Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Experimental variation in polyandry affects parasite loads and fitness in a bumble-bee

Nature volume 397, pages 151–154 (1999)Cite this article

Abstract

In many species of animals, females typically mate with more than one male (polyandry). Some social insects carry this behaviour to extremes1. For example, honeybee queens mate with ten to twenty (or even more) males on their nuptial flights2. The reasons for this behaviour remain unknown, given the obvious costs of time, energy and exposure to predation. Several potential benefits of polyandry have been proposed1,3,3,4, but none are well supported yet. Here we test the hypothesis that genetic diversity among a female's offspring may offer some protection from parasitism5,6,7. We artificially inseminated queens of a bumble-bee (Bombus terrestris L.) with sperm of either low or high genetic diversity. The resulting colonies were exposed to parasitism under field conditions. High-diversity colonies had fewer parasites and showed greater reproductive success, on average, than did low-diversity colonies. We suggest that female mating frequency may be influenced in part by parasites.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Intensity and prevalence of infection of high- and low-diversity B. terrestris colonies.
Figure 2: Average parasite load (the average number of different parasite species per worker per colony) was lower in workers from high-diversity colonies than in workers from low-diversity colonies (U-test: z = 2.162, P = 0.015).
Figure 3: Average reproductive success was higher in high-diversity colonies than in low-diversity colonies, as assessed by several criteria: first, the males produced (t = 2.05, d.f. = 17, P = 0.028); second, the number of queens produced (U-test, z = 0.518, not significant); and third, sexual productivity (that is, the number of queens multiplied by two, plus the number of males; justified because the body mass of queens is approximately double that of males: t = 2.67, d.f. = 17, P = 0.008).

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boomsma, J. J. & Ratnieks, F. L. W. Paternity in eusocial hymenoptera. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 351, 947–975 (1996).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Moritz, F. R. A. et al. High degree of polyandry in Apis dorsata queens detected by DNA microsatellite variability. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 37, 357–363 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boomsma, J. J. & Grafen, A. Colony-level sex ratio selection in the eusocial Hymenoptera. J. Evol. Biol. 3, 383–407 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Keller, L. & Reeve, H. K. Partitioning of reproduction in animal societies. TREE 9, 98–102 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tooby, J. Pathogens, polymorphism, and the evolution of sex. J. Theor. Biol. 97, 557–576 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hamilton, W. D. in Animal Societies: Theory and Facts (eds Itô, Y., Brown, J. L. & Kikkawa, J.) 81–102 (Japan. Sci. Soc. Press, Tokyo, (1987)).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sherman, P. W., Seeley, T. D. & Reeve, H. K. Parasites, pathogens, and polyandry in social Hymenoptera. Am. Nat. 131, 602–610 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kulincevic, J. M. in Bee Genetics and Breeding (ed. Rinderer, T. E.) 391–414 (Academic, Orlando, (1986)).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Shykoff, J. A. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Parasites and the advantage of genetic variability within social insect colonies. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 243, 55–58 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Schmid-Hempel, P. & Loosli, R. Acontribution to the knowledge of Nosema infections in bumble bees, Bombus spp. Apidologie (in the press).

  11. Schmid-Hempel, P. Infection and colony variability in social insects. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 346, 313–321 (1994).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Crozier, R. H. & Pamilo, P. Evolution of Social Insect Colonies 1–306 (Oxford Univ. Press, (1996)).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Durrer, S. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Shared use of flowers leads to horizontal pathogen transmission. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 258, 299–302 (1994).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Estoup, A., Scholl, A., Pouvreau, A. & Solignac, M. Monandry and polyandry in bumble bees (Hymenoptera, Bombinae) as evidenced by highly variable microsatellites. Mol. Ecol. 4, 89–93 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Röseler, P. -F. Die Anzahl Spermien im Receptaculum seminis von Hummelköniginnen (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombinae). Apidologie 4, 267–274 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Thorén, P., Estoup, A., Paxton, R. J. & Tengö, J. in 6th Congr. Eur. Soc. Evol. Biol. Arnhem S3 (Eur. Soc. Evol. Biol., Arnhem, (1997)).

    Google Scholar 

  17. MacFarlane, R. P., Lipa, J. J. & Liu, H. J. Bumble bee pathogens and internal enemies. Bee World 76, 130–148 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Schmid-Hempel, P. Parasites in Social Insects (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, (1998)).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shykoff, J. A. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Parasites delay worker reproduction in bumblebees: consequences for eusociality. Behav. Ecol. 2, 242–248 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Müller, C. B. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Variation in worker mortality and reproductive performance in the bumble bee, B. lucorum. Funct. Ecol. 6, 48–56 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Müller, C. B. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Correlates of reproductive success among field colonies of Bombus lucorum L.: the importance of growth and parasites. Ecol. Entomol. 17, 343–353 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Liersch, S. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Genetic variability within social insect colonies reduces parasite load. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 221–225 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Walker, W. F. Sperm utilization strategies in non-social insects. Am. Nat. 115, 780–799 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Madsen, T., Shine, R., Loman, J. & Hakensson, T. Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature 355, 440–441 (1992).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank K. Boomsma, M. Brown, F. Fischer, B. Imhoof, S. Koulianos, N. Krüger, E.Magro, E. Meier, R. E. Page Jr, F. Ratnieks, R. Schmid-Hempel and H. Schwarz for help and comments, and the local communities and forestry commissions for use of their land. This work was supported bygrants to P.S.-H. from the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Swiss Office of Science and Technology (within a European TMR network).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ETH Zürich, Experimental Ecology, ETH-Zentrum NW, CH-8092, Zürich, Switzerland

    Boris Baer & Paul Schmid-Hempel

Authors
  1. Boris Baer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Schmid-Hempel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Schmid-Hempel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baer, B., Schmid-Hempel, P. Experimental variation in polyandry affects parasite loads and fitness in a bumble-bee. Nature 397, 151–154 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/16451

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/16451

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing