Dear Dr. Wenner

I notice you did not address the points raised in Madeleine Beekman's work.
She studied nest selection behavior, which (according to her, Seeley, et al)
involves evaluating various nest sites, building a quorum  on the "best"
choice, and flying to the selected site. To me, it seems utterly implausible
that a colony could find a preselected nest site deep in the woods using
scent alone. Even if the bees could detect a site marked with Nasanov scent
from a distance of a mile or more, what would happen if the scouts had
marked more than one site? The swarm would presumably be forced to go off in
more than one direction, which they don't do. By far the most persuasive
aspect of Beekman's work is the fact that thee researchers could alter the
outcome of the nest selection process by removing the bees that were
"dancing" for the hollow trees and thereby ensuring that the colony would go
to the nest site the researchers provided. 

I think the discovery of the honey bee dance language and the discovery of
natural selection have much in common. For centuries, the facts were
observed and various hypotheses were put forth. At last, Darwin and others
were able to see how it could be that there are very distinct species on the
various continents and how this could have come about through natural
selection and adaptation to different environments. Subsequently, we have
discovered the genetic mechanisms and have learned, for better or worse, how
to manipulate them. Just as the development of the atomic bomb proves that
we "understand" sub-atomic particles, the production of new species by
humans (plants with genes from bacteria, for example) , proves that we have
a good grasp of how evolution works, even if we don't know how it started.

In the same way, researchers like Beekman and Seeley, operate on the
assumption that honey bees *can* understand their own dances -- that they
are doing this behavior to communicate information. These researchers are
able to predict the outcome of various manipulations, such as removing the
dancers that are promoting one site and not another. So the theory has
predictive power. In the years since the discovery of the great importance
of scent in the process of communicating food sources, all educators have
included this information in their presentations on honey bee foraging. But
these are the various factors that make up the bees' sensory interface with
the outside world. It is not just scent or directional navigation, but all
of it. 

One could easily "prove" that human beings can communicate using only their
voice, or using only body language. Obviously, under some circumstances,
only the voice is available, such as using the telephone. And other times
only a quick glance is needed to say what one wishes, as when one casts a
disapproving look at another. Similarly, bees can quickly impart information
by offering a drop of nectar ("the buckwheat is flowing again") and another
bee can act upon such information instantly. Other times, more information
is needed: a new source has been found some miles distant in a different
direction from where the colony has been foraging. But the fact that at
times we or they use only one mode does not thereby prove that another is
superfluous.

Bumble bees, lacking any such communication mechanisms, must search anew for
food sources and so do not venture far from the nest. They seem content in
greenhouses, whereas honey bees are so accustomed to foraging over broad
areas, they spend most of their energy trying to get out of the greenhouse.
Without a well-developed navigational sense, it is doubtful a bee could go
four five miles from the hive and find its way back. Having been lost in
woods on several occasions, I know how time consuming it is try to find
one's way without some sort of directional guidance, either using the sun or
a compass. Simply memorizing landmarks is of no use at all, if one loses
sight of those landmarks. In fact, it is more difficult to imagine that bees
can memorize thousands of landmarks in order to return home than it is to
conceive of their use of directional navigation.

I have never understood why it of such great importance to certain
individuals to attempt to prove that the honey bee language is a freak of
nature and serves no real purpose. The only explanation I have heard that
begins to shed light on it is that some people have a deeply held conviction
that only humans actually communicate and the rest of living creation is
going about life mindlessly. However, there is a huge body of evidence that
contradicts this. Just as the bone structure similar to our own five
fingered hand can be seen  in thousands of other of animals as different as
dinosaurs and dogs, so can the evolution of communication and mentality be
observed in myriad non-human organisms. Of course, many people are afraid
that attributing mental processes to other creatures will increase our
sympathy for them. I hope so.

Peter Borst
Danby NY USA

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---