Julian O'Dea from Australia asked (in part):
>For some time, I have been interested in Adrian Wenner's
>criticisms of the evidence in support of the von Frisch "dance
>language" hypothesis.
>I recently found [a popular] article in New Scientist (UK) of 5 June
>1999 on the decision-making process in honeybee swarming,
>which seemed to provide strong support for the classical
>von Frisch hypothesis.
>"Group decision making in a swarm of honey bees" by
>Thomas Seeley and Susannah Buhrman, "Behavioral
>Ecology and Sociobiology", vol. 45, p.19, 1999 and
>"Collective decisions and cognition in bees" by Kirk
>Visscher and Scott Camazine, "Nature", vol. 397, p.400,
>1999.
-- CLIP --
Those interested in the swarming phenomenon might well read the following
paper: Wenner, A.M. 1992. Swarm movement: A mystery explained. AMERICAN
BEE JOURNAL. 132 (Jan.):27-31. That article illustrates why one need not
embrace the bee language hypothesis when trying to understand swarming
behavior among honey bees. An odor-search hypothesis suffices.
Julian surmised as much when he wrote:
>However, there are some issues that come to mind. Is it possible that
>[bees >become recruited as postulated] merely because they are picking up
>familiar >odours from the other scout bees, and dancing in accordance with
>their memory of >the associated sites? That is, the communication is via
>odour not via
>the dance?
Virtually all beekeepers know that virtually all bees in a moving swarm
fly pretty much in circles --- not in a bee line as expected by the
language hypothesis. The swarm apparently has been led by Nasanov gland
odors emitted by the hundreds of scouts that have made the trip many times.
Julian also asked:
>My first reading of the New Scientist article was that there
>was new, strong evidence against Professor Wenner's critique of the
>von Frisch interpretation. But now I am not so sure. Does anybody
>have an opinion?
*********
Many of those who have followed the bee language controversy these past
several years now realize that we live in two parallel universes on this
issue (as is so often true in controversies). A rather small body of avid
language advocates embraces all supportive evidence and pays essentially no
heed to the great amount of negative evidence that has accumulated this
past half century (even that evidence inherent in von Frisch's own
publications), with respect to that pervasive hypothesis. Advocates
"preach to the choir" (as it were) and appeal greatly to receptive
reporters in the popular media as they continue their mission to keep the
language hypothesis intact.
It appears that most applied bee researchers now ignore the whole issue
--- knowing full well that neither they nor beekeepers have profited from
the promises inherent in the original hypothesis (I can furnish a brief
summary of those original promises for anyone interested).
Thus, this issue has far more interesting implications than simply
whether an insect can have a language; instead, it revolves about how we do
science, a topic covered in the following publication:
1997 Wenner, A.M. The role of controversy in animal behavior. Pages
3-37 in Greenberg, C. and E. Tobach (eds). Comparative Psychology of
Invertebrates:The Field and Laboratory Study of Insect Behavior. Garland
Publishing, New York.
Unfortunately, the media all too readily embraces exotic explanations
--- a major part of the problem. How long will the impasse last (the
existence of two parallel worlds)? One can find some input on that
question in the following publication:
1998 Wenner, A.M. Honey bee "dance language" controversy. Pages
823-836 in Greenberg, C. and M. Hara, (eds.), Comparative Psychology: A
Handbook. Garland Publishing, New York.
Adrian
Adrian M. Wenner (805) 963-8508 (home phone)
967 Garcia Road (805) 893-8062 (UCSB FAX)
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
****************************************************************************
**********
*
* "The most difficult task of the scientist is to suspend judgment
about what is * true and what is not."
* (Susan Cozzens,
1985)
*
****************************************************************************
**********
|
