Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

133777-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The purpose of this experiment was to test how different nutrition supplementation would affect honey bee lifespan. The use of sugar syrup and pollen as well as protein, probiotic, and vitamin supplement were the independent variables in this experiment. The average lifespan of a honey bee (Apis mellifera) is around

The purpose of this experiment was to test how different nutrition supplementation would affect honey bee lifespan. The use of sugar syrup and pollen as well as protein, probiotic, and vitamin supplement were the independent variables in this experiment. The average lifespan of a honey bee (Apis mellifera) is around 30 days depending on climate and time of year (Amdam & Omholt, 2002). This experiment yielded results that would require further testing but was able to conclude that a diet of sugar syrup is not sufficient for honey bees, whereas pollen and probiotic supplement showed positive effects on average lifespan. Protein supplement showed no statistically significant advantage or disadvantage to pollen when it comes to short term supplementation. Considering the importance of nutrition on honey bee lifespan, this paper also explores specific ways legislation can aid in pollinator population decline, considering the impacts of colonies without access to a healthy diet.
ContributorsKalamchi, Dena (Author) / Woodall, Gina (Thesis director) / Kaftanoglu, Osman (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
161743-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The living world is replete with easily observed structural adaptations (e.g. teeth, claws, and stingers), but behavioral adaptations are no less impressive. Conspecific aggression can be defined as any harmful action directed by one animal at another of the same species. Because it is a potentially risky and costly behavior,

The living world is replete with easily observed structural adaptations (e.g. teeth, claws, and stingers), but behavioral adaptations are no less impressive. Conspecific aggression can be defined as any harmful action directed by one animal at another of the same species. Because it is a potentially risky and costly behavior, aggression should be elicited only under optimal conditions. In honeybees, nestmate recognition is considered the driving factor determining whether colony guards will aggress against other honeybees attempting to gain entry to the colony. Models and empirical research support the conclusion that nestmate recognition should be favored over direct kin recognition. Thus, bees tend to use environmentally mediated cues associated with their colonies (e.g. colony odors) to recognize nestmates. The framework of nestmate recognition suggests that non-nestmates should always be aggressed against while nestmates should always be accepted. However, aggression towards nestmates and acceptance of non-nestmates are seen in a wide variety of eusocial insects, including honeybees. These are typically classified as rejection errors and acceptance errors, respectively. As such, they can be explained using signal detection theory and optimal acceptance threshold models, which postulate that recognition errors are inevitable if there is overlap in the cues used to distinguish “desirables” (fitness-enhancing) from “undesirables” (fitness-decrementing) conspecifics. In the context of social insects desirables are presumed to be nestmates and undesirables are presumed to be non-nestmates. I propose that honeybees may make more refined decisions concerning what conspecifics are desirable and undesirable, accounting for at least some of the phenomena previously reported as recognition errors. Some “errors” may be the result of guard bees responding to cues associated with threats and benefits beyond nestmate identity. I show that less threatening neighbors receive less aggression than highly threatening strangers. I show that well-fed colonies exhibit less aggression and that bees from well-fed colonies receive less aggression. I provide evidence that honeybees may decrease aggression towards nestmates and non-nestmate not involved in robbing while increasing aggression towards non-nestmate from a robber colony. Lastly, I show that pollen bearing foragers, regardless of nestmate identity, receive little to no aggression compared to non-pollen bearing foragers.
ContributorsJackson, Jonathan Cole (Author) / Pratt, Stephen (Thesis advisor) / Rutowski, Ronald (Committee member) / Fewell, Jennifer (Committee member) / Amazeen, Nia (Committee member) / Kaftanoglu, Osman (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021