Are insects flower constant because they use search images to find flowers

By Dave Goulson. 2000

108 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Many insects which gather nectar or pollen exhibit flower constancy, a learned fidelity to a particular species of plant. Recent studies suggest that foraging insects may use a perceptual mechanism akin to a search image to detect flowers, in a manner analogous to the way that predators search for prey. This has emerged as an alternative (but not mutually exclusive) explanation for flower constancy to that proposed by Darwin, who suggested that it may result from a limited ability to learning or remember the handling skills appropriate for particular flowers. However, search images are thought to be a mechanism for locating cryptic prey. Plants which are pollinated by animals have evolved brightly coloured flowers to attract the attention of their pollinators. It thus seems implausible to argue that flowers may actually be cryptic. One possible explanation for this apparent contradiction is that flowers are effectively cryptic when viewed against a background which contains many other flowers of similar colour. I present experimental evidence which suggests that a background of flowers of similar colour does reduce foraging efficiency of bumblebees, but that a background of dissimilarly coloured flowers has no effect. This I interpret as evidence that flowers may be cryptic, suggesting that pollinators may indeed use a search image in location of flowers. However, the relative importance of constraints on foragers' abilities to locate flowers versus their abilities to handle them as causes of flower constancy remain to be elucidated.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Sensory Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/560eff69b6d1a7d888ce370160239b04141489ce

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Genetics

In Sensory Systems

Citations in the corpus

Effects of experience and weather on foraging rate and pollen versus nectar collection in the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris (2005, background): “…and predictions of foraging models and the interplay between learning, memory constraints and foraging rate in a complex and unpredictable environment (e.g. Heinrich 1979; Cresswell 1990; Dukas and Real 1993a, 1993b, 1993c; Goulson 1994, 1999, 2000a, 2000b; Dreisig 1995; Cresswell et al. 2000).”
Flower constancy in bumblebees: a test of the trait variability hypothesis (2005, background): “The most accepted explanations for flower constancy invoke some sort of cognitive limitation on the part of pollinators (e.g. Waser 1983, 1986; Lewis 1993; Dukas 1998; Chittka et al. 1999; Goulson 2000).”
Importance of Pollinator-Mediated Interspecific Pollen Transfer for Angiosperm Evolution (2019, background): “Second, differences in floral traits could reinforce search images used to locate flowers during foraging (Goulson 2000, Heinrich 1975,Wilson & Stine 1996).”
Weed-insect pollinator networks as bio-indicators of ecological sustainability in agriculture. A review (2016, background): “The " search images " system possessed by insects (Goulson 2000) can be aided by characteristic black spots at the base of the petal, functioning as a " nectar guide " (Johnson and Dafni 1998), as observed in P. rhoeas (Papaveraceae).”
Perceptual Processes and the Maintenance of Polymorphism Through Frequency-dependent Predation (2005, background): “perceptual mechanisms in foraging insect pollinators may also explain flower constancy (Goulson, 2000) and even flower corolla polymorphism (Smithson and MacNair, 1997; Gigord et al.”