Queen Recognition Signals in Two Primitively Eusocial Halictid Bees: Evolutionary Conservation and Caste-Specific Perception.

Iris Steitz, Katharina Brandt, Felix Biefel, Ädem Minat, Manfred Ayasse
Author Information
  1. Iris Steitz: Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.
  2. Katharina Brandt: Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.
  3. Felix Biefel: Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.
  4. Ädem Minat: Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.
  5. Manfred Ayasse: Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany.

Abstract

Queen signals are known to regulate reproductive harmony within eusocial colonies by influencing worker behavior and ovarian physiology. However, decades of research have resulted in the identification of just a few queen signals, and studies of their mode of action are rare. Our aim was to identify queen recognition signals in the halictid bee and to analyze caste differences in the olfactory perception of queen signals in and the closely related species . We performed chemical analyses and bioassays to test for caste differences in chemical profiles and worker behavior influenced by queen-specific compounds in . Our results indicated that caste differences in the chemical profiles were mainly attributable to higher amounts of macrocyclic lactones in queens. Bioassays demonstrated a higher frequency of subordinate behavior in workers elicited by queen-specific amounts of macrocyclic lactones. Thus, macrocyclic lactones function as queen recognition signals in , as in . Using electrophysiological analyses, we have demonstrated that queens of both tested species lack antennal reactions to certain macrocyclic lactones. Therefore, we assume that this is a mechanism to prevent reproductive self-inhibition in queens. Our results should stimulate debate on the conservation and mode of action of queen signals.

Keywords

References

  1. Bioessays. 2015 Jul;37(7):808-21 [PMID: 25916998]
  2. Physiol Zool. 1948 Jan;21(1):1-13 [PMID: 18898533]
  3. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2017 Aug;22:79-84 [PMID: 28805643]
  4. J Chem Ecol. 1985 Oct;11(10):1447-56 [PMID: 24311186]
  5. Proc Biol Sci. 2015 Oct 22;282(1817):20151800 [PMID: 26490791]
  6. Sci Rep. 2014 Dec 12;4:7449 [PMID: 25502598]
  7. Curr Biol. 2009 Jan 13;19(1):78-81 [PMID: 19135369]
  8. R Soc Open Sci. 2016 Jan 06;3(1):150599 [PMID: 26909189]
  9. Chem Senses. 2005 Jul;30(6):477-89 [PMID: 15917370]
  10. J Chem Ecol. 2018 Sep;44(9):827-837 [PMID: 30014321]
  11. J Chem Ecol. 1981 Mar;7(2):403-10 [PMID: 24420485]
  12. R Soc Open Sci. 2016 Oct 19;3(10):160576 [PMID: 27853577]
  13. Annu Rev Entomol. 2008;53:523-42 [PMID: 17877458]
  14. Science. 2014 Jan 17;343(6168):287-90 [PMID: 24436417]
  15. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1971 Jun;68(6):1241-5 [PMID: 16591931]
  16. Curr Biol. 2020 Mar 23;30(6):1136-1141.e3 [PMID: 32059770]
  17. J Exp Biol. 2018 May 11;221(Pt 9): [PMID: 29615527]
  18. Annu Rev Entomol. 2001;46:31-78 [PMID: 11112163]
  19. J Evol Biol. 2013 Jul;26(7):1549-58 [PMID: 23662630]
  20. J Chem Ecol. 2018 Sep;44(9):805-817 [PMID: 29858748]
  21. Naturwissenschaften. 2014 Aug;101(8):603-11 [PMID: 24861136]
  22. J Chem Ecol. 1986 Jan;12(1):197-208 [PMID: 24306409]
  23. J Chem Ecol. 1981 Mar;7(2):319-31 [PMID: 24420478]
  24. Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Dec 22;277(1701):3793-800 [PMID: 20591861]
  25. J Chem Ecol. 2011 Nov;37(11):1263-75 [PMID: 22083225]
  26. J Chem Ecol. 2017 Jun;43(6):563-572 [PMID: 28647839]
  27. Science. 2014 Jan 17;343(6168):254-5 [PMID: 24436408]
  28. J Chem Ecol. 2016 Nov;42(11):1175-1180 [PMID: 27722875]
  29. Naturwissenschaften. 2003 Oct;90(10):477-80 [PMID: 14564409]
  30. BMC Evol Biol. 2015 Nov 16;15:254 [PMID: 26573687]
  31. Arthropod Struct Dev. 2008 Nov;37(6):459-68 [PMID: 18621587]
  32. J Exp Biol. 2016 Feb;219(Pt 3):419-30 [PMID: 26847561]
  33. Cell. 2016 Mar 10;164(6):1277-1287 [PMID: 26967293]
  34. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jul 20;107(29):12963-8 [PMID: 20615972]
  35. Annu Rev Entomol. 2014;59:299-319 [PMID: 24160431]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0queensignalschemicalmacrocycliclactonesbehaviorcastedifferencesqueensQueenreproductiveworkermodeactionrecognitionspeciesanalysesprofilesqueen-specificresultshigheramountsdemonstratedknownregulateharmonywithineusocialcoloniesinfluencingovarianphysiologyHoweverdecadesresearchresultedidentificationjuststudiesrareaimidentifyhalictidbeeanalyzeolfactoryperceptioncloselyrelatedperformedbioassaystestinfluencedcompoundsindicatedmainlyattributableBioassaysfrequencysubordinateworkerselicitedThusfunctionUsingelectrophysiologicaltestedlackantennalreactionscertainThereforeassumemechanismpreventself-inhibitionstimulatedebateconservationRecognitionSignalsTwoPrimitivelyEusocialHalictidBees:EvolutionaryConservationCaste-SpecificPerceptionHalictidaecommunicationcontrolvssignalhypothesissweatbees

Similar Articles

Cited By