4.5 Article

Seeing near and seeing far; behavioural evidence for dual mechanisms of pattern vision in the honeybee (Apis mellifera)

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 215, 期 3, 页码 397-404

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.060954

关键词

bee; landmark; Y-maze; visual angle

类别

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  2. Australian Research Council [DP0878968/0987989]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Visual perception is a primary modality for interacting with complex environments. Recent work has shown that the brain and visual system of the honeybee is able, in some cases, to learn complex spatial relationships, while in other cases, bee vision is relatively rudimentary and based upon simple elemental-type visual processing. In the present study, we test the ability of honeybees to learn 4-bar asymmetric patterns in a Y-maze with aversive-appetitive differential conditioning. In Experiment 1, a group of bees were trained at a small visual angle of 50 deg by constraining individuals to the decision chamber within the Y-maze. Bees learned this task, and were able to solve the task even in the presence of background noise. However, these bees failed to solve the task when the stimuli were presented at a novel visual angle of 100 deg. In Experiment 2, a separate group of bees were trained to sets of 4-bar asymmetric patterns that excluded retinotopic matching and, in this case, bees learned the configural rule describing stimuli at a visual angle of approximately 50 deg, and this allowed the bees to solve the task when the stimuli were presented at a novel vision angle of 100 deg. This shows that the bee brain contains multiple mechanisms for pattern recognition, and what a bee sees is very dependent upon the specific experience that it receives. These multiple mechanisms would allow bees to interact with complex environments to solve tasks like recognising landmarks at variable distances or quickly discriminating between rewarding/non-rewarding flowers at reasonable constant visual angles.

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

4.5
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