- :: Atom & Cosmos
- :: Body & Brain
- :: Earth
- :: Environment
- :: Genes & Cells
- :: Humans
- :: Life
- :: Matter & Energy
- :: Molecules
- :: Science & Society
- :: Other Topics
- :: Science News For Kids
It's the ultimate way to pull off a sting: Teach a group of ordinary honeybees to ignore flowers and, instead, focus on vapors from explosives used in bombs. Then send the bees off in teams to sniff out terrorists. Or track the molecular trail of illicit drugs, or even point police to a rotting corpse.
In recent years, researchers have shown that with just a few
minutes of training, undercover bees can detect the smell of TNT,
methamphetamine or almost any other scent just as the bees would respond to
pollen. Wasps’ sniffing abilities may also be put to use finding bodies in
search-and-rescue missions or helping farmers track infestations that,
unchecked, could lead to crop failure or foodborne illness.
Based on these findings, scientists have begun devising an
array of chemical detection devices that exploit the insects’ powerful sense
for scents. At Los Alamos National Laboratory in
“The general premise is, if it smells, we believe we can
train our bees to detect it,” says chemist Robert Wingo of
Wingo says insects are not only cheaper to keep and quicker to train than dogs, but also can pick up scents that canines can’t detect. In some cases, the bees perform better than instruments used in the lab.
While these insect abilities have long attracted interest from military and security personnel on the lookout for highly sensitive and portable devices, the concept has been slow to gain favor in the scientific community. Even though insect-based devices have performed well in laboratory settings and controlled field studies, some scientists question whether these devices can be used as reliably as other sensors.
Glen Rains of the
Still, no one denies that insects have a phenomenal sense of smell. Their antennae are covered with thousands of microscopic sensors, allowing them to pick up the faintest odors. Bees, wasps and even moths can learn and remember a wide range of target odors, making them ideal for use in chemical detection systems.
Now several laboratories are stepping up efforts to test
insect devices in real-world conditions. Scientists say the studies will
provide empirical evidence needed to make the devices more widely accepted as
biological sensors. If all goes well, commercial insect sniffing devices may
become available within a year.
Buzz bombs and stinger missiles
Military uses for honeybees and other insects date back to
ancient times. The Romans used catapults with beehives as projectiles, to
unleash the fury of angry bees on the enemy. During World War I, beehives were
rigged to topple with trip wires to thwart an approaching enemy.
More recent studies on honeybees and other foraging insects show these small, winged creatures possess other traits that can sting enemy agents. For example, despite their tiny brains, honeybees are quite intelligent and can be easily trained using classical conditioning techniques. Just like Pavlov’s dogs, which learned to associate a ringing bell with dinner, bees and wasps can be trained to associate a smell—vapors, say, of a liquid explosive or decaying corpse—with a sugary treat.
In the early 1990s, the
“The problem was, it’s hard to track a bee whizzing by at 15 miles per hour,” Wingo says. Never mind tracking a large group. “Technologically, it’s an extraordinary challenge. Number two: How do you prove the associative conditioning?”
Enter Tim Haarmann, an entomologist working at
The bee bomb detector is about half the size of a shoe box and weighs roughly two kilograms (four pounds). From the outside, it looks like a plain box with a few air holes. Inside, lined up in a row and strapped into strawlike tubes, bees are exposed to puffs of air as a video camera monitors their reactions. The camera is tied to pattern-recognition software that signals when a bee responds to a scent.
A, Bee, C’s of detection training
Though bees can’t bark when they encounter a target scent, they do have a way of communicating that the camera can catch. It turns out that a hungry bee will stick out its tongue in anticipation of a meal. Bees will also stick out their tongues when a drop of sugar water is touched to their antennae. Pair the sugar drop with the scent of TNT or C-4 plastic explosives half a dozen times, and the bees will extend their tongues at a whiff of the explosives alone. This response, called the proboscis extension reflex, can assess the bees’ reaction to a particular scent.
“A honeybee will not stick out its tongue for any other
reason than to eat. So we can train bees to associate food with a particular
scent,” Taylor-McCabe says. “It’s an unambiguous signal that the honeybee gives
us to indicate yes or no.”
Wingo and Taylor-McCabe are using this approach to train forager bees to detect a wide range of compounds, including methamphetamine and cocaine. The honeybees can even detect triacetone triperoxide, or TATP, an explosive that canines often have trouble detecting. TATP was the detonator carried by the “shoe bomber” in his attempt to destroy a commercial aircraft with plastic explosives in his shoe.
Bees can be trained to detect multiple scents and taught to
pick up a single scent from a bouquet. The bees can also pick up the scant
molecular trail of vapors too faint to be detected by lab instruments. In
trials at
“We haven’t quantified exactly how low their threshold is, but the bees are able to detect the explosives at concentrations below that stated of the detection instruments in our lab, and that’s generally in the low parts per trillion,” Wingo says.
A British firm, Inscentinel Ltd., is developing a bee-based
detection device that relies on a team of 36 bees. Mathilde Briens, research
and development manager, says the company is investigating ways to pack twice
that many bees in a single unit, allowing them to screen up to a dozen
chemicals at once.
“It’s mainly an engineering issue,” she says. “We need to make sure all the bees are exposed to the scent and find ways to manage all the bees so we know when they are responding.”
Dances with wasps
While wasps don’t stick out their tongues in response to a
scent, they do communicate with each other—through dance. The
Rains’ group is exploiting the wide range of such movements
to build biological sensors with wasps capable of detecting more than one odor.
For example, a wasp trained to associate a specific odor with a food reward
will press its antennae down onto the source of an odor. If scientists present
a different target odor while the wasp is stinging its host, the wasp will
display coiling behavior, rearing up on its hind legs and bending its antennae
the next time it encounters that scent.
Similar to the bee-based detector, the Wasp Hound houses a team of trained wasps in a handheld, ventilated cartridge. At one end of the cartridge, a small fan draws outside air through a hole. If the wasps don’t recognize an incoming odor, they continue flying about. If they do recognize the scent, they cluster around the opening, where a miniature video camera records their movements and sends images to a laptop for analysis.
In an early field trial designed to compare the detection limits of the Wasp Hound to an “electronic nose,” the insect detector proved to be 74 times more sensitive to fungi than the mechanical device, and 94 times more sensitive to plant odors. That study appeared in Transactions of the ASAE in 2004.
Rains and his collaborators are now working to make the
device even more sensitive. Don Kulasiri of
By analyzing the wasps’ responses to chemical stimuli at different concentrations and tracking any resulting changes in their behavior, the scientists aim to develop a device that not only detects a specified chemical but also can accurately measure its concentration.
“What that holds for us is potentially developing a device
that’s not just yes-or-no but is concentration-specific to some level,” says
Rains, who along with his colleagues, reviews the efforts in the August Entomologia
Experimentalis et Applicata.
Ideally, the scientists say, the device could be carried into farm fields and grain stores to check for contaminants and disease. The group is now using a prototype Wasp Hound to detect aflatoxin, a toxin produced by a fungus that grows on peanuts, corn and other plants. Trials suggest the device may provide a better way of detecting the toxin before crops enter the food supply, Rains says.
“Current detection methods rely on just a subsample of a large quantity of material, so there’s a possibility of missing it when it’s there,” he says. The group is also investigating ways to detect infestations of E. coli, salmonella and other food contaminants. The Wasp Hound may also be used for security and forensics, and has the potential to detect volatile compounds in human breath associated with diseases such as cancer and tuberculosis, Rains says.
Giving it the sniff test
Though insect sensing systems have performed well in laboratory settings and controlled field studies, the devices have yet to prove themselves to be reliable in real-world applications.
This summer, scientists began putting the devices to the
test. In a field trial in July, the Wasp Hound went nose-to-nose with a team of
five nationally certified human rescue dogs to detect soil contaminated with
the scent of human remains. The results will be presented in February at a
meeting of the
This fall, the bee bomb-detection device is being used in a blind test by a small-town police force to sniff out explosives during a training exercise, and will be done in concert with a canine team.
Jeffery Tomberlin, an entomologist at
“Another advantage is that you don’t have to worry about the
wasp trying to provide a response simply because it wants to please its owner,”
he says. Still, not all scientists are convinced that the insect sniffing
devices will fly.
“In order to get a bee to respond only to the odor you’re interested in, you have to do what’s called differential reinforcement, which means you present some other odor without sucrose until the animal responds differentially, and that may take several trials,” Bitterman says.
Moving to the real world presents other obstacles, Bitterman
notes. “It is one thing to assert that a forager from an established hive can detect
explosives in a dish under standard field conditions but quite another to
decide how to use that ability in screening the contents of a shipping
container at a pier or on a highway.”
Still, scientists working to build the insect devices say these obstacles can be overcome. Wingo and his group reinforce their bees’ learning every day with a “breakfast boost,” providing the scent of interest with the bee’s morning meal.
Despite the repeated training sessions, and the occasional
sting, Taylor-McCabe says the effort is worth it.
“Bees are wonderful insects for detection devices,” she says. “They give us an unambiguous answer, and they work until the minute they die.”
Found in: Life
- Milius, S. 2005. Face time: Bees can tell apart human portraits. Science News 168(Dec. 3):360. Available at
[Go to]. - ______. 2004. Little brains that could: Bees show big-time working memory. Science News 167(July 24):213. available at [Go to].
- Cunningham, A. 2007. Lighting up for uranium. Science News 171(March 3):141. Available at [Go to].
- Explore more
Glen Rains et al. “Using insect sniffing devices for detection.” Trends in Biotechnology. June 2008.
- Tomberlin, J.K., G.C. Rains, and M.R. Sanford. 2008. Development of Microplitis croceipes as a biological sensor. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 128(August)249-257. DOI: 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2008.00743.x
- Rains, G.C., J.K. Tomberlin, and D. Kulasiri. 2008. Using insect sniffing devices for detection. Trends in Biotechnology 26(June):288-294.
- Rains, G.C., et al. 2004. Limits of volatile chemical detection of a parasitoid wasp, Microplitis croceipes, and an electronic nose: A comparative study. Transactions of the ASAE 47:2145-2152.
- Rains, G.C., et al. 2003. Parasitic wasps learn and report diverse chemicals with unique conditionable behaviors. Chemical Senses 28(July):545-549.
- Bitterman, M.E., et al. 1983. Classical conditioning of proboscis extension in honeybees (Apis mellifera). Journal of Comparative Psychology 97(June):107-119.
- Microswimmers make a splash
- Fire
- Seeking genetic fate
- Planck by Planck
- 2008: Science news of the year

Please login or register to participate.