Attractiveness of single and multiple species flower patches to beneficial insects in agroecosystems

The provision of floral resources for the enhancement of beneficial insect populations has shown promise as a strategy to enhance biological control and pollination in agroecosystems. One approach involves the provision of a single flower species while a second involves the multiple flower species, but the two have never been compared experimentally. Here we examine the influence of single and multiple species flower treatments on the abundance and foraging behaviour of key beneficial insects in two agricultural agroecosystems (broccoli and lucerne crops). The five flower treatments comprised buckwheat only, phacelia only, a simple mixture of buckwheat and phacelia, a complex mixture of buckwheat, phacelia and a commercial seed blend or the existing crop as a control. The abundance of bumble‐bees (Bombus hortorum) and honey bees (Apis mellifera) was highest in the three treatments that contained phacelia, while hoverfly (Melanostoma fasciatum) numbers were high in all four flower treatments. Bumble‐bees and honey bees probed almost exclusively phacelia flowers, even when provided with a choice of other flower species in the simple and complex mixture treatments. In contrast, hoverflies probed the flowers of all plant species in single and multiple species treatments, with no apparent difference in acceptance. However, in mixture treatments, the majority of individual bumble‐bees, honey bees and hoverflies probed the flowers from only one species, despite the presence of alternative flower species. Our results illustrate how an appreciation of insect floral attractiveness can be used to customise the species composition of floral patches to potentially maximise biological control and pollination in targeted agroecosystems.     

Managed bumble bees increase flower visitation but not fruit weight in polytunnel strawberry crops

Animal-mediated pollination is essential for the production and quality of fruits and seeds of many crops consumed by humans. However, crop pollination services might be compromised when wild pollinators are scarce. Managed pollinators are commonly used in crops to supplement such services with the assumption that they will enhance crop yield. However, information on the spatiotemporal pollinator-dependence of crops is still limited. We assessed the contribution of commercial bumble bee colonies compared to the available pollinator community on strawberry (‘Fortuna’ variety) flower visitation and strawberry quality across a landscape gradient of agricultural intensification (i.e. polytunnel berry crop cover). We used colonies of bumble bees in winter and in spring, i.e. when few and most wild pollinators are in their flight period, respectively. The placement of colonies increased visits of bumble bees to strawberry flowers, especially in winter. The use of bumble bee colonies did not affect flower visitation by other insects, mainly honey bees, hoverflies and other Diptera. Flower visitation by both honey bees and wild insects did not vary between seasons and was unrelated to the landscape gradient of berry crop cover. Strawberries were of the highest quality (i.e. weight) when insect-mediated pollination was allowed, and their quality was positively related to wild flower visitors in winter but not in spring. However, increased visits to strawberry flowers by managed bumble bees and honey bees had no effect on strawberry weight. Our results suggest that the pollination services producing high quality strawberry fruits are provided by the flower visitor community present in the study region without the need to use managed bumble bees.     

Reduced abundance and earlier collection of bumble bee workers under intensive cultivation of a mass‐flowering prairie crop

One of the most commonly seeded crops in Canada is canola, a cultivar of oilseed rape (Brassica napus). As a mass‐flowering crop grown intensively throughout the Canadian Prairies, canola has the potential to influence pollinator success across tens of thousands of square kilometers of cropland. Bumble bees (Bombus sp.) are efficient pollinators of many types of native and crop plants. We measured the influence of this mass‐flowering crop on the abundance and phenology of bumble bees, and on another species of social bee (a sweat bee; Halictus rubicundus), by continuously deploying traps at different levels of canola cultivation intensity, spanning the start and end of canola bloom. Queen bumble bees were more abundant in areas with more canola cover, indicating that this crop is attractive to queens. However, bumble bee workers were significantly fewer in these locations later in the season, suggesting reduced colony success. The median collection dates of workers of three bumble bee species were earlier near canola fields, suggesting a dynamic response of colonies to the increased floral resources. Different species experienced this shift to different extents. The sweat bee was not affected by canola cultivation intensity. Our findings suggest that mass‐flowering crops such as canola are attractive to bumble bee queens and therefore may lead to higher rates of colony establishment, but also that colonies established near this crop may be less successful. We propose that the effect on bumble bees can be mitigated by spacing the crop more evenly with respect to alternate floral resources.     

Agricultural landscapes with organic crops support higher pollinator diversity

Pollinators are traditionally thought to perceive non-flowering crop fields as hostile landscape matrix. In this study, we show that landscapes composed of higher proportions of organic crop fields support more bee species at greater abundances in fallow strips. An increase in organic cropping in the surrounding landscape from 5% to 20% enhanced bee species richness in fallow strips by 50%, density of solitary bees by 60% and bumble bee density by 150%. Bee species richness and bumble bee density responded strongest to organic cropping in landscape sectors with 500 m radius, solitary bee density in landscape sectors with 250 m radius. The most likely source of these results is that crop and noncrop habitats are strongly connected via bee foraging at the landscape scale. It seems likely that bees depending on nesting sites in fallow strips benefited from the more abundant flower resources provided by broadleaved weeds in organic crop fields. We conclude that the incorporation of organic crop fields into conventionally managed agricultural landscapes can provide food resources needed to sustain greater pollinator species richness in noncrop habitats.     

Bumble bee abundance and richness improves honey bee pollination behaviour in sweet cherry

Pollination service in agricultural crops increases significantly with pollinator diversity and wild pollinator abundance. Differences in the foraging behaviour of pollinating insects are one of the reasons why pollinator diversity and abundance enhances crop pollination. Here, we focused on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees in sweet cherry orchards. In addition, we studied the influence of bee diversity and abundance on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees. Honey bees were found to visit fewer flowers than bumble bees. Bumble bees also showed a higher probability of changing trees between rows than honey bees. Both visitation rate and probability of row changes of honey bees increased with bumble bee diversity and with bumble bee abundance. We also found that the probability of row changes of honey bees increased with increasing bumble bee abundance. These effects of bumble bee richness and abundance on the pollination behaviour of honey bees can improve the pollination performance of honey bees in crops that depend on cross pollination. Our results highlight the higher pollination performance of bumble bees and the facilitative effect of wild pollinators to crop pollination.     

Bee visit rates vary with floral morphology among highbush blueberry cultivars (Vaccinium corymbosum L.)

As the human population has increased, so too has the demand for biotically pollinated crops. Bees (Apoidea) are essential for pollen transfer and fruit production in many crops, and their visit patterns can be influenced by floral morphology. Here, we considered the role of floral morphology on visit rates and behaviour of managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) and wild bumble bees (genus Bombus), for four highbush blueberry cultivars (Vaccinium corymbosum L.). We measured five floral traits for each cultivar, finding significant variation among cultivars. Corolla throat diameter may be the main morphological determinant of visit rates of honey bees, which is significantly higher on the wider flowers of cv. ‘Duke’ than on ‘Bluecrop’ or ‘Draper’. Honey bees also visited cv. ‘Duke’ legitimately but were frequent nectar robbers on the long, narrow flowers of cv. ‘Bluecrop’. Bumble bees were infrequent (and absent on cv. ‘Draper’) but all observed visits were legitimate. Crop yield was highest for the cultivar with the highest combined (honey bee + bumble bee) visit rate, suggesting that aspects of floral morphology that affect pollinator visit patterns should be considered in crop breeding initiatives.     

Pollination Services Provided by Bees in Pumpkin Fields Supplemented with Either Apis mellifera or Bombus impatiens or Not Supplemented

Pollinators provide an important service in many crops. Managed honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are used to supplement pollination services provided by wild bees with the assumption that they will enhance pollination, fruit set and crop yield beyond the levels provided by the wild bees. Recent declines in managed honey bee populations have stimulated interest in finding alternative managed pollinators to service crops. In the eastern U.S., managed hives of the native common eastern bumble bee (Bombus impatiens Cresson) may be an excellent choice. To examine this issue, a comprehensive 2-yr study was conducted to compare fruit yield and bee visits to flowers in pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo L.) fields that were either supplemented with A. mellifera hives, B. impatiens hives or were not supplemented. We compared pumpkin yield, A. mellifera flower visitation frequency and B. impatiens flower visitation frequency between treatments. Results indicated that supplementing pumpkin fields with either A. mellifera or B. impatiens hives did not increase their visitation to pumpkin flowers or fruit yield compared with those that were not supplemented. Next, the relationship between frequency of pumpkin flower visitation by the most prominent bee species (Peponapis pruinosa (Say), B. impatiens and A. mellifera) and fruit yield was determined across all pumpkin fields sampled. Fruit yield increased as the frequency of flower visits by A. mellifera and B. impatiens increased in 2011 and 2012, respectively. These results suggest that supplementation with managed bees may not improve pumpkin production and that A. mellifera and B. impatiens are important pollinators of pumpkin in our system.     

The Potential Influence of Bumble Bee Visitation on Foraging Behaviors and Assemblages of Honey Bees on Squash Flowers in Highland Agricultural Ecosystems

Bee species interactions can benefit plant pollination through synergistic effects and complementary effects, or can be of detriment to plant pollination through competition effects by reducing visitation by effective pollinators. Since specific bee interactions influence the foraging performance of bees on flowers, they also act as drivers to regulate the assemblage of flower visitors. We selected squash (Cucurbita pepo L.) and its pollinators as a model system to study the foraging response of honey bees to the occurrence of bumble bees at two types of sites surrounded by a high amount of natural habitats (≥ 58% of land cover) and a low amount of natural habitats (≤ 12% of land cover) in a highland agricultural ecosystem in China. At the individual level, we measured the elapsed time from the departure of prior pollinator(s) to the arrival of another pollinator, the selection of honey bees for flowers occupied by bumble bees, and the length of time used by honey bees to explore floral resources at the two types of sites. At the community level, we explored the effect of bumble bee visitation on the distribution patterns of honey bees on squash flowers. Conclusively, bumble bee visitation caused an increase in elapsed time before flowers were visited again by a honey bee, a behavioral avoidance by a newly-arriving honey bee to select flowers occupied by bumble bees, and a shortened length of time the honey bee takes to examine and collect floral resources. The number of overall bumble bees on squash flowers was the most important factor explaining the difference in the distribution patterns of honey bees at the community level. Furthermore, decline in the number of overall bumble bees on the squash flowers resulted in an increase in the number of overall honey bees. Therefore, our study suggests that bee interactions provide an opportunity to enhance the resilience of ecosystem pollination services against the decline in pollinator diversity.     

Experimental evidence that wildflower strips increase pollinator visits to crops

Wild bees provide a free and potentially diverse ecosystem service to farmers growing pollination‐dependent crops. While many crops benefit from insect pollination, soft fruit crops, including strawberries are highly dependent on this ecosystem service to produce viable fruit. However, as a result of intensive farming practices and declining pollinator populations, farmers are increasingly turning to commercially reared bees to ensure that crops are adequately pollinated throughout the season. Wildflower strips are a commonly used measure aimed at the conservation of wild pollinators. It has been suggested that commercial crops may also benefit from the presence of noncrop flowers; however, the efficacy and economic benefits of sowing flower strips for crops remain relatively unstudied. In a study system that utilizes both wild and commercial pollinators, we test whether wildflower strips increase the number of visits to adjacent commercial strawberry crops by pollinating insects. We quantified this by experimentally sowing wildflower strips approximately 20 meters away from the crop and recording the number of pollinator visits to crops with, and without, flower strips. Between June and August 2013, we walked 292 crop transects at six farms in Scotland, recording a total of 2826 pollinators. On average, the frequency of pollinator visits was 25% higher for crops with adjacent flower strips compared to those without, with a combination of wild and commercial bumblebees (Bombus spp.) accounting for 67% of all pollinators observed. This effect was independent of other confounding effects, such as the number of flowers on the crop, date, and temperature. Synthesis and applications. This study provides evidence that soft fruit farmers can increase the number of pollinators that visit their crops by sowing inexpensive flower seed mixes nearby. By investing in this management option, farmers have the potential to increase and sustain pollinator populations over time.     

Honey bee‐collected pollen in agro‐ecosystems reveals diet diversity,diet quality,and pesticide exposure

European honey bees Apis mellifera are important commercial pollinators that have suffered greater than normal overwintering losses since 2007 in North America and Europe. Contributing factors likely include a combination of parasites, pesticides, and poor nutrition. We examined diet diversity, diet nutritional quality, and pesticides in honey bee‐collected pollen from commercial colonies in the Canadian Maritime Provinces in spring and summer 2011. We sampled pollen collected by honey bees at colonies in four site types: apple orchards, blueberry fields, cranberry bogs, and fallow fields. Proportion of honey bee‐collected pollen from crop versus noncrop flowers was high in apple, very low in blueberry, and low in cranberry sites. Pollen nutritional value tended to be relatively good from apple and cranberry sites and poor from blueberry and fallow sites. Floral surveys ranked, from highest to lowest in diversity, fallow, cranberry, apple, and blueberry sites. Pesticide diversity in honey bee‐collected pollen was high from apple and blueberry sites and low from cranberry and fallow sites. Four different neonicotinoid pesticides were detected, but neither these nor any other pesticides were at or above LD₅₀ levels. Pollen hazard quotients were highest in apple and blueberry sites and lowest in fallow sites. Pollen hazard quotients were also negatively correlated with the number of flower taxa detected in surveys. Results reveal differences among site types in diet diversity, diet quality, and pesticide exposure that are informative for improving honey bee and land agro‐ecosystem management.     

Farming practices influence wild pollinator populations on squash and pumpkin

Recent declines in managed honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colonies have increased interest in the current and potential contribution of wild bee populations to the pollination of agricultural crops. Because wild bees often live in agricultural fields, their population density and contribution to crop pollination may be influenced by farming practices, especially those used to reduce the populations of other insects. We took a census of pollinators of squash and pumpkin at 25 farms in Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland to see whether pollinator abundance was related to farming practices. The main pollinators were Peponapis pruinosa Say; honey bees, and bumble bees (Bombus spp.). The squash bee was the most abundant pollinator on squash and pumpkin, occurring at 23 of 25 farms in population densities that were commonly several times higher than that of other pollinators. Squash bee density was related to tillage practices: no-tillage farms hosted three times as great a density of squash bees as tilled farms. Pollinator density was not related to pesticide use. Honey bee density on squash and pumpkin was not related to the presence of managed honey bee colonies on farms. Farms with colonies did not have more honey bees per flower than farms that did not keep honey bees, probably reflecting the lack of affinity of honey bees for these crops. Future research should examine the economic impacts of managing farms in ways that promote pollinators, particularly pollinators of crops that are not well served by managed honey bee colonies.     

Orchard pollination in Capitol Reef National Park,Utah, USA. Honey bees or native bees?

Capitol Reef National Park in central Utah, USA surrounds 22 managed fruit orchards started over a century ago by Mormon pioneers. Honey bees are imported for pollination, although the area in which the Park is embedded has over 700 species of native bees, many of which are potential orchard pollinators. We studied the visitation of native bees to apple, pear, apricot, and sweet cherry over 2 years. Thirty species of bees visited the flowers but, except for pear flowers, most were uncommon compared to honey bees. Evidence that honey bees prevented native bees from foraging on orchard crop flowers was equivocal: generally, honey bee and native bee visitation rates to the flowers were not negatively correlated, nor were native bee visitation rates positively correlated with distance of orchards from honey bee hives. Conversely, competition was tentatively suggested by much larger numbers of honey bees than natives on the flowers of apples, apricots and cherry; and by the large increase of native bees on pears, where honey bee numbers were low. At least one-third of the native bee species visiting the flowers are potential pollinators, including cavity-nesting species such as Osmia lignaria propinqua, currently managed for small orchard pollination in the US, plus several fossorial species, including one rosaceous flower specialist (Andrena milwaukiensis). We suggest that gradual withdrawal of honey bees from the Park would help conserve native bee populations without decreasing orchard crop productivity, and would serve as a demonstration of the commercial value of native pollinators.     

Fruit set in perennial vetch (Vicia unijuga): reproductive system and insect role in pollination

Perennial vetch (Vicia unijuga) is a wild plant found in parts of East Asia and potentially valuable as a forage species for more extreme environments. Information on its reproductive system and pollination biology is needed for progress in domestication of the species. We characterized the reproductive system of perennial vetch as facultative xenogamy (i.e. it is largely cross‐pollinated by insects but is also self‐compatible and can self‐pollinate). There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the fruit set ratio between insect cross‐pollination and artificial cross‐pollination at the seed maturation stage, but natural self‐pollination was inefficient. In our study conducted on the Tibetan plateau, eight insect species (especially certain bumble bees) are identified as potential pollinators, and four other insect species belonging to the Lepidoptera and Diptera visited flowers but are unlikely to be pollinators. The flower visitation rate of wild bumble bees was 1.6–3.3 times higher than domestic honeybees, with Bombus lepidus having the highest visitation rate of 15.7 florets/min. The diurnal floret opening rhythm of perennial vetch was synchronized with diurnal activity of potential pollinators. Optimal pollination of perennial vetch would likely be achieved using wild bees, as they have behaviour characteristics and flower tripping ability necessary, and are present in sufficient numbers to be efficient pollinators of this crop. However, even with sufficiency of pollination, there remains a fundamental problem with low fruit set which requires further investigation from a plant biology perspective.     

Distance from forest edge affects bee pollinators in oilseed rape fields

Wild pollinators have been shown to enhance the pollination of Brassica napus (oilseed rape) and thus increase its market value. Several studies have previously shown that pollination services are greater in crops adjoining forest patches or other seminatural habitats than in crops completely surrounded by other crops. In this study, we investigated the specific importance of forest edges in providing potential pollinators in B. napus fields in two areas in France. Bees were caught with yellow pan traps at increasing distances from both warm and cold forest edges into B. napus fields during the blooming period. A total of 4594 individual bees, representing six families and 83 taxa, were collected. We found that both bee abundance and taxa richness were negatively affected by the distance from forest edge. However, responses varied between bee groups and edge orientations. The ITD (Inter‐Tegular distance) of the species, a good proxy for bee foraging range, seems to limit how far the bees can travel from the forest edge. We found a greater abundance of cuckoo bees (Nomada spp.) of Andrena spp. and Andrena spp. males at forest edges, which we assume indicate suitable nesting sites, or at least mating sites, for some abundant Andrena species and their parasites (Fig.  1 ). Synthesis and Applications. This study provides one of the first examples in temperate ecosystems of how forest edges may actually act as a reservoir of potential pollinators and directly benefit agricultural crops by providing nesting or mating sites for important early spring pollinators. Policy‐makers and land managers should take forest edges into account and encourage their protection in the agricultural matrix to promote wild bees and their pollination services.

Figure 1 Open in figure viewer PowerPoint Left, a Nomada sp male; right, an Andrena sp male. Caption Left, a Nomada sp male; right, an Andrena sp male.

Introduction

Pollinators play an important functional role in most terrestrial ecosystems and provide a key ecosystem service (Ashman et al. 2004 ). Insects, particularly bees, are the primary pollinators for the majority of the world's angiosperms (Ollerton et al. 2012 ). Without this service, many interconnected species and processes functioning within both wild and agricultural ecosystems could collapse (Kearns et al. 1998 ). Brassica napus (oilseed rape, OSR) represents the most widespread entomophilous crop in France with almost 1.5 Mha in 2010 (FAOSTAT August 10th, 2012). Results differ between varieties, but even though it seems that OSR produces 70% of its fruits through self‐pollination (Downey et al. 1970 in Mesquida and Renard 1981 ), native bees are also known to contribute to its pollination (Morandin and Winston 2005 ; Jauker et al. 2012 ). Bee pollination leads to improved yields (Steffan‐Dewenter 2003b ; Sabbahi et al. 2005 ) and to a shorter blooming period (Sabbahi et al. 2006 ), thus increasing the crop's market value (Bommarco et al. 2012 ). The most widely used species in crop pollination is the honeybee (Apis mellifera L) which is sometimes assumed to be sufficient for worldwide crop pollination (Aebi and Neumann 2011 ). However, this assertion has been questioned by different authors (Ollerton et al. 2012 ), and several studies show that many wild bees are also efficient pollinators of crops (Klein et al. 2007 ; Winfree et al. 2008 ; Breeze et al. 2011 ). Recently, Garibaldi et al. ( 2013 ) found positive associations of fruit set with wild‐insect visits to flowers in 41 crop systems worldwide. They demonstrate that honeybees do not maximize pollination, nor can they fully replace the contributions of diverse, wild‐insect assemblages to fruit set for a broad range of crops and agricultural practices on all continents with farmland. Unfortunately, not only are honey bees declining due to a variety of different causes (vanEngelsdorp et al. 2009 ), wild bee populations are also dwindling (Potts et al. 2010 ). Their decline has been documented in two Western European countries (Britain and the Netherlands) by comparing data obtained before and after 1980 (Biesmeijer et al. 2006 ). These losses have mostly been attributed to the use of agrochemicals, the increase in monocultures, the loss of seminatural habitat and deforestation (Steffan‐Dewenter et al. 2002 ; Steffan‐Dewenter and Westphal 2008 ; Brittain and Potts 2011 ). Several studies have shown the importance of natural or seminatural habitats in sustaining pollinator populations or pollination services close to fruit crops (Steffan‐Dewenter 2003a ; Kremen et al. 2004 ; Greenleaf and Kremen 2006a ; Carvalheiro et al. 2010 ). Morandin and Winston ( 2006 ) presented a cost–benefit model that estimates profit in OSR agroecosystems with different proportions of uncultivated land. They calculated that yield and profit could be maximized with 30% of the land left uncultivated within 750 m of field edges. Other studies have demonstrated a negative impact of the distance from forests on pollination services or bee abundance and richness both in tropical ecosystems (De Marco and Coelho 2004 ; Blanche et al. 2006 ; Chacoff and Aizen 2006 ) and in temperate ecosystems (Hawkins 1965 ; Taki et al. 2007 ; Arthur et al. 2010 ; Watson et al. 2011 ). These studies all suggest that natural or seminatural habitats are important sources of pollinators, probably because they provide “partial habitats” (Westrich 1996 ) such as complementary mating, foraging, nesting, and nesting materials sites that bees need to complete their life cycle. In this study, we focused on the effect of distance to forest edge on bee assemblages in OSR ecosystems. Forest edges could provide one or more important partial habitats for different bee species in agricultural landscapes, in particular when associated with a mass‐flowering crop such as OSR (Le Feon et al. 2011 ). For example, the availability of untilled soil and dead branches might provide ground‐nesting and cavity‐nesting bee species with numerous nesting sites. Moreover, during spring at least, the understory and the forest edge can provide cover containing flowering plants and wild trees such as Prunus spp, Castanea sativa, or Salix spp and thereby allow bees to find alternative floral resources. During spring 2010 and 2011, in two areas in France, we examined wild bee abundance and taxa richness both along forest edges and inside OSR fields at different distances from the forest. Like other taxa, bees respond to environmental variables according to their biologic traits that determine access and requirements for nesting, mating, and forage resources, species mobility or physiological tolerance. Specifically, we hypothesized that (1) bee abundance, species richness, and composition of bee communities within the crop field are dependent on the distance from the forest edge (where complementary floral resources, nesting sites, shelters, etc. can be found) and on the orientation of the forest edge; (2) the identity of bees in the crop is related to their foraging range which we measured with the ITD (Inter‐Tegular distance); (3) the forest edge may be the nesting or mating sites for cavity‐nesting or ground‐nesting bees such as Osmia spp or Andrena spp which are important groups of potential early spring pollinators for OSR.     

Honey bees and wild pollinators differ in their preference for and use of introduced floral resources

Introduced plants may be important foraging resources for honey bees and wild pollinators, but how often and why pollinators visit introduced plants across an entire plant community is not well understood. Understanding the importance of introduced plants for pollinators could help guide management of these plants and conservation of pollinator habitat. We assessed how floral abundance and pollinator preference influence pollinator visitation rate and diversity on 30 introduced versus 24 native plants in central New York. Honey bees visited introduced and native plants at similar rates regardless of floral abundance. In contrast, as floral abundance increased, wild pollinator visitation rate decreased more strongly for introduced plants than native plants. Introduced plants as a group and native plants as a group did not differ in bee diversity or preference, but honey bees and wild pollinators preferred different plant species. As a case study, we then focused on knapweed (Centaurea spp.), an introduced plant that was the most preferred plant by honey bees, and that beekeepers value as a late‐summer foraging resource. We compared the extent to which honey bees versus wild pollinators visited knapweed relative to coflowering plants, and we quantified knapweed pollen and nectar collection by honey bees across 22 New York apiaries. Honey bees visited knapweed more frequently than coflowering plants and at a similar rate as all wild pollinators combined. All apiaries contained knapweed pollen in nectar, 86% of apiaries contained knapweed pollen in bee bread, and knapweed was sometimes a main pollen or nectar source for honey bees in late summer. Our results suggest that because of diverging responses to floral abundance and preferences for different plants, honey bees and wild pollinators differ in their use of introduced plants. Depending on the plant and its abundance, removing an introduced plant may impact honey bees more than wild pollinators.     

Contemporary human‐altered landscapes and oceanic barriers reduce bumble bee gene flow

Much of the world's terrestrial landscapes are being altered by humans in the form of agriculture, urbanization and pastoral systems, with major implications for biodiversity. Bumble bees are one of the most effective pollinators in both natural and cultivated landscapes, but are often the first to be extirpated in human‐altered habitats. Yet, little is known about the role of natural and human‐altered habitats in promoting or limiting bumble bee gene flow. In this study, I closely examine the genetic structure of the yellow‐faced bumble bee, Bombus vosnesenskii, across the southwestern US coast and find strong evidence that natural oceanic barriers, as well as contemporary human‐altered habitats, limit bee gene flow. Heterozygosity and allelic richness were lower in island populations, while private allelic richness was higher in island populations compared to mainland populations. Genetic differentiation, measured for three indices across the 1000 km study region, was significantly greater than the null expectation (F_ST = 0.041, F’_ST = 0.044 and D_est = 0.155) and correlated with geographic distance. Furthermore, genetic differentiation patterns were most strongly correlated with contemporary (2011) not past (2006, 2001) resistance maps calibrated for high dispersal limitation over oceans, impervious habitat and croplands. Despite the incorporation of dramatic elevation gradients, the analyses reveal that oceans and contemporary human land use, not mountains, are the primary dispersal barriers for B. vosnesenskii gene flow. These findings reinforce the importance of maintaining corridors of suitable habitat across the distribution range of native pollinators to promote their persistence and safeguard their ability to provide essential pollination services.     

Pollination efficiency and foraging behaviour of honey bees and non‐Apis bees to sweet cherry

1. Crop pollination generally increases with pollinator diversity and wild pollinator visitation. To optimize crop pollination, it is necessary to investigate the pollination contribution of different pollinator species. In the present study, we examined this contribution of honey bees and non‐Apis bees (bumble bees, mason bees and other solitary bees) in sweet cherry.
2. We assessed the pollination efficiency (fruit set of flowers receiving only one visit) and foraging behaviour (flower visitation rate, probability of tree change, probability of row change and contact with the stigma) of honey bees and different types of non‐Apis bees.
3. Single visit pollination efficiency on sweet cherry was higher for both mason bees and solitary bees compared with bumble bees and honey bees. The different measures of foraging behaviour were variable among non‐Apis bees and honey bees. Adding to their high single visit efficiency, mason bees also visited significantly more flower per minute, and they had a high probability of tree change and a high probability to contact the stigma.
4. The results of the present study highlight the higher pollination performance of solitary bees and especially mason bees compared with bumble bees and honey bees. Management to support species with high pollination efficiency and effective foraging behaviour will promote crop pollination.

     

Bees of the Victorian Alps: Network structure and interactions of introduced species

Bees are considered the most important plant pollinators in many ecosystems, yet little is known about pollination of native plants by bees in many Australian ecosystems including the alpine region. Here we consider bee pollination in this region by constructing a bee visitation network and investigating the degree of specialism and network ‘nestedness’, which are related to the robustness of the network to perturbations. Bees and flowers were collected and observed from 10 sites across the Bogong High Plains/Mt Hotham region in Victoria. Low nestedness and a low degree of specialism were detected, consistent with patterns in other alpine regions. Twenty‐one native and one non‐indigenous bee species were observed visiting 46 of the 67 flower species recorded. The introduced Apis mellifera had a large floral overlap with native bees, which may reduce fecundity of native bees through competition. The introduced plant, Hypochaeris radicata (Asteraceae), had the largest and most sustained coverage of any flower and had the most visitations and bee species of any flower. The network developed in this study is a first step in understanding pollination patterns in the alpine/subalpine region and serves as a baseline for future comparisons.     

Local bumble bee decline linked to recovery of honey bees,drought effects on floral resources

Time series of abundances are critical for understanding how abiotic factors and species interactions affect population dynamics, but are rarely linked with experiments and also scarce for bee pollinators. This gap is important given concerns about declines in some bee species. I monitored honey bee (Apis mellifera) and bumble bee (Bombus spp.) foragers in coastal California from 1999, when feral A. mellifera populations were low due to Varroa destructor, until 2014. Apis mellifera increased substantially, except between 2006 and 2011, coinciding with declines in managed populations. Increases in A. mellifera strongly correlated with declines in Bombus and reduced diet overlap between them, suggesting resource competition consistent with past experimental results. Lower Bombus numbers also correlated with diminished floral resources. Declines in floral abundances were associated with drought and reduced spring rainfall. These results illustrate how competition with an introduced species may interact with climate to drive local decline of native pollinators.     

Potential negative effects of exotic honey bees on the diversity of native pollinators and yield of highland coffee plantations

• 1 The honey bee Apis mellifera is native to Eurasia and Africa, although it is commonly introduced into crop fields of different parts of the world because of the assumption that it improves yield. This bee is, however, a poor pollinator of several crops compared with native insects. Indeed, honey bees can displace native pollinators and reduce their diversity. The present study evaluated the potential impacts of A. mellifera on the diversity of native pollinators of highland coffee (Coffea arabica) and its putative consequences for coffee production at the state of Veracruz, Mexico.
• 2 The abundance of A. mellifera and diversity of native pollinators were assessed during blooming at 12 shade coffee plantations and pollination experiments were conducted to determine the impacts of pollinators on coffee fruit production. Regression analyses were used to assess whether the abundance of honey bees was related to native pollinator diversity, and whether fruit production was influenced by both the diversity of pollinators and the abundance of A. mellifera.
• 3 Native pollinator diversity decreased as the number of honey bees increased. Furthermore, although coffee fruit production was positively related to the diversity of native pollinators, an increasing abundance of A. mellifera was correlated with a decrease in fruit production.
• 4 Highland shade coffee plantations are considered as reservoirs of the Mexican insect fauna. Thus, native pollinator diversity could be better preserved if beekeepers reduced the number of managed hives that they brought into plantations. This may also help to increase coffee yield by decreasing the putative negative effects of A. mellifera on native pollinators.