Using the waggle dance to determine the spatial ecology of honey bees during commercial crop pollination

相似文献   

A Four-Year Field Program Investigating Long-Term Effects of Repeated Exposure of Honey Bee Colonies to Flowering Crops Treated with Thiamethoxam

Neonicotinoid residues in nectar and pollen from crop plants have been implicated as one of the potential factors causing the declines of honey bee populations. Median residues of thiamethoxam in pollen collected from honey bees after foraging on flowering seed treated maize were found to be between 1 and 7 µg/kg, median residues of the metabolite CGA322704 (clothianidin) in the pollen were between 1 and 4 µg/kg. In oilseed rape, median residues of thiamethoxam found in pollen collected from bees were between <1 and 3.5 µg/kg and in nectar from foraging bees were between 0.65 and 2.4 µg/kg. Median residues of CGA322704 in pollen and nectar in the oilseed rape trials were all below the limit of quantification (1 µg/kg). Residues in the hive were even lower in both the maize and oilseed rape trials, being at or below the level of detection of 1 µg/kg for bee bread in the hive and at or below the level of detection of 0.5 µg/kg for hive nectar, honey and royal jelly samples. The long-term risk to honey bee colonies in the field was also investigated, including the sensitive overwintering stage, from four years consecutive single treatment crop exposures to flowering maize and oilseed rape grown from thiamethoxam treated seeds at rates recommended for insect control. Throughout the study, mortality, foraging behavior, colony strength, colony weight, brood development and food storage levels were similar between treatment and control colonies. Detailed examination of brood development throughout the year demonstrated that colonies exposed to the treated crop were able to successfully overwinter and had a similar health status to the control colonies in the following spring. We conclude that these data demonstrate there is a low risk to honey bees from systemic residues in nectar and pollen following the use of thiamethoxam as a seed treatment on oilseed rape and maize.     

Pollinator genetics and pollination: do honey bee colonies selected for pollen‐hoarding field better pollinators of cranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon?

1. Genetic polymorphisms of flowering plants can influence pollinator foraging but it is not known whether heritable foraging polymorphisms of pollinators influence their pollination efficacies. Honey bees Apis mellifera L. visit cranberry flowers for nectar but rarely for pollen when alternative preferred flowers grow nearby. 2. Cranberry flowers visited once by pollen‐foraging honey bees received four‐fold more stigmatic pollen than flowers visited by mere nectar‐foragers (excluding nectar thieves). Manual greenhouse pollinations with fixed numbers of pollen tetrads (0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32) achieved maximal fruit set with just eight pollen tetrads. Pollen‐foraging honey bees yielded a calculated 63% more berries than equal numbers of non‐thieving nectar‐foragers, even though both classes of forager made stigmatic contact. 3. Colonies headed by queens of a pollen‐hoarding genotype fielded significantly more pollen‐foraging trips than standard commercial genotypes, as did hives fitted with permanently engaged pollen traps or colonies containing more larvae. Pollen‐hoarding colonies together brought back twice as many cranberry pollen loads as control colonies, which was marginally significant despite marked daily variation in the proportion of collected pollen that was cranberry. 4. Caloric supplementation of matched, paired colonies failed to enhance pollen foraging despite the meagre nectar yields of individual cranberry flowers. 5. Heritable behavioural polymorphisms of the honey bee, such as pollen‐hoarding, can enhance fruit and seed set by a floral host (e.g. cranberry), but only if more preferred pollen hosts are absent or rare. Otherwise, honey bees' broad polylecty, flight range, and daily idiosyncrasies in floral fidelity will obscure specific pollen‐foraging differences at a given floral host, even among paired colonies in a seemingly uniform agricultural setting.     

Bumblebee flight distances in relation to the forage landscape

1. Foraging range is a key aspect of the ecology of 'central place foragers'. Estimating how far bees fly under different circumstances is essential for predicting colony success, and for estimating bee-mediated gene flow between plant populations. It is likely to be strongly influenced by forage distribution, something that is hard to quantify in all but the simplest landscapes; and theories of foraging distance tend to assume a homogeneous forage distribution. 2. We quantified the distribution of bumblebee Bombus terrestris L. foragers away from experimentally positioned colonies, in an agricultural landscape, using two methods. We mass-marked foragers as they left the colony, and analysed pollen from foragers returning to the colonies. The data were set within the context of the 'forage landscape': a map of the spatial distribution of forage as determined from remote-sensed data. To our knowledge, this is the first time that empirical data on foraging distances and forage availability, at this resolution and scale, have been collected and combined for bumblebees. 3. The bees foraged at least 1.5 km from their colonies, and the proportion of foragers flying to one field declined, approximately linearly, with radial distance. In this landscape there was great variation in forage availability within 500 m of colonies but little variation beyond 1 km, regardless of colony location. 4. The scale of B. terrestris foraging was large enough to buffer against effects of forage patch and flowering crop heterogeneity, but bee species with shorter foraging ranges may experience highly variable colony success according to location.     

Crop Pollination Exposes Honey Bees to Pesticides Which Alters Their Susceptibility to the Gut Pathogen Nosema ceranae

Recent declines in honey bee populations and increasing demand for insect-pollinated crops raise concerns about pollinator shortages. Pesticide exposure and pathogens may interact to have strong negative effects on managed honey bee colonies. Such findings are of great concern given the large numbers and high levels of pesticides found in honey bee colonies. Thus it is crucial to determine how field-relevant combinations and loads of pesticides affect bee health. We collected pollen from bee hives in seven major crops to determine 1) what types of pesticides bees are exposed to when rented for pollination of various crops and 2) how field-relevant pesticide blends affect bees’ susceptibility to the gut parasite Nosema ceranae. Our samples represent pollen collected by foragers for use by the colony, and do not necessarily indicate foragers’ roles as pollinators. In blueberry, cranberry, cucumber, pumpkin and watermelon bees collected pollen almost exclusively from weeds and wildflowers during our sampling. Thus more attention must be paid to how honey bees are exposed to pesticides outside of the field in which they are placed. We detected 35 different pesticides in the sampled pollen, and found high fungicide loads. The insecticides esfenvalerate and phosmet were at a concentration higher than their median lethal dose in at least one pollen sample. While fungicides are typically seen as fairly safe for honey bees, we found an increased probability of Nosema infection in bees that consumed pollen with a higher fungicide load. Our results highlight a need for research on sub-lethal effects of fungicides and other chemicals that bees placed in an agricultural setting are exposed to.     

Brood pheromone regulates foraging activity of honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Brood pheromone modulated the foraging behavior of commercial honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colonies pollinating a 10-ha market garden of cucumber, Cucurbita pepo L., and zucchini, Cucumis saticus L., in Texas in late autumn. Six colonies were randomly selected to receive 2000 larval equivalents of brood pheromone and six received a blank control. The ratio of pollen to nonpollen foragers entering colonies was significantly greater in pheromone-treated colonies 1 h after treatment. Pheromone-treated foragers returned with pollen load weights that were significantly heavier than controls. Pollen returned by pheromone-treated foragers was 43% more likely to originate from the target crop. Number of pollen grains washed from the bodies of nonpollen foragers from pheromone-treated colonies was significantly greater than controls and the pollen was 54% more likely to originate from the target crop. Increasing the foraging stimulus environment with brood pheromone increased colony-level foraging and individual forager efforts. Brood pheromone is a promising technology for increasing the pollination activity and efficiency of commercial honey bee colonies.     

Honey bee waggle dance communication increases diversity of pollen diets in intensively managed agricultural landscapes

The benefits of honey bee dance communication for colony performance in different resource environments are still not well understood. Here, we test the hypothesis that directional dance communication enables honey bee colonies to maintain a diverse pollen diet, especially in landscapes with low resource diversity. To test this hypothesis, we placed 24 Apis mellifera L. colonies with either intact or experimentally disrupted dance communication in eight agricultural landscapes that differed in the diversity of flowering plants and in the dominance of mass‐flowering crops. Pollen from incoming foragers was collected and identified via DNA metabarcoding. Disrupting dance communication affected the way the diversity of honey bee pollen diets was impacted by the dominance of mass‐flowering crops in available flower resources (p = .04). With increasing dominance of mass‐flowering crops in resource environments, foragers of colonies with intact communication foraged on an increasing proportion of available plant genera (p = .01). This was not the case for colonies with disrupted dance communication (p = .5). We conclude that the honey bee dance communication benefits pollen foraging on diverse plant resources and thereby contributes to high quality nutrition in environments with low‐resource diversity.     

Urban gardens promote bee foraging over natural habitats and plantations

Increasing human land use for agriculture and housing leads to the loss of natural habitat and to widespread declines in wild bees. Bee foraging dynamics and fitness depend on the availability of resources in the surrounding landscape, but how precisely landscape related resource differences affect bee foraging patterns remains unclear. To investigate how landscape and its interaction with season and weather drive foraging and resource intake in social bees, we experimentally compared foraging activity, the allocation of foragers to different resources (pollen, nectar, and resin) and overall resource intake in the Australian stingless bee Tetragonula carbonaria (Apidae, Meliponini). Bee colonies were monitored in different seasons over two years. We compared foraging patterns and resource intake between the bees'' natural habitat (forests) and two landscapes differently altered by humans (suburban gardens and agricultural macadamia plantations). We found foraging activity as well as pollen and nectar forager numbers to be highest in suburban gardens, intermediate in forests and low in plantations. Foraging patterns further differed between seasons, but seasonal variations strongly differed between landscapes. Sugar and pollen intake was low in plantations, but contrary with our predictions, it was even higher in gardens than in forests. In contrast, resin intake was similar across landscapes. Consequently, differences in resource availability between natural and altered landscapes strongly affect foraging patterns and thus resource intake in social bees. While agricultural monocultures largely reduce foraging success, suburban gardens can increase resource intake well above rates found in natural habitats of bees, indicating that human activities can both decrease and increase the availability of resources in a landscape and thus reduce or enhance bee fitness.     

Sucrose response thresholds of honey bee (Apis mellifera) foragers are not modulated by brood ester pheromone

Division of labor is a hallmark of eusocial insects and their ecological success can be attributed to it. Honey bee division of labor proceeds along a stereotypical ontogenetic path based on age, modulated by various internal and external stimuli. Brood pheromone is a major social pheromone of the honey bee that has been shown to affect honey bee division of labor. It elicits several physiological and behavioral responses; notably, regulating the timing of the switch from performing in-hive tasks to the initiation of foraging. Additionally, brood pheromone affects future foraging choice. In honey bees, sucrose response threshold is a physiological correlate of age of first foraging and foraging choice. Brood pheromone has been shown to modulate sucrose response threshold in young bees, but its effects on sucrose response thresholds of bees in advanced behavioral states (foragers) are not known. In this study we examined the sucrose response thresholds of two different task groups, foragers (pollen and non-pollen) and non-foraging bees, in response to honey bee brood pheromone. Sucrose response thresholds were not significantly different between brood pheromone treatment and controls among both non-pollen and pollen foragers. However, the sucrose response threshold of non-foraging bees was significantly higher in the brood pheromone treatment group than in the control group. The switch to foraging task is considered a terminal one, with honey bee lifespan being determined at least partially by risks and stress accompanying foraging. Our results indicate that foragers are physiologically resistant to brood pheromone priming of sucrose response thresholds.     

Viral Infection Affects Sucrose Responsiveness and Homing Ability of Forager Honey Bees,Apis mellifera L.

Honey bee health is mainly affected by Varroa destructor, viruses, Nosema spp., pesticide residues and poor nutrition. Interactions between these proposed factors may be responsible for the colony losses reported worldwide in recent years. In the present study, the effects of a honey bee virus, Israeli acute paralysis virus (IAPV), on the foraging behaviors and homing ability of European honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) were investigated based on proboscis extension response (PER) assays and radio frequency identification (RFID) systems. The pollen forager honey bees originated from colonies that had no detectable level of honey bee viruses and were manually inoculated with IAPV to induce the viral infection. The results showed that IAPV-inoculated honey bees were more responsive to low sucrose solutions compared to that of non-infected foragers. After two days of infection, around 10⁷ copies of IAPV were detected in the heads of these honey bees. The homing ability of IAPV-infected foragers was depressed significantly in comparison to the homing ability of uninfected foragers. The data provided evidence that IAPV infection in the heads may enable the virus to disorder foraging roles of honey bees and to interfere with brain functions that are responsible for learning, navigation, and orientation in the honey bees, thus, making honey bees have a lower response threshold to sucrose and lose their way back to the hive.     

Row crop fields provide mid‐summer forage for honey bees

Honey bees provide invaluable economic and ecological services while simultaneously facing stressors that may compromise their health. For example, agricultural landscapes, such as a row crop system, are necessary for our food production, but they may cause poor nutrition in bees from a lack of available nectar and pollen. Here, we investigated the foraging dynamics of honey bees in a row crop environment. We decoded, mapped, and analyzed 3459 waggle dances, which communicate the location of where bees collected food, for two full foraging seasons (April–October, 2018–2019). We found that bees recruited nestmates mostly locally (<2 km) throughout the season. The shortest communicated median distances (0.474 and 0.310 km), indicating abundant food availability, occurred in July in both years, which was when our row crops were in full bloom. We determined, by plotting and analyzing the communicated locations, that almost half of the mid‐summer recruitment was to row crops, with 37% (2018) and 50% (2019) of honey bee dances indicating these fields. Peanut was the most attractive in July, followed by corn and cotton but not soybean. Overall, row crop fields are indicated by a surprisingly large proportion of recruitment dances, suggesting that similar agricultural landscapes may also provide mid‐summer foraging opportunities for honey bees.     

Multiple routes of pesticide exposure for honey bees living near agricultural fields

Populations of honey bees and other pollinators have declined worldwide in recent years. A variety of stressors have been implicated as potential causes, including agricultural pesticides. Neonicotinoid insecticides, which are widely used and highly toxic to honey bees, have been found in previous analyses of honey bee pollen and comb material. However, the routes of exposure have remained largely undefined. We used LC/MS-MS to analyze samples of honey bees, pollen stored in the hive and several potential exposure routes associated with plantings of neonicotinoid treated maize. Our results demonstrate that bees are exposed to these compounds and several other agricultural pesticides in several ways throughout the foraging period. During spring, extremely high levels of clothianidin and thiamethoxam were found in planter exhaust material produced during the planting of treated maize seed. We also found neonicotinoids in the soil of each field we sampled, including unplanted fields. Plants visited by foraging bees (dandelions) growing near these fields were found to contain neonicotinoids as well. This indicates deposition of neonicotinoids on the flowers, uptake by the root system, or both. Dead bees collected near hive entrances during the spring sampling period were found to contain clothianidin as well, although whether exposure was oral (consuming pollen) or by contact (soil/planter dust) is unclear. We also detected the insecticide clothianidin in pollen collected by bees and stored in the hive. When maize plants in our field reached anthesis, maize pollen from treated seed was found to contain clothianidin and other pesticides; and honey bees in our study readily collected maize pollen. These findings clarify some of the mechanisms by which honey bees may be exposed to agricultural pesticides throughout the growing season. These results have implications for a wide range of large-scale annual cropping systems that utilize neonicotinoid seed treatments.     

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.     

Netted crop covers reduce honeybee foraging activity and colony strength in a mass flowering crop

The widespread use of protective covers in horticulture represents a novel landscape‐level change, presenting the challenges for crop pollination. Honeybees (Apis mellifera L) are pollinators of many crops, but their behavior can be affected by conditions under covers. To determine how netting crop covers can affect honeybee foraging dynamics, colony health, and pollination services, we assessed the performance of 52 nucleus honeybee colonies in five covered and six uncovered kiwifruit orchards. Colony strength was estimated pre‐ and postintroduction, and the foraging of individual bees (including pollen, nectar, and naïve foragers) was monitored in a subset of the hives fitted with RFID readers. Simultaneously, we evaluated pollination effectiveness by measuring flower visitation rates and the number of seeds produced after single honeybee visits. Honeybee colonies under cover exhibited both an acute loss of foragers and changes in the behavior of successful foragers. Under cover, bees were roughly three times less likely to return after their first trip outside the hive. Consequently, the number of adult bees in hives declined at a faster rate in these orchards, with colonies losing on average 1,057 ± 274 of their bees in under two weeks. Bees that did forage under cover completed fewer trips provisioning their colony, failing to reenter after a few short‐duration trips. These effects are likely to have implications for colony health and productivity. We also found that bee density (bees/thousand flowers) and visitation rates to flowers were lower under cover; however, we did not detect a resultant change in pollination. Our findings highlight the need for environment‐specific management techniques for pollinators. Improving honeybee orientation under covers and increasing our understanding of the effects of covers on bee nutrition and brood rearing should be primary objectives for maintaining colonies and potentially improving pollination in these systems.     

The effects of landscape on bumblebees to ensure crop pollination in the highland agricultural ecosystems in China

Honey bees and wild bees provide critical pollination services to agricultural ecosystems; however, the relative contributions of different bee taxa are not well understood. The natural habitats surrounding farmland support food and nesting resources for wild bees and therefore play an important role in the maintenance of crop pollination. In this study, we selected Cucurbita pepo L. (squash) as a model crop to investigate the relative importance of honey bees and bumblebees in pollinating the crop. Thirteen fields, which were surrounded by a gradient of natural habitat, were investigated on the Yunnan‐Guizhou Plateau in China. We measured the visit densities of honey bees and bumblebees, the number of pollen grains deposited in a single visit by the two bee taxa, as well as the overall pollen grains deposited on stigmas during a flowering day, and then used Bayesian inference to decouple the pollen grains deposited by either the honey bees or the bumblebees. Compared with honey bees, bumblebees deposited a higher number of pollen grains on stigmas in a single visit, but had a lower visit density than honey bees. Meanwhile, the bumblebee visit density increased along the proportion of natural habitat, while the honey bee visit density was not affected by the surrounding natural habitat. Data simulations using Bayesian inference showed that on a flowering day, the number of pollen grains deposited by bumblebees increased with the proportion of natural habitat in the surrounding landscape, but the number of pollen grains deposited by honey bees did not. Moreover, the total numbers of pollen grains deposited by honey bees or bumblebees alone were all below 2000 (the critical level to satisfy the pollination requirement of this crop). Pollen calculations demonstrated that the number of pollen grains deposited by the two bee taxa was greater than 2000 in fields surrounded by more than 13% natural habitat (grasslands and forests). The results revealed that bumblebees ensured C. pepo pollination in combination with honey bees in the highland agricultural ecosystems.     

Small wild bee abundance declines with distance into strawberry crops regardless of field margin habitat

The preservation of pollinator habitat on croplands in the form of hedgerows, wildflower strips, and natural and semi-natural areas can help maintain and enhance wild bee populations in agricultural landscapes. However, there have been few comparisons of the effectiveness of different types of field-margin pollinator habitat in maintaining bee diversity and pollination of the focal crops. We compared wild bee abundance, species richness and community composition between strawberry crops bordered by hedgerows, and those bordered by larger expanses of natural land (forests). Strawberry is an ideal crop in which to investigate pollinator export from field margins as the rows are covered with straw, which reduces habitat for ground-nesting bees within the crop; thus, most wild pollinators need to enter the crop from the margins. We sampled bees in six strawberry fields with hedgerow margins and six strawberry fields with forested margins of at least 200 m in length, using a paired design. We examined strawberry pollen deposition at regular intervals into the fields, and the magnitude of pollinator export from the field margins towards the centre of the crops. We found that bees as a group were no more species-rich or abundant in crops bordered by forests than in crops bordered by hedgerows, although large-bodied bees were more abundant in the former than the latter. Regardless of field-margin type, we found that small wild bee abundance declined significantly from the edge to the centre of the crop, but honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) and large-bodied bee abundance did not. Strawberry pollen deposition also did not decline with distance into the crop. Although previous work indicates that small wild bees are more effective (yield-increasing) pollinators of strawberry on a per-visit basis, their limited foraging ranges suggest they may only pollinate areas near the crop margins, given typical field sizes in our area.     

Major Quantitative Trait Loci Affecting Honey Bee Foraging Behavior

We identified two genomic regions that affect the amount of pollen stored in honey bee colonies and influence whether foragers will collect pollen or nectar. We selected for the amount of pollen stored in combs of honey bee colonies, a colony-level trait, and then used random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers and interval mapping procedures with data from backcross colonies to identify two quantitative trait loci (pln1 and pln2, LOD 3.1 and 2.3, respectively). Quantitative trait loci effects were confirmed in a separate cross by demonstrating the cosegregation of marker alleles with the foraging behavior of individual workers. Both pln1 and pln2 had an effect on the amount of pollen carried by foragers returning to the colony, as inferred by the association between linked RAPD marker alleles, D8-.3f and 301-.55, and the individual pollen load weights of returning foragers. The alleles of the two marker loci were nonrandomly distributed with respect to foraging task. The two loci appeared to have different effects on foraging behavior. Individuals with alternative alleles for the marker linked to pln2 (but not pln1) differed with respect to the nectar sugar concentration of their nectar loads.     

Octopamine influences division of labor in honey bee colonies

Forager honey bees have higher brain levels of octopamine than do bees tending larvae in the hive. To test the hypothesis that octopamine influences honey bee division of labor we treated bees orally with octopamine or its immediate precursor tyramine and determined whether these treatments increased the probability of initiating foraging. Octopamine treatment significantly elevated levels of octopamine in the brain and caused a significant dose-dependent increase in the number of new foragers. This effect was seen for precocious foragers in single-cohort colonies and foragers in larger colonies with more typical age demographies. Tyramine treatment did not increase the number of new foragers, suggesting that octopamine was exerting a specific effect. Octopamine treatment was effective only when given to bees old enough to forage, i.e., older than 4 days of age. Treatment when bees were 1-3 days of age did not cause a significant increase in the number of new foragers when the bees reached the minimal foraging age. These results demonstrate that octopamine influences division of labor in honey bee colonies. We speculate that octopamine is acting in this context as a neuromodulator.     

Brood Pheromone Modulation of Pollen Forager Turnaround Time in the Honey Bee (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Apis mellifera</Emphasis> L.)

Foraging for pollen is an important behavior of the honey bee because pollen is their sole source of protein. Through nurse bees, larvae are the principal consumers of pollen. Fatty acid esters extractable from the surface of larvae, called brood pheromone, release multiple colony-level and individual foraging behaviors increasing pollen intake. In this study pollen forager turnaround time was measured in observation hives supplemented with brood pheromone versus a blank control treatment. Treatment with brood pheromone significantly decreased pollen forager turnaround time in the hive between foraging bouts by approximately 72%. Concurrently, brood pheromone increased the ratio of pollen to non-pollen foragers entering colonies. Brood pheromone has been shown to release most of the mechanisms known to increase pollen intake by colonies acting as an important regulator of colony foraging decisions and growth.     

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.