Visual and movement memories steer foraging bumblebees along habitual routes

FlyDetector-Automated Monitoring Platform for the Visual-Motor Coordination of Honeybees in a Dynamic Obstacle Scene Using Digital Paradigm

Vision plays a crucial role in the ability of compound-eyed insects to perceive the characteristics of their surroundings. Compound-eyed insects (such as the honeybee) can change the optical flow input of the visual system by autonomously controlling their behavior, and this is referred to as visual-motor coordination (VMC). To analyze an insect's VMC mechanism in dynamic scenes, we developed a platform for studying insects that actively shape the optic flow of visual stimuli by adapting their flight behavior. Image-processing technology was applied to detect the posture and direction of insects' movement, and automatic control technology provided dynamic scene stimulation and automatic acquisition of perceptual insect behavior. In addition, a virtual mapping technique was used to reconstruct the visual cues of insects for VMC analysis in a dynamic obstacle scene. A simulation experiment at different target speeds of 1-12 m/s was performed to verify the applicability and accuracy of the platform. Our findings showed that the maximum detection speed was 8 m/s, and triggers were 95% accurate. The outdoor experiments showed that flight speed in the longitudinal axis of honeybees was more stable when facing dynamic barriers than static barriers after analyzing the change in geometric optic flow. Finally, several experiments showed that the platform can automatically and efficiently monitor honeybees' perception behavior, and can be applied to study most insects and their VMC.

The potential underlying mechanisms during learning flights

Hymenopterans, such as bees and wasps, have long fascinated researchers with their sinuous movements at novel locations. These movements, such as loops, arcs, or zigzags, serve to help insects learn their surroundings at important locations. They also allow the insects to explore and orient themselves in their environment. After they gained experience with their environment, the insects fly along optimized paths guided by several guidance strategies, such as path integration, local homing, and route-following, forming a navigational toolkit. Whereas the experienced insects combine these strategies efficiently, the naive insects need to learn about their surroundings and tune the navigational toolkit. We will see that the structure of the movements performed during the learning flights leverages the robustness of certain strategies within a given scale to tune other strategies which are more efficient at a larger scale. Thus, an insect can explore its environment incrementally without risking not finding back essential locations.

Spatial tuning of translational optic flow responses in hawkmoths of varying body size

To safely navigate their environment, flying insects rely on visual cues, such as optic flow. Which cues insects can extract from their environment depends closely on the spatial and temporal response properties of their visual system. These in turn can vary between individuals that differ in body size. How optic flow-based flight control depends on the spatial structure of visual cues, and how this relationship scales with body size, has previously been investigated in insects with apposition compound eyes. Here, we characterised the visual flight control response limits and their relationship to body size in an insect with superposition compound eyes: the hummingbird hawkmoth Macroglossum stellatarum. We used the hawkmoths’ centring response in a flight tunnel as a readout for their reception of translational optic flow stimuli of different spatial frequencies. We show that their responses cut off at different spatial frequencies when translational optic flow was presented on either one, or both tunnel walls. Combined with differences in flight speed, this suggests that their flight control was primarily limited by their temporal rather than spatial resolution. We also observed strong individual differences in flight performance, but no correlation between the spatial response cutoffs and body or eye size.