4.5 Article

Tragedy of the commons in Melipona bees revisited

期刊

BIOLOGY LETTERS
卷 18, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2021.0498

关键词

Melipona; social insects; social parasitism; caste fate conflict; tragedy of the commons

资金

  1. Research Foundation Flanders (FWO postdoctoral grant) [12R9619N, 1502119N]
  2. CONACYT [CAR-21861]
  3. SAGARPACONCAYT [291333]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The overproduction of queens in Melipona bees is caused by individual larvae selfishly biasing their development towards the queen pathway. The presence of geraniol does not affect the rearing of new queens, and there is no evidence for queen parasitism in M. beecheii. These findings support the original 'tragedy of the commons' hypothesis.
Melipona stingless bees display a paradoxical overproduction of queens, which are later eliminated by nest-mate workers. Mechanistically, it was suggested that the monoterpenoid geraniol deposited into newly provisioned cells by adult bees would cause larvae to develop into queens in Melipona beecheii. This system could be evolutionarily stable if many of these new queens were to leave the nest and parasitize other genetically unrelated colonies nearby, as was shown to occur in a congeneric species. Here, we use microsatellite markers to test whether queen overproduction could be a strategy by which adult workers control the caste fate of the developing larvae to export copies of their own genes to the rest of the population via queen parasitism in M. beecheii. In addition, we re-examined whether artificially increasing the levels of geraniol indeed caused larvae to develop as queens rather than workers. Contrary to our prediction, we found no evidence for queen parasitism in M. beecheii and observed no effect of geraniol on the rearing of new queens. Together, these results support the original 'tragedy of the commons' hypothesis for queen overproduction in Melipona bees, where individual larvae selfishly bias their development towards the queen pathway according to their best evolutionary interests.

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