The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 06 (of 10)Sharp, David
Science
The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 06 (of 10)
Sharp, David
Animals
enter into the cell it had left partially completed, would examine
circumspectly the boulder, but would always leave it, and again return to
the spot where the nest was originally situated, and, on finding that the
nest was not there, would take its departure altogether from the locality.
The home must be, for the bee, in the proper situation, or it is not
recognised as the desired object. Thus we are confronted with the strange
fact that the very bee that is able to return to its nest from a distance
of four kilometres can no longer recognise it when removed only a yard from
the original position. This extraordinary condition of the memory of the
Insect is almost inconceivable by us. That the bee should accurately
recognise the spot, but that it should not recognise the cell it had itself
just formed and half-filled with honey-paste, seems to us almost
incredible; nevertheless, the fact is quite consistent with what we shall
subsequently relate in the case of the solitary wasp _Bembex_. A cross
experiment was made by taking away the stone with the attached nest of the
bee while the latter {41}was absent, and putting in its place the nest of
another individual in about the same stage of construction; this nest was
at once adopted by the bee, which indeed was apparently in no way deranged
by the fact that the edifice was the work of another. A further experiment
was made by transposing the positions of two nests that were very near
together, so that each bee when returning might be supposed to have a free
choice as to which nest it would go to. Unhesitatingly each bee selected
the nest that, though not its own, was in the position where its own had
been. This series of experiments seems to prove that the _Chalcidoma_ has
very little sense as to what is its own property, but, on the other hand,
has a most keen appreciation of locality. As, however, it might be supposed
that the bees were deceived by the similarity between the substituted
nests, Fabre transposed two nests that were extremely different, one
consisting of many cells, the other of a single incomplete cell; it was, of
course, a necessary condition of this experiment that each of the two
nests, however different in other respects, should possess one cell each in
similar stages of construction; and when that was the case each bee
cheerfully adopted the nest that, though very different to its own, was in
the right place. This transposition of nests can be rapidly repeated, and
thus the same bee may be made to go on working at two different nests.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account