1. Foraging Bumble Bees Weigh the Reliability of Personal and Social Information 
Aimee S. Dunlap, Matthew E. Nielsen, Anna Dornhaus, Daniel R. Papaj 
Current Biology 
Volume 26, Issue 9, Pages (May 2016)
DOI: /j.cub
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Diagram of the Colored-Disc Artificial Flowers and Dried Pinned Bumble Bees Used as Social Cues
The final testing array consisted of three of each of these types, for a total of 12 flowers. See also Figure S1.
Current Biology  , DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Responses to Bee Presence and Trained Flower Color for All Reliability Treatment Combinations
Left: all levels of floral cue reliability when social cue reliability = 50%. Middle: all levels of floral cue reliability when social cue reliability = 83%. Right: all levels of floral cue reliability when social cue reliability = 100%. Each point shows the mean ± SD for the ten bees tested in each treatment. Single asterisks indicate significant (p < 0.05) deviations from what is expected by chance (50%); double asterisks indicate points remaining statistically significant following Bonferroni corrections. See also Table S1.
Current Biology  , DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
Visitation Rates during Training to Social and Floral Cues Based on the Reliability of Those Cues
The main effects of social cue reliability and of floral clue reliability on overall performance during the training phase in terms of the proportion of rewarded landings (mean ± SE). For social reliability, each point is statistically significantly different from every other point (Fisher’s least significant difference [LSD], all p < ). For floral reliability, the mean number of rewarded landings per block when flowers are 100% reliable significantly differs from other levels (Fisher’s LSD, both p < ). See also Figure S2 and Table S2.
Current Biology  , DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions