Cargando…

Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens

Reproductive division of labour is a hallmark of eusociality, but disentangling the underlying proximate mechanisms can be challenging. In bumblebees, workers isolated from the queen can activate their ovaries and lay haploid, male eggs. We investigated if volatile, contact, visual or behavioural cu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Padilla, Mario, Amsalem, Etya, Altman, Naomi, Hefetz, Abraham, Grozinger, Christina M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5099002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853577
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160576
_version_ 1782465864043331584
author Padilla, Mario
Amsalem, Etya
Altman, Naomi
Hefetz, Abraham
Grozinger, Christina M.
author_facet Padilla, Mario
Amsalem, Etya
Altman, Naomi
Hefetz, Abraham
Grozinger, Christina M.
author_sort Padilla, Mario
collection PubMed
description Reproductive division of labour is a hallmark of eusociality, but disentangling the underlying proximate mechanisms can be challenging. In bumblebees, workers isolated from the queen can activate their ovaries and lay haploid, male eggs. We investigated if volatile, contact, visual or behavioural cues produced by the queen or brood mediate reproductive dominance in Bombus impatiens. Exposure to queen-produced volatiles, brood-produced volatiles and direct contact with pupae did not reduce worker ovary activation; only direct contact with the queen could reduce ovary activation. We evaluated behaviour, physiology and gene expression patterns in workers that were reared in chambers with all stages of brood and a free queen, caged queen (where workers could contact the queen, but the queen was unable to initiate interactions) or no queen. Workers housed with a caged queen or no queen fully activated their ovaries, whereas ovary activation in workers housed with a free queen was completely inhibited. The caged queen marginally reduced worker aggression and expression of an aggression-associated gene relative to queenless workers. Thus, queen-initiated behavioural interactions appear necessary to establish reproductive dominance. Queen-produced chemical cues may function secondarily in a context-specific manner to augment behavioural cues, as reliable or honest signal.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5099002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50990022016-11-16 Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens Padilla, Mario Amsalem, Etya Altman, Naomi Hefetz, Abraham Grozinger, Christina M. R Soc Open Sci Biology (Whole Organism) Reproductive division of labour is a hallmark of eusociality, but disentangling the underlying proximate mechanisms can be challenging. In bumblebees, workers isolated from the queen can activate their ovaries and lay haploid, male eggs. We investigated if volatile, contact, visual or behavioural cues produced by the queen or brood mediate reproductive dominance in Bombus impatiens. Exposure to queen-produced volatiles, brood-produced volatiles and direct contact with pupae did not reduce worker ovary activation; only direct contact with the queen could reduce ovary activation. We evaluated behaviour, physiology and gene expression patterns in workers that were reared in chambers with all stages of brood and a free queen, caged queen (where workers could contact the queen, but the queen was unable to initiate interactions) or no queen. Workers housed with a caged queen or no queen fully activated their ovaries, whereas ovary activation in workers housed with a free queen was completely inhibited. The caged queen marginally reduced worker aggression and expression of an aggression-associated gene relative to queenless workers. Thus, queen-initiated behavioural interactions appear necessary to establish reproductive dominance. Queen-produced chemical cues may function secondarily in a context-specific manner to augment behavioural cues, as reliable or honest signal. The Royal Society 2016-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5099002/ /pubmed/27853577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160576 Text en © 2016 The Authors. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Biology (Whole Organism)
Padilla, Mario
Amsalem, Etya
Altman, Naomi
Hefetz, Abraham
Grozinger, Christina M.
Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title_full Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title_fullStr Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title_full_unstemmed Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title_short Chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens
title_sort chemical communication is not sufficient to explain reproductive inhibition in the bumblebee bombus impatiens
topic Biology (Whole Organism)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5099002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853577
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160576
work_keys_str_mv AT padillamario chemicalcommunicationisnotsufficienttoexplainreproductiveinhibitioninthebumblebeebombusimpatiens
AT amsalemetya chemicalcommunicationisnotsufficienttoexplainreproductiveinhibitioninthebumblebeebombusimpatiens
AT altmannaomi chemicalcommunicationisnotsufficienttoexplainreproductiveinhibitioninthebumblebeebombusimpatiens
AT hefetzabraham chemicalcommunicationisnotsufficienttoexplainreproductiveinhibitioninthebumblebeebombusimpatiens
AT grozingerchristinam chemicalcommunicationisnotsufficienttoexplainreproductiveinhibitioninthebumblebeebombusimpatiens