4.1 Article

Biology of Lasioglossum (L.) majus (Hymenoptera: Halictidae), a largely solitary sweat bee with behavioural adaptations to communality

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHOLOGY
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 361-367

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10164-008-0129-5

关键词

Lasioglossum (L.) majus; Hymenoptera; Nesting habits; Solitary nesting; Communal nesting; Social evolution

资金

  1. FIRB [RBAU019H94-001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Within the bee family Halictidae there have been three origins of sociality. Although detection of origins and reversal from sociality requires phylogenetic studies, at a behavioural level a predisposition to sociality can be detected by analysis of intra-specific interactions. We studied aspects of nesting biology and behavioural interactions in Lasioglossum (Lasioglossum) majus, a poorly known halictine inhabiting temperate regions of Europe, which is suspected to be solitary. Nests were found to be largely used by one female, but some were shared by more than one individual. These few nests, whose entrances were very close to each other, were found to be connected underground. A few individuals were observed to enter in a nest where a female was waiting, behaving as a guard and allowing the incoming bee to enter the nest. By use of circle-tube experiments, the behavioural repertoire exhibited by females during encounters was assessed. Levels of withdrawal and cooperative events were comparable with those observed in other solitary nesting species, but aggressive events were very rare, as in several observed communal species. We conclude that L. (L.) majus females, despite general solitary nesting, possess behavioural components enabling them to adopt, probably in high nest-density areas, nest-sharing strategies. A similar kind of local social polymorphism has been observed in two other species of the subgenus Lasioglossum, but these are the first data available on a European species and the first record of subterranean connections among nests of halictid bees.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据