Genetic differences in learning behavior in honeybees (Apis mellifera capensis)
- PMID: 1863260
- DOI: 10.1007/BF01065820
Genetic differences in learning behavior in honeybees (Apis mellifera capensis)
Abstract
Workers from colonies of Cape honeybees show marked phenotypic differences in performance in proboscis extension reflex (PER) conditioning. Analysis of these differences using parthenogenetic offspring groups permitted the estimation of genotypic values and revealed a high degree of genetic variability that is evident among related as well as unrelated bees. The results obtained from related groups are of particular importance, since they demonstrated the existence of strong genetic variability among individuals of the same colony. Quantitative analysis yielded high estimates of additive genetic effects and low estimates of dominance effects. Selection of individual workers resulted in an explicit increase in genetic variance of the next generation (G1). However, selection of bees from the parthenogenetic G1 generation, which was done to obtain parthenogenetic G2 offspring, did not lead to further improvement in selection. This observation suggests that recombination of linked genes underlying proboscis extension reflex was negligible during selection in parthenogenetic groups. Taken together with further behavioral analysis (Brandes and Menzel, 1990; Brandes et al., 1988), results from these quantitative genetic experiments suggest that additive genetic factors contribute significantly to variability among individuals for associative learning.
Similar articles
-
Conditional withholding of proboscis extension in honeybees (Apis mellifera) during discriminative punishment.J Comp Psychol. 1991 Dec;105(4):345-56. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.105.4.345. J Comp Psychol. 1991. PMID: 1778067
-
Simultaneous conditioning in honeybees (Apis mellifera).J Comp Psychol. 1992 Jun;106(2):114-9. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.106.2.114. J Comp Psychol. 1992. PMID: 1600718
-
Heritable variation for latent inhibition and its correlation with reversal learning in honeybees (Apis mellifera).J Comp Psychol. 2000 Mar;114(1):86-97. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.114.1.86. J Comp Psychol. 2000. PMID: 10739314
-
The proboscis extension reflex to evaluate learning and memory in honeybees (Apis mellifera): some caveats.Naturwissenschaften. 2012 Sep;99(9):677-86. doi: 10.1007/s00114-012-0955-8. Epub 2012 Aug 7. Naturwissenschaften. 2012. PMID: 22869163 Review.
-
Invertebrate learning and memory: Fifty years of olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response in honeybees.Learn Mem. 2012 Jan 17;19(2):54-66. doi: 10.1101/lm.024711.111. Print 2012 Feb. Learn Mem. 2012. PMID: 22251890 Review.
Cited by
-
Explaining workers' inactivity in social colonies from first principles.J R Soc Interface. 2023 Jan;20(198):20220808. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2022.0808. Epub 2023 Jan 4. J R Soc Interface. 2023. PMID: 36596450 Free PMC article.
-
Costs of memory: lessons from 'mini' brains.Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Mar 22;278(1707):923-9. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.2488. Epub 2010 Dec 22. Proc Biol Sci. 2011. PMID: 21177679 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Genomic analysis in the sting-2 quantitative trait locus for defensive behavior in the honey bee, Apis mellifera.Genome Res. 2003 Dec;13(12):2588-93. doi: 10.1101/gr.1634503. Genome Res. 2003. PMID: 14656966 Free PMC article.
-
Specialization does not predict individual efficiency in an ant.PLoS Biol. 2008 Nov 18;6(11):e285. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060285. PLoS Biol. 2008. PMID: 19018663 Free PMC article.
-
Quantitative trait loci for honey bee stinging behavior and body size.Genetics. 1998 Mar;148(3):1203-13. doi: 10.1093/genetics/148.3.1203. Genetics. 1998. PMID: 9539435 Free PMC article.