scholarly journals Variability in individual assessment behaviour and its implications for collective decision-making

2017 ◽  
Vol 284 (1848) ◽  
pp. 20162237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. O'Shea-Wheller ◽  
Naoki Masuda ◽  
Ana B. Sendova-Franks ◽  
Nigel R. Franks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Nest Site ◽  
Computational Modelling ◽  
Nest Site Selection ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Decentralized System ◽  
Nest Sites ◽  
Nest Choice ◽  
Nest Quality

Self-organized systems of collective behaviour have been demonstrated in a number of group-living organisms. There is, however, less research relating to how variation in individual assessments may facilitate group decision-making. Here, we investigate this using the decentralized system of collective nest choice behaviour employed by the ant Temnothorax albipennis, combining experimental results with computational modelling. In experiments, isolated workers of this species were allowed to investigate new nest sites of differing quality, and it was found that for any given nest quality, there was wide variation among individuals in the durations that they spent within each nest site. Additionally, individual workers were consistent in spending more time in nest sites of higher quality, and less time in those of lower quality. Hence, the time spent in a new nest site must have included an assessment of nest quality. As nest site visit durations (henceforth termed assessment durations) are linked to recruitment, it is possible that the variability we observed may influence the collective decision-making process of colonies. Thus, we explored this further using a computational model of nest site selection, and found that heterogeneous nest assessments conferred a number of potential benefits. Furthermore, our experiments showed that nest quality assessments were flexible, being influenced by experience of prior options. Our findings help to elucidate the potential mechanisms underlying group behaviour, and highlight the importance of heterogeneity among individuals, rather than precise calibration, in shaping collective decision-making.

scholarly journals Different bees, different needs: how nest-site requirements have shaped the decision-making processes in homeless honeybees ( Apis spp.)

2018 ◽  
Vol 373 (1746) ◽  
pp. 20170010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeleine Beekman ◽  
Benjamin P. Oldroyd
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Site Selection ◽  
Nest Site ◽  
Movement Ecology ◽  
Nest Site Selection ◽  
Apis Florea ◽  
Collective Movement ◽  
Nest Sites ◽  
Cavity Nesting ◽  
Species Specific

During reproductive swarming, a honeybee swarm needs to decide on a new nest site and then move to the chosen site collectively. Most studies of swarming and nest-site selection are based on one species, Apis mellifera . Natural colonies of A. mellifera live in tree cavities. The quality of the cavity is critical to the survival of a swarm. Other honeybee species nest in the open, and have less strict nest-site requirements, such as the open-nesting dwarf honeybee Apis florea . Apis florea builds a nest comprised of a single comb suspended from a twig. For a cavity-nesting species, there is only a limited number of potential nest sites that can be located by a swarm, because suitable sites are scarce. By contrast, for an open-nesting species, there is an abundance of equally suitable twigs. While the decision-making process of cavity-nesting bees is geared towards selecting the best site possible, open-nesting species need to coordinate collective movement towards areas with potential nest sites. Here, we argue that the nest-site selection processes of A. florea and A. mellifera have been shaped by each species' specific nest-site requirements. Both species use the same behavioural algorithm, tuned to allow each species to solve their species-specific problem. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Collective movement ecology’.

scholarly journals Do small swarms have an advantage when house hunting? The effect of swarm size on nest-site selection by Apis mellifera

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (87) ◽  
pp. 20130533 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. M. Schaerf ◽  
J. C. Makinson ◽  
M. R. Myerscough ◽  
M. Beekman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Nest Site ◽  
Time Lag ◽  
Nest Site Selection ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Nest Sites ◽  
Nest Site Choice ◽  
Realistic Problem ◽  
Swarm Size

Reproductive swarms of honeybees are faced with the problem of finding a good site to establish a new colony. We examined the potential effects of swarm size on the quality of nest-site choice through a combination of modelling and field experiments. We used an individual-based model to examine the effects of swarm size on decision accuracy under the assumption that the number of bees actively involved in the decision-making process (scouts) is an increasing function of swarm size. We found that the ability of a swarm to choose the best of two nest sites decreases as swarm size increases when there is some time-lag between discovering the sites, consistent with Janson & Beekman (Janson & Beekman 2007 Proceedings of European Conference on Complex Systems , pp. 204–211.). However, when simulated swarms were faced with a realistic problem of choosing between many nest sites discoverable at all times, larger swarms were more accurate in their decisions than smaller swarms owing to their ability to discover nest sites more rapidly. Our experimental fieldwork showed that large swarms invest a larger number of scouts into the decision-making process than smaller swarms. Preliminary analysis of waggle dances from experimental swarms also suggested that large swarms could indeed discover and advertise nest sites at a faster rate than small swarms.

Stop Signals Provide Cross Inhibition in Collective Decision-Making by Honeybee Swarms

Science ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 335 (6064) ◽  
pp. 108-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas D. Seeley ◽  
P. Kirk Visscher ◽  
Thomas Schlegel ◽  
Patrick M. Hogan ◽  
Nigel R. Franks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Nest Site ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Model ◽  
Nesting Site ◽  
Cross Inhibition

Honeybee swarms and complex brains show many parallels in how they make decisions. In both, separate populations of units (bees or neurons) integrate noisy evidence for alternatives, and, when one population exceeds a threshold, the alternative it represents is chosen. We show that a key feature of a brain—cross inhibition between the evidence-accumulating populations—also exists in a swarm as it chooses its nesting site. Nest-site scouts send inhibitory stop signals to other scouts producing waggle dances, causing them to cease dancing, and each scout targets scouts’ reporting sites other than her own. An analytic model shows that cross inhibition between populations of scout bees increases the reliability of swarm decision-making by solving the problem of deadlock over equal sites.

Islands of Stability: Engaging Emergence from Cellular Automata to the Occupy Movement

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Pickering
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cellular Automata ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Occupy Movement ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1960S

"Instead of considering »being with« in terms of non-problematic, machine-like places, where reliable entities assemble in stable relationships, STS conjures up a world where the achievement of chancy stabilisations and synchronisations is local.We have to analyse how and where a certain regularity and predictability in the intersection of scientists and their instruments, say, or of human individuals and groups, is produced.The paper reviews models of emergence drawn from the history of cybernetics—the canonical »black box,« homeostats, and cellular automata—to enrich our imagination of the stabilisation process, and discusses the concept of »variety« as a way of clarifying its difficulty, with the antiuniversities of the 1960s and the Occupy movement as examples. Failures of »being with« are expectable. In conclusion, the paper reviews approaches to collective decision-making that reduce variety without imposing a neoliberal hierarchy. "

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document