PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 18, 2025Journal of Experimental Biology2 citationsOpen Access

Bumblebees learn to use antennal and tarsal taste to predict the presence of nectar rewards in flowers

View Full Paper
MHMichael J. M. HarrapUniversity of FreiburgRPRachel H. ParkinsonQueen Mary University of LondonHJHannah JonesTH Köln - University of Applied Sciences

Key Points

  • Bumblebees can learn to associate floral surface chemistry with the presence of nectar rewards.
  • In experiments, bumblebees showed strongest learning when sucrose cues indicated rewards compared to other compounds.
  • Gustatory receptor neurons in bumblebees' antennae can detect various tastes including sugars, salts, and bitter chemicals.
  • Bumblebees found it harder to associate quinine with rewards than the absence of sucrose, indicating learning variability.

Abstract

Learning cues such as tastes associated with palatable food is an important mechanism animals have for foraging optimally. Insects can use gustatory receptor neurons (GRNs) in their mouthparts to detect nutrients and toxins, but they also taste compounds using sensilla on other organs such as their antennae and tarsi. Bees are adept at learning to associate floral traits with the presence of nectar rewards, but few studies have examined how they incorporate gustatory information from their antennae or tarsi detected on flower surfaces. Here, we characterize the ability of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) to taste sugar, salt, and bitter compounds using their antennae and then tested whether they could use this sensory information to associate it with rewarding artificial floral displays. We show that bumblebees have antennal GRNs sensitive to sugars, salts, and bitter compounds and can use surface chemistry differences detected by their antennae and/or tarsi to learn about the presence or absence of flower rewards in a free-flight assay. Naïve bumblebees showed no detected spontaneous preferences toward or against any surface chemistry tested. Bumblebees performed best when sucrose surface cues were associated with rewards, but they could learn to associate any cue with the presence or absence of sucrose solution. Interestingly, the bees found it more difficult to associate quinine surface chemistry with the presence of reward than its absence. These results indicate that bees have the potential to learn to associate another floral trait – chemicals on the surfaces of petals - with the quality of floral rewards.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Harrap et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d462ca31b076d99fa621c0https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.250535
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Bumble bees’ food preferences are jointly shaped by rapid evaluation of nectar sugar concentration and viscosity2024 · 8 citations
  2. 2Timing impacts responses to color and odor in a model insect, the bumblebee <i>Bombus impatiens</i>2026
  3. 3Olfactory Information Transfer in Bumblebees and Its Variation According to the Food Resource2026
  4. 4Bumblebees’ orofacial reactions to tastes provide evidence for affective evaluation2026 · 2 citations
  5. 5The stingless bee Trigona fulviventris prefers sweet and salty over savory nectar2024 · 7 citations