Adapting to Dynamic Environments: Polyethism in Response Threshold Models for Social Insects

Response threshold models are an important tool to model division of labor in social insects and to investigate the underlying principles of self-organization. In this article response threshold models which incorporate dynamic environments with varying demand for work and their influence on division of labor are studied. In their natural habitats, social insects are always exposed to dynamic environments, however, the effect that such environments have on response threshold models has rarely been investigated. In the course of this article it is shown that overworking and underworking, i.e. working more or less than the ideal amount, over a certain time is a colony-size dependent effect in dynamic situations. By adjusting the number of possible learning steps, which correspond to changes in the maximal threshold values relative to a colony's size, the performance of colonies in dynamic environments can be increased. A setup inspired by repeated migration behavior is also investigated. It is shown that these different learning rates affect a colony's ability to maintain an activity onset for a reappearing task.

[1]  N. Franks,et al.  How experienced individuals contribute to an improvement in collective performance in ants , 2007, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[2]  J. Deneubourg,et al.  Emergent polyethism as a consequence of increased colony size in insect societies. , 2002, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  Robert E. Page,et al.  Genetic determination of guarding and undertaking in honey-bee colonies , 1988, Nature.

[4]  G. Robinson,et al.  Differences in performance on a reversal learning test and division of labor in honey bee colonies , 2000, Animal Cognition.

[5]  Daniel Merkle,et al.  Dynamic Polyethism and Competition for Tasks in Threshold Reinforcement Models of Social Insects , 2004, Adapt. Behav..

[6]  E. Bonabeau,et al.  Fixed response thresholds and the regulation of division of labor in insect societies , 1998 .

[7]  Alcherio Martinoli,et al.  Efficiency and robustness of threshold-based distributed allocation algorithms in multi-agent systems , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[8]  N. Franks,et al.  Social resilience in individual worker ants and its role in division of labour , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[9]  S. Graham,et al.  Honey Bee Nest Thermoregulation: Diversity Promotes Stability , 2004, Science.

[10]  T. Pankiw,et al.  Response thresholds to sucrose predict foraging division of labor in honeybees , 2000, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[11]  Nigel R. Franks,et al.  Division of labour in a crisis: task allocation during colony emigration in the ant Leptothorax unifasciatus (Latr.) , 1995, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[12]  J. Pasteels,et al.  Caste polyethism and collective defense in the ant, Pbeidole pallidula: the outcome of quantitative differences in recruitment , 1992, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[13]  Guy Theraulaz,et al.  Adaptive Task Allocation Inspired by a Model of Division of Labor in Social Insects , 1997, BCEC.

[14]  G. Robinson,et al.  Selective neuroanatomical plasticity and division of labour in the honeybee , 1993, Nature.

[15]  R. Scheiner Sucrose responsiveness and behaviour in honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) , 2001 .

[16]  E. Bonabeau,et al.  Quantitative study of the fixed threshold model for the regulation of division of labour in insect societies , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  Edward O. Wilson,et al.  Success and Dominance in Ecosystems: The Case of the Social Insects , 1991 .

[18]  J. Fewell,et al.  Models of division of labor in social insects. , 2001, Annual review of entomology.

[19]  Craig A. Tovey,et al.  On Honey Bees and Dynamic Server Allocation in Internet Hosting Centers , 2004, Adapt. Behav..

[20]  D. Floreano,et al.  Division of labour and colony efficiency in social insects: effects of interactions between genetic architecture, colony kin structure and rate of perturbations , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  Michael J. B. Krieger,et al.  The call of duty: Self-organised task allocation in a population of up to twelve mobile robots , 2000, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[22]  R E Page,et al.  The evolution of insect societies. , 1997, Endeavour.

[23]  Raphaël Jeanson,et al.  Emergence of increased division of labor as a function of group size , 2007, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[24]  Edward O. Wilson,et al.  Behavioral discretization and the number of castes in an ant species , 1976, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[25]  Susan M. Bertram,et al.  Division of labor in a dynamic environment: response by honeybees (Apis mellifera) to graded changes in colony pollen stores , 1999, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.