Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.

<h4>Background</h4>The success of social insects can be in part attributed to their division of labor, which has been explained by a response threshold model. This model posits that individuals differ in their response thresholds to task-associated stimuli, so that individuals with lower...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Edith Roussel, Julie Carcaud, Jean-Christophe Sandoz, Martin Giurfa
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2009
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3a4c37706c47496ea19b654f944a3c98
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3a4c37706c47496ea19b654f944a3c98
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3a4c37706c47496ea19b654f944a3c982021-11-25T06:17:47ZReappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0004197https://doaj.org/article/3a4c37706c47496ea19b654f944a3c982009-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/19142222/pdf/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>The success of social insects can be in part attributed to their division of labor, which has been explained by a response threshold model. This model posits that individuals differ in their response thresholds to task-associated stimuli, so that individuals with lower thresholds specialize in this task. This model is at odds with findings on honeybee behavior as nectar and pollen foragers exhibit different responsiveness to sucrose, with nectar foragers having higher response thresholds to sucrose concentration. Moreover, it has been suggested that sucrose responsiveness correlates with responsiveness to most if not all other stimuli. If this is the case, explaining task specialization and the origins of division of labor on the basis of differences in response thresholds is difficult.<h4>Methodology</h4>To compare responsiveness to stimuli presenting clear-cut differences in hedonic value and behavioral contexts, we measured appetitive and aversive responsiveness in the same bees in the laboratory. We quantified proboscis extension responses to increasing sucrose concentrations and sting extension responses to electric shocks of increasing voltage. We analyzed the relationship between aversive responsiveness and aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex, and determined how this relationship relates to division of labor.<h4>Principal findings</h4>Sucrose and shock responsiveness measured in the same bees did not correlate, thus suggesting that they correspond to independent behavioral syndromes, a foraging and a defensive one. Bees which were more responsive to shock learned and memorized better aversive associations. Finally, guards were less responsive than nectar foragers to electric shocks, exhibiting higher tolerance to low voltage shocks. Consequently, foragers, which are more sensitive, were the ones learning and memorizing better in aversive conditioning.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results constitute the first integrative study on how aversive responsiveness affects learning, memory and social organization in honeybees. We suggest that parallel behavioral modules (e.g. appetitive, aversive) coexist within each individual bee and determine its tendency to adopt a given task. This conclusion, which is at odds with a simple threshold model, should open new opportunities for exploring the division of labor in social insects.Edith RousselJulie CarcaudJean-Christophe SandozMartin GiurfaPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 4, Iss 1, p e4197 (2009)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Edith Roussel Julie Carcaud Jean-Christophe Sandoz Martin Giurfa Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
description	<h4>Background</h4>The success of social insects can be in part attributed to their division of labor, which has been explained by a response threshold model. This model posits that individuals differ in their response thresholds to task-associated stimuli, so that individuals with lower thresholds specialize in this task. This model is at odds with findings on honeybee behavior as nectar and pollen foragers exhibit different responsiveness to sucrose, with nectar foragers having higher response thresholds to sucrose concentration. Moreover, it has been suggested that sucrose responsiveness correlates with responsiveness to most if not all other stimuli. If this is the case, explaining task specialization and the origins of division of labor on the basis of differences in response thresholds is difficult.<h4>Methodology</h4>To compare responsiveness to stimuli presenting clear-cut differences in hedonic value and behavioral contexts, we measured appetitive and aversive responsiveness in the same bees in the laboratory. We quantified proboscis extension responses to increasing sucrose concentrations and sting extension responses to electric shocks of increasing voltage. We analyzed the relationship between aversive responsiveness and aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex, and determined how this relationship relates to division of labor.<h4>Principal findings</h4>Sucrose and shock responsiveness measured in the same bees did not correlate, thus suggesting that they correspond to independent behavioral syndromes, a foraging and a defensive one. Bees which were more responsive to shock learned and memorized better aversive associations. Finally, guards were less responsive than nectar foragers to electric shocks, exhibiting higher tolerance to low voltage shocks. Consequently, foragers, which are more sensitive, were the ones learning and memorizing better in aversive conditioning.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results constitute the first integrative study on how aversive responsiveness affects learning, memory and social organization in honeybees. We suggest that parallel behavioral modules (e.g. appetitive, aversive) coexist within each individual bee and determine its tendency to adopt a given task. This conclusion, which is at odds with a simple threshold model, should open new opportunities for exploring the division of labor in social insects.
format	article
author	Edith Roussel Julie Carcaud Jean-Christophe Sandoz Martin Giurfa
author_facet	Edith Roussel Julie Carcaud Jean-Christophe Sandoz Martin Giurfa
author_sort	Edith Roussel
title	Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
title_short	Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
title_full	Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
title_fullStr	Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
title_full_unstemmed	Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
title_sort	reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2009
url	https://doaj.org/article/3a4c37706c47496ea19b654f944a3c98
work_keys_str_mv	AT edithroussel reappraisingsocialinsectbehaviorthroughaversiveresponsivenessandlearning AT juliecarcaud reappraisingsocialinsectbehaviorthroughaversiveresponsivenessandlearning AT jeanchristophesandoz reappraisingsocialinsectbehaviorthroughaversiveresponsivenessandlearning AT martingiurfa reappraisingsocialinsectbehaviorthroughaversiveresponsivenessandlearning
_version_	1718413917963681792

Reappraising social insect behavior through aversive responsiveness and learning.

Ejemplares similares