CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 45Neurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior

Forward and backward second-order Pavlovian conditioning in honeybees

Open access
Hussaini, Syed Abid, Komischke, Bernhard, Menzel, Randolf, Lachnit, Harald·2007·Learning & Memory
DOI 10.1101/lm.471307PMC PMC2044558
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Second-order conditioning (SOC) is the association of a neutral stimulus with another stimulus that had previously been combined with an unconditioned stimulus (US). We used classical conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER) in honeybees (Apis mellifera) with odors (CS) and sugar (US). Previous SOC experiments in bees were inconclusive, and, therefore, we attempted to demonstrate SOC in the following three experiments: (Experiment 1) After differential conditioning (pairing odor A with US and presenting odor B without US), the bees experienced two pairs of partially overlapping odors, either a new odor C followed by a previously reinforced odor A (C-A) or a new odor C followed by a previously nonreinforced odor B (C-B). (Experiment 2) After differential conditioning, bees were presented with C-A or A-C. (Experiment 3) Bees were first presented with C-A or A-C before differential conditioning and were tested with odor C. We observed: (Experiment 1) 40% of the bees showed PER to the C-A presentation, but only 20% showed PER to the C-B presentation. (Experiment 2) 40% of the bees showed PER to the C-A presentation, while only 20% showed PER to the reversed sequence A-C. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that a previously reinforced odor can be a secondary reinforcer for excitatory SOC only with forward-pairing. (Experiment 3) PER toward C was lower (15%) in bees presented with A-C than with C-A (25%). This showed that backward SOC is not as effective as forward SOC. These results help to delineate different conditions that are critical for the phenomenon of SOC.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/lm.471307

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Menzel, R. 1990. Learning, memory, and "cognition" in honey bees. In Neurobiology of comparative cognition (eds. R.P. Kesner and D.S. Olton), pp. 237-292. Erlbaum, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hussaini, S. A., Komischke, B., Menzel, R., & Lachnit, H.
Affiliations
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Learning & Memory
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Published
2007-10
Volume
14
Issue
10
Pages
678-683
ISSN
  • 1072-0502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5485
DOI
10.1101/lm.471307
PMC
PMC2044558
OpenAlex
W2072177122
Cited by
45
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Learning & Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Insect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Keywords
second-order conditioning, classical conditioning, Apis mellifera, proboscis extension response, differential conditioning, secondary reinforcement
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Animals, Association Learning, Bees, Conditioning, Classical, Cues, Feeding Behavior, Female, Odorants, Reinforcement Schedule, Reward, Smell, Sucrose

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