climatic conditions in late winter. Further, phenology shifts and mismatches driven by climate change can have severe fitness consequences. III. In chapter III, I assess the importance of the environmental factors ambient temperature and photoperiod as well as elapsed time on the timing of brood onset. Twenty-four hibernating honey bee colonies were placed into environmental chambers and allocated to different combinations of two temperature regimes and three different light regimes. Brood onset was identified non-invasively by tracking comb temperature within the winter cluster. The experiment revealed that ambient temperature plays a major role in the timing of brood onset, but the response of honey bee colonies to temperature increases is modified by photoperiod. Further, the data indicate the involvement of an internal clock. I conclude that the timing of brood onset is complex but probably highly susceptible to climate change and especially spells of warm weather in winter. IV. In chapter IV, it was examined if honey bees are capable of interval time-place learning and if this ability improves foraging efficiency in a dynamic resource environment. In a field experiment with artificial feeders, foragers were able to learn time intervals and use this ability to anticipate time periods during which feeders were active. Further, interval time-place learning enabled foragers to increase nectar uptake rates. It was concluded that interval time-place learning can help honey bee foragers to adapt to the complex and variable temporal patterns of floral resource environments. V. The study presented in chapter V identified the importance of the honey bee waggle dance communication for the spatiotemporal coordination of honey bee foraging activity in resource environments that can vary from day to day. Consequences of disrupting the instructional component of honey bee dance communication were investigated in eight temperate zone landscapes with different levels of spatiotemporal complexity. While nectar uptake of colonies was not affected, waggle dance communication significantly benefitted pollen harvest irrespective of landscape complexity. I suggest that this is explained by the fact that honey bees prefer to forage pollen in semi-natural habitats, which provide diverse resource species but are sparse and presumably hard to find in intensively managed agricultural landscapes. I conclude that waggle dance communication helps to ensure a sufficient and diverse pollen diet which is crucial for honey bee colony health. VI. In my PhD-project, I could show that honey bee colonies are able to adapt their activities to a seasonally and daily changing environment, which affects resource uptake, colony development, colony health and ultimately colony fitness. Ongoing global change, however, puts timing in honey bee colonies at risk. Climate change has the potential to cause mismatches with the local resource environment. Intensivation of agricultural management with decreased resource diversity and short resource peaks in spring followed by distinctive gaps increases the probability of mismatches. Even the highly efficient foraging system of honey bees might not ensure a sufficiently diverse and healthy diet in such an environment. The global introduction of the parasitic mite V. destructor and the increased exposure to pesticides in intensively managed landscapes further degrades honey bee colony health. This might lead to reduced cognitive capabilities in workers and impact the communication and social organization in colonies, thereby undermining the ability of honey bee colonies to adapt to their environment.},
  subject      = {Biene},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{DeğirmencineePoelloth2023,
  author    = {Değirmenci [n{\´e}e P{\"o}lloth], Laura},
  title     = {Sugar perception and sugar receptor function in the honeybee (\(Apis\) \(mellifera\))},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-32187},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-321873},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {In the eusocial insect honeybee (Apis mellifera), many sterile worker bees live together with a reproductive queen in a colony. All tasks of the colony are performed by the workers, undergoing age-dependent division of labor. Beginning as hive bees, they take on tasks inside the hive such as cleaning or the producing of larval food, later developing into foragers. With that, the perception of sweetness plays a crucial role for all honeybees whether they are sitting on the honey stores in the hive or foraging for food. Their ability to sense sweetness is undoubtedly necessary to develop and evaluate food sources. Many of the behavioral decisions in honeybees are based on sugar perception, either on an individual level for ingestion, or for social behavior such as the impulse to collect or process nectar. In this context, honeybees show a complex spectrum of abilities to perceive sweetness on many levels. They are able to perceive at least seven types of sugars and decide to collect them for the colony. Further, they seem to distinguish between these sugars or at least show clear preferences when collecting them. Additionally, the perception of sugar is not rigid in honeybees. For instance, their responsiveness towards sugar changes during the transition from in-hive bees (e.g. nurses) to foraging and is linked to the division of labor. Other direct or immediate factors changing responsiveness to sugars are stress, starvation or underlying factors, such as genotype. Interestingly, the complexity in their sugar perception is in stark contrast to the fact that honeybees seem to have only three predicted sugar receptors. In this work, we were able to characterize the three known sugar receptors (AmGr1, AmGr2 and AmGr3) of the honeybee fully and comprehensively in oocytes (Manuscript II, Chapter 3 and Manuscript III, Chapter 4). We could show that AmGr1 is a broad sugar receptor reacting to sucrose, glucose, maltose, melezitose and trehalose (which is the honeybees' main blood sugar), but not fructose. AmGr2 acts as its co-receptor altering AmGr1's specificity, AmGr3 is a specific fructose receptor and we proved the heterodimerization of all receptors. With my studies, I was able to reproduce and compare the ligand specificity of the sugar receptors in vivo by generating receptor mutants with CRISPR/Cas9. With this thesis, I was able to define AmGr1 and AmGr3 as the honeybees' basis receptors already capable to detect all sugars of its known taste spectrum. In the expression analysis of my doctoral thesis (Manuscript I, Chapter 2) I demonstrated that both basis receptors are expressed in the antennae and the brain of nurse bees and foragers. This thesis assumes that AmGr3 (like the Drosophila homologue) functions as a sensor for fructose, which might be the satiety signal, while AmGr1 can sense trehalose as the main blood sugar in the brain. Both receptors show a reduced expression in the brain of foragers when compared with nurse bees. These results may reflect the higher concentrated diet of nurse bees in the hive. The higher number of receptors in the brain may allow nurse bees to perceive hunger earlier and to consume the food their sitting on. Forager bees have to be more persistent to hunger, when they are foraging, and food is not so accessible. The findings of reduced expression of the fructose receptor AmGr3 in the antennae of nurse bees are congruent with my other result that nurse bees are also less responsive to fructose at the antennae when compared to foragers (Manuscript I, Chapter 2). This is possible, since nurse bees sit more likely on ripe honey which contains not only higher levels of sugars but also monosaccharides (such as fructose), while foragers have to evaluate less-concentrated nectar. My investigations of the expression of AmGr1 in the antennae of honeybees found no differences between nurse bees and foragers, although foragers are more responsive to the respective sugar sucrose (Manuscript I, Chapter 2). Considering my finding that AmGr2 is the co-receptor of AmGr1, it can be assumed that AmGr1 and the mediated sucrose taste might not be directly controlled by its expression, but indirectly by its co-receptor. My thesis therefore clearly shows that sugar perception is associated with division of labor in honeybees and appears to be directly or indirectly regulated via expression. The comparison with a characterization study using other bee breeds and thus an alternative protein sequence of AmGr1 shows that co-expression of different AmGr1 versions with AmGr2 alters the sugar response differently. Therefore, this thesis provides first important indications that alternative splicing could also represent an important regulatory mechanism for sugar perception in honeybees. Further, I found out that the bitter compound quinine lowers the reward quality in learning experiments for honeybees (Manuscript IV, Chapter 5). So far, no bitter receptor has been found in the genome of honeybees and this thesis strongly assumes that bitter substances such as quinine inhibit sugar receptors in honeybees. With this finding, my work includes other molecules as possible regulatory mechanism in the honeybee sugar perception as well. We showed that the inhibitory effect is lower for fructose compared to sucrose. Considering that sugar signals might be processed as differently attractive in honeybees, this thesis concludes that the sugar receptor inhibition via quinine in honeybees might depend on the receptor (or its co-receptor), is concentration-dependent and based on the salience or attractiveness and concentration of the sugar present. With my thesis, I was able to expand the knowledge on honeybee's sugar perception and formulate a complex, comprehensive overview. Thereby, I demonstrated the multidimensional mechanism that regulates the sugar receptors and thus the sugar perception of honeybees. With this work, I defined AmGr1 and AmGr3 as the basis of sugar perception and enlarged these components to the co-receptor AmGr2 and the possible splice variants of AmGr1. I further demonstrated how those sugar receptor components function, interact and that they are clearly involved in the division of labor in honeybees. In summary, my thesis describes the mechanisms that enable honeybees to perceive sugar in a complex way, even though they inhere a limited number of sugar receptors. My data strongly suggest that honeybees overall might not only differentiate sugars and their diet by their general sweetness (as expected with only one main sugar receptor). The found sugar receptor mechanisms and their interplay further suggest that honeybees might be able to discriminate directly between monosaccharides and disaccharides or sugar molecules and with that their diet (honey and nectar).},
  subject      = {Biene},
  language  = {en}
}