Visual ecology of Indian carpenter bees II: adaptations of eyes and ocelli to nocturnal and diurnal lifestyles

Most bees are diurnal, with behaviour that is largely visually mediated, but several groups have made evolutionary shifts to nocturnality, despite having apposition compound eyes unsuited to vision in dim light. We compared the anatomy and optics of the apposition eyes and the ocelli of the nocturnal carpenter bee, Xylocopa tranquebarica, with two sympatric species, the strictly diurnal X. leucothorax and the occasionally crepuscular X. tenuiscapa. The ocelli of the nocturnal X. tranquebarica are unusually large (diameter ca. 1 mm) and poorly focussed. Moreover, their apposition eyes show specific visual adaptations for vision in dim light, including large size, large facets and very wide rhabdoms, which together make these eyes 9 times more sensitive than those of X. tenuiscapa and 27 times more sensitive than those of X. leucothorax. These differences in optical sensitivity are surprisingly small considering that X. tranquebarica can fly on moonless nights when background luminance is as low as 10(-5) cd m(-2), implying that this bee must employ additional visual strategies to forage and find its way back to the nest. These strategies may include photoreceptors with longer integration times and higher contrast gains as well as higher neural summation mechanisms for increasing visual reliability in dim light.

Resolution and sensitivity of the eyes of the Asian honeybees Apis florea, Apis cerana and Apis dorsata

Bees of the genus Apis are important foragers of nectar and pollen resources. Although the European honeybee, Apis mellifera, has been well studied with respect to its sensory abilities, learning behaviour and role as pollinators, much less is known about the other Apis species. We studied the anatomical spatial resolution and absolute sensitivity of the eyes of three sympatric species of Asian honeybees, Apis cerana, Apis florea and Apis dorsata and compared them with the eyes of A. mellifera. Of these four species, the giant honeybee A. dorsata (which forages during moonlit nights) has the lowest spatial resolution and the most sensitive eyes, followed by A. mellifera, A. cerana and the dwarf honeybee, A. florea (which has the smallest acceptance angles and the least sensitive eyes). Moreover, unlike the strictly diurnal A. cerana and A. florea, A. dorsata possess large ocelli, a feature that it shares with all dim-light bees. However, the eyes of the facultatively nocturnal A. dorsata are much less sensitive than those of known obligately nocturnal bees such as Megalopta genalis in Panama and Xylocopa tranquebarica in India. The differences in sensitivity between the eyes of A. dorsata and other strictly diurnal Apis species cannot alone explain why the former is able to fly, orient and forage at half-moon light levels. We assume that additional neuronal adaptations, as has been proposed for A. mellifera, M. genalis and X. tranquebarica, might exist in A. dorsata.

Differential reproductive success in Cassia fistula in different habitants-A case of pollinator limitations?

Differences in flower success patterns in two habitat types that differed drastically with respect to rainfall, tree density and species composition were studied at Mudumalai wildlife sanctuary, India. Observations on phenological patterns of two species, Cassia fistula and Gmelina arborea, were made from April 1988 through June 1990. Quantitative data on flower-fruit ratio, insect visitation rates, pollen grain per stigma and the number of fruits per tree were recorded. Data were also collected on the number of pollen deposited on the stigma after different types of bees visited the flower. The data suggested that only carpenter bees (Xylocopa spp) effect pollination in C. fistula. The differences in fruit-flower ratios were attributed to the differences in insect visitation rates to inflorescences between sites. The low pollen number per stigma and the resultant reduction in reproductive success in C. fistula are attributed to the competing species G. arborea receiving more visitations from pollinators in the wetter site. These results suggest that pollinator limitation is another constraint in reproductive success of plants.