Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2004 Oct 7;271(1552):2065–2069. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2839

Queen-signal modulation of worker pheromonal composition in honeybees.

Tamar Katzav-Gozansky 1, Raphaël Boulay 1, Victoria Soroker 1, Abraham Hefetz 1
PMCID: PMC1691821  PMID: 15451697

Abstract

Worker sterility in honeybees is neither absolute nor irreversible. Whether under queen or worker control, it is likely to be mediated by pheromones. Queen-specific pheromones are not exclusive to queens; workers with activated ovaries also produce them. The association between ovarian activation and queen-like pheromone occurrence suggests the latter as providing a reliable signal of reproductive ability. In this study we investigated the effect of queen pheromones on ovary development and occurrence of queen-like esters in workers' Dufour's gland. Workers separated from the queenright compartment by a double mesh behaved like queenless workers, activating their ovaries and expressing a queen-like Dufour's gland secretion, confirming that the pheromones regulating both systems are non-volatile. Workers with developed ovaries produced significantly more secretion than sterile workers, which we attribute primarily to increased ester production. Workers separated from the queenright compartment by a single mesh displayed a delayed ovarian development, which we attribute to interrupted transfer of the non-volatile pheromone between compartments. We suggest that worker expression of queen-like characters reflects a queen-worker arms race; and that Dufour's gland secretion may provide a reliable signal for ovarian activation. The associative nature between ovary development and Dufour's gland ester production remains elusive.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (110.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Breed M. D., Butler L., Stiller T. M. Kin discrimination by worker honey bees in genetically mixed groups. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 May;82(9):3058–3061. doi: 10.1073/pnas.82.9.3058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Hoover Shelley E. R., Keeling Christopher I., Winston Mark L., Slessor Keith N. The effect of queen pheromones on worker honey bee ovary development. Naturwissenschaften. 2003 Sep 18;90(10):477–480. doi: 10.1007/s00114-003-0462-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Katzav-Gozansky T, Soroker V, V, Hefetz A. Plasticity in caste-related exocrine secretion biosynthesis in the honey bee (Apis mellifera). J Insect Physiol. 2000 Jun 1;46(6):993–998. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1910(99)00209-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Page R. E., Blum M. S., Fales H. M. o-Aminoacetophenone, a pheromone that repels honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). Experientia. 1988 Mar 15;44(3):270–271. doi: 10.1007/BF01941735. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Pankiw T., Winston M. L., Fondrk M. K., Slessor K. N. Selection on worker honeybee responses to queen pheromone (Apis mellifera L.). Naturwissenschaften. 2000 Nov;87(11):487–490. doi: 10.1007/s001140050764. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Pirk Christian W. W., Neumann Peter, Hepburn Randall, Moritz Robin F. A., Tautz Jürgen. Egg viability and worker policing in honey bees. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 28;101(23):8649–8651. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0402506101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES