@phdthesis{Schilcher2023,
  author    = {Schilcher, Felix},
  title     = {Regulation of the nurse-forager transition in honeybees (\(Apis\) \(mellifera\))},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-28935},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-289352},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Honeybees are among the few animals that rely on eusociality to survive. While the task of queen and drones is only reproduction, all other tasks are accomplished by sterile female worker bees. Different tasks are mostly divided by worker bees of different ages (temporal polyethism). Young honeybees perform tasks inside the hive like cleaning and nursing. Older honeybees work at the periphery of the nest and fulfill tasks like guarding the hive entrance. The oldest honeybees eventually leave the hive to forage for resources until they die. However, uncontrollable circumstances might force the colony to adapt or perish. For example, the introduced Varroa destructor mite or the deformed wing virus might erase a lot of in-hive bees. On the other hand, environmental events might kill a lot of foragers, leaving the colony with no new food intake. Therefore, adaptability of task allocation must be a priority for a honeybee colony. In my dissertation, I employed a wide range of behavioral, molecular biological and analytical techniques to unravel the underlying molecular and physiological mechanisms of the honeybee division of labor, especially in conjunction with honeybee malnourishment. The genes AmOARα1, AmTAR1, Amfor and vitellogenin have long been implied to be important for the transition from in-hive tasks to foraging. I have studied in detail expression of all of these genes during the transition from nursing to foraging to understand how their expression patterns change during this important phase of life. My focus lay on gene expression in the honeybee brain and fat body. I found an increase in the AmOARα1 and the Amforα mRNA expression with the transition from in-hive tasks to foraging and a decrease in expression of the other genes in both tissues. Interestingly, I found the opposite pattern of the AmOARα1 and AmTAR1 mRNA expression in the honeybee fat body during orientation flights. Furthermore, I closely observed juvenile hormone titers and triglyceride levels during this crucial time. Juvenile hormone titers increased with the transition from in-hive tasks to foraging and triglyceride levels decreased. Furthermore, in-hive bees and foragers also differ on a behavioral and physiological level. For example, foragers are more responsive towards light and sucrose. I proposed that modulation via biogenic amines, especially via octopamine and tyramine, can increase or decrease the responsiveness of honeybees. For that purpose, in-hive bees and foragers were injected with both biogenic amines and the receptor response was quantified 1 using electroretinography. In addition, I studied the behavioral response of the bees to light using a phototaxis assay. Injecting octopamine increased the receptor response and tyramine decreased it. Also, both groups of honeybees showed an increased phototactic response when injected with octopamine and a decreased response when injected with tyramine, independent of locomotion. Additionally, nutrition has long been implied to be a driver for division of labor. Undernourished honeybees are known to speed up their transition to foragers, possibly to cope with the missing resources. Furthermore, larval undernourishment has also been implied to speed up the transition from in-hive bees to foragers, due to increasing levels of juvenile hormone titers in adult honeybees after larval starvation. Therefore, I reared honeybees in-vitro to compare the hatched adult bees of starved and overfed larvae to bees reared under the standard in-vitro rearing diet. However, first I had to investigate whether the in-vitro rearing method affects adult honeybees. I showed effects of in-vitro rearing on behavior, with in-vitro reared honeybees foraging earlier and for a shorter time than hive reared honeybees. Yet, nursing behavior was unaffected. Afterwards, I investigated the effects of different larval diets on adult honeybee workers. I found no effects of malnourishment on behavioral or physiological factors besides a difference in weight. Honeybee weight increased with increasing amounts of larval food, but the effect seemed to vanish after a week. These results show the complexity and adaptability of the honeybee division of labor. They show the importance of the biogenic amines octopamine and tyramine and of the corresponding receptors AmOARα1 and AmTAR1 in modulating the transition from inhive bees to foragers. Furthermore, they show that in-vitro rearing has no effects on nursing behavior, but that it speeds up the transition from nursing to foraging, showing strong similarities to effects of larval pollen undernourishment. However, larval malnourishment showed almost no effects on honeybee task allocation or physiology. It seems that larval malnourishment can be easily compensated during the early lifetime of adult honeybees.},
  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}
}