Matching Items (5)
152501-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
How a colony regulates the division of labor to forage for nutritional resources while accommodating for changes in colony demography is a fundamental question in the sociobiology of social insects. In honey bee, Apis mellifera, brood composition impacts the division of labor, but it is unknown if colonies adjust the

How a colony regulates the division of labor to forage for nutritional resources while accommodating for changes in colony demography is a fundamental question in the sociobiology of social insects. In honey bee, Apis mellifera, brood composition impacts the division of labor, but it is unknown if colonies adjust the allocation of foragers to carbohydrate and protein resources based on changes in the age demography of larvae and the pheromones they produce. Young and old larvae produce pheromones that differ in composition and volatility. In turn, nurses differentially provision larvae, feeding developing young worker larvae a surplus diet that is more queen-like in protein composition and food availability, while old larvae receive a diet that mimics the sugar composition of the queen larval diet but is restrictively fed instead of provided ad lib. This research investigated how larval age and the larval pheromone e-β ocimene (eβ) impact foraging activity and foraging load. Additional cage studies were conducted to determine if eβ interacts synergistically with queen mandibular pheromone (QMP) to suppress ovary activation and prime worker physiology for nursing behavior. Lastly, the priming effects of larval age and eβ on worker physiology and the transition from in-hive nursing tasks to outside foraging were examined. Results indicate that workers differentially respond to larvae of different ages, likely by detecting changes in the composition of the pheromones they emit. This resulted in adjustments to the foraging division of labor (pollen vs. nectar) to ensure that the nutritional needs of the colony's brood were met. For younger larvae and eβ, this resulted in a bias favoring pollen collection. The cage studies reveal that both eβ and QMP suppressed ovary activation, but the larval pheromone was more effective. Maturing in an environment of young or old larvae primed bees for nursing and impacted important endocrine titers involved in the transition to foraging, so bees maturing in the presence of larvae foraged earlier than control bees reared with no brood.
ContributorsTraynor, Kirsten S. (Author) / Page, Robert E. (Thesis advisor) / Hölldobler, Berthold (Committee member) / Pratt, Stephen (Committee member) / Liebig, Jürgen (Committee member) / Brent, Colin (Committee member) / Baluch, Page (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.

ContributorsChester, Elise (Author) / Harrison, Jon (Thesis director) / DesJardins, Nicole (Committee member) / Smith, Brian (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2023-05
Description
In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.
ContributorsChester, Elise (Author) / Harrison, Jon (Thesis director) / DesJardins, Nicole (Committee member) / Smith, Brian (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2023-05
Description
In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.
ContributorsChester, Elise (Author) / Harrison, Jon (Thesis director) / DesJardins, Nicole (Committee member) / Smith, Brian (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2023-05
172704-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

During the mid-nineteenth century, Johann Gregor Mendel experimented with pea plants to develop a theory of inheritance. In 1843, while a monk in the Augustian St Thomas's Abbey in Brünn, Austria, now Brno, Czech Repubic, Mendel examined the physical appearance of the abbey's pea plants (Pisum sativum) and noted inconsistencies

During the mid-nineteenth century, Johann Gregor Mendel experimented with pea plants to develop a theory of inheritance. In 1843, while a monk in the Augustian St Thomas's Abbey in Brünn, Austria, now Brno, Czech Repubic, Mendel examined the physical appearance of the abbey's pea plants (Pisum sativum) and noted inconsistencies between what he saw and what the blending theory of inheritance, a primary model of inheritance at the time, predicted. With his experiments, which he recored in "Versuche uber Pflanzenhybriden" ("Experiments in Plant Hybridization") in 1865, Mendel discredited the blending theory of inheritance, and from them he proposed laws for inheritance patterns. Despite the fact that Mendel's work did not define all aspects of inheritance, his ideas and laws contributed to later concepts of traits, specifically that offspring inherit traits from their parents via genes, that an offspring has at least two genetic factors for any given qualitative trait, and that the offspring inherits the genetic factors in equal proportion from both parents.

Created2013-09-04