The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Visual constraints in foraging bumblebees: Flower size and color affect search time and flight behavior
Open accessAbstract
In optimal foraging theory, search time is a key variable defining the value of a prey type. But the sensory-perceptual processes that constrain the search for food have rarely been considered. Here we evaluate the flight behavior of bumblebees ( Bombus terrestris ) searching for artificial flowers of various sizes and colors. When flowers were large, search times correlated well with the color contrast of the targets with their green foliage-type background, as predicted by a model of color opponent coding using inputs from the bees' UV, blue, and green receptors. Targets that made poor color contrast with their backdrop, such as white, UV-reflecting ones, or red flowers, took longest to detect, even though brightness contrast with the background was pronounced. When searching for small targets, bees changed their strategy in several ways. They flew significantly slower and closer to the ground, so increasing the minimum detectable area subtended by an object on the ground. In addition, they used a different neuronal channel for flower detection. Instead of color contrast, they used only the green receptor signal for detection. We relate these findings to temporal and spatial limitations of different neuronal channels involved in stimulus detection and recognition. Thus, foraging speed may not be limited only by factors such as prey density, flight energetics, and scramble competition. Our results show that understanding the behavioral ecology of foraging can substantially gain from knowledge about mechanisms of visual information processing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Speed–accuracy tradeoffs in animal decision making
Chittka, L., Skorupski, P., & Raine, N. E. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.010 · Cited by 637
Self-citationRecognition of flowers by pollinators
Chittka, L., & Raine, N. E. (2006) · Current Opinion in Plant Biology · doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2006.05.002 · Cited by 494
Self-citationEndler, J. A., Westcott, D. A., Madden, J. R., & Robson, T. (2005) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01827.x · Cited by 284
Poison Frog Colors Are Honest Signals of Toxicity, Particularly for Bird Predators
Maan, M. E., & Cummings, M. E. (2012) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/663197 · Cited by 260
Disorder in convergent floral nanostructures enhances signalling to bees
Moyroud, E., Wenzel, T., Middleton, R., Rudall, P. J., Banks, H., Reed, A., Mellers, G., Killoran, P., Westwood, M. M., Steiner, U., et al. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature24285 · Cited by 170
Metadata
- Authors
- Spaethe, J., Tautz, J., & Chittka, L.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2001-03-20
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 3898-3903
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1968931885
- Cited by
- 549
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Visual constraints in foraging bumblebees: Flower size and color affect search time and flight behavior. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.071053098
- The paper
- Spaethe, J., Tautz, J., & Chittka, L. (2001). Visual constraints in foraging bumblebees: Flower size and color affect search time and flight behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.071053098
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.