BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 16 Feb 2000 19:04:45 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (30 lines)
> Julian O'Dea: There is a third possibility, c), which I
> discuss at
>
> http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-13/ns_jdo.html
>
> This is that the symbolic representation evolved as
> idiothetic behaviour: for the benefit of the *individual,
> foraging bee*. The "dance" later evolved the function
> of attracting other bees to the dancer, to pick up odours.
> No symbolic communication, though.
>
> Canberra, Australia
>

And I would offer yet another. That as the bee began its journey to the
complex social insect it is today, the early bee evolved the dance
communication to direct sisters to the food source. As the chemical
communications became more refined the need for the dance was reduced.
What we are seeing today is what is left of the old genetic code.

In your article referenced above you mention that the africanized honey
bee dances, but the information is not used. This could be an indication
that the environment has pressured these bees away from relying on the
dance as other methods evolved.

The fact that "dancing" conveys information that is human readable is a
big hangup for me. The amount of time and pressure that it would take to
evolve random movments to a pattern is great. However, the self imprinting
theory you put forth does carry some weight in "paying" for this cost.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2