Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica parents work harder when foraging conditions are good

In altricial birds, the great effort involved in supplying food to nestlings can create trade‐offs in the allocation of resources between the current brood and parental self‐maintenance. In poor foraging conditions, parents have to adjust their energy expenditure in relation to the increased foraging costs. However, intra‐specific variation in parental energy expenditure has rarely been evaluated in the context of these trade‐offs. Here, we quantified the daily energy expenditure (DEE) of parent Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica during the nestling period in relation to foraging conditions while controlling for differences in brood size and nestling age. DEE varied substantially with environmental conditions, increasing by 10 kJ/day per 5 °C in ambient temperature, and by 11 kJ/day per hour in day length. Parent birds did not compensate for a poor aerial insect supply on cool days, but reduced their DEE. Parents only slightly buffered a negative energy balance during chick provisioning with stored body reserves. They did not sacrifice their own energy demands to keep up a high energy flow to the brood when foraging conditions were poor. Instead they worked harder when foraging conditions allowed a surplus intake, fully compensating for their additional efforts, and made maximum use of the rich food supply, allowing the brood to accrue body reserves to compensate for low food intake on cold days. This strategy of energy management may have evolved in the context of the adaptation to the aerial foraging mode and to the ephemeral nature of aerial food resources.     

Seasonal patterns of diet and ranging in two species of tamarin monkeys: Stability versus variability

From June through December, data were collected on the diet and ranging patterns of moustached (Saguinus mystax) and saddle-back (Saguinus fuscicollis) tamarin monkeys in the Amazon Basin of northeastern Peru. During this 7-month period, insects and nonleguminous fruits accounted for 83% of tamarin feeding and foraging time. Despite marked seasonal variation in rainfall and forest productivity, patterns of habitat utilization, day range, dietary diversity, resource exploitation, and activity budget remained relatively stable throughout the year. Moustached and saddle-back tamarins appear to solve problems of food acquisition and exploit patchily distributed feeding sites using a relatively limited set of foraging patterns. In general, these primates concentrate their daily feeding efforts on several trees from a small number of target plant species. These feeding sites are uncommon, produce only a small amount of ripe fruit each day, and are characterized by a high degree of intraspecific fruiting and flowering synchrony. Trees of the same species are frequently visited in succession, and individual feeding sites are revisited several times over the course of 1–2 weeks. This type of foraging pattern occurred during both dry and wet seasons and when exploiting fruit, nectar, legume, and exudate resources. Seasonal variation in the percentage of feeding and foraging time devoted to insectivory was also limited. In this investigation, there was no consistent evidence that temporal changes in overall forest fruit production had a major impact on the feeding, foraging, or ranging behavior of either tamarin species.     

Nectar depletion and its implications for honeyeaters in heathland near Sydney

Several researchers have attempted to calculate whether depression of nectar resources by Australian honeyeaters is likely to limit their densities. Such calculations can be misleading, however, and do not directly test whether birds depress nectar availability. I monitored changes in nectar availability during the 8–9 months that honeyeaters bred in heathland near Sydney, and caged inflorescences to test whether nectar availability was being depressed by birds. There were pronounced seasonal changes in nectar availability in each of 2 years, and caging substantially increased the amounts of nectar in inflorescences during months when nectar production was low. The effects of caging must have resulted from exclusion of honeyeaters, as: (i) open-ended cage controls showed that the effects of caging resulted from exclusion of foragers, not from artifacts of caging; (ii) day-only and night-only caging showed that nectar was depleted only during the day: and (iii) observations showed that cages did not exclude any diurnal foragers other than honeyeaters. Resident honeyeaters spent more time foraging during months when nectar was scarce, implying that the rates at which they could obtain nectar were affected by changes in nectar availability. It is therefore possible that the depletion of nectar by honeyeaters could have limited their densities. However. I argue that such limitation could only be inferred safely if nectar-supplementation experiments showed survival and/or reproduction to be limited by nectar availability.     

The exploitation of floral nectar in Eucalyptus incrassata by honeyeaters and honeybees

Summary During October and November, 1977, a study of nectar production and nectarivore foraging in Eucalyptus incrassata was conducted at Wyperfeld National Park in south-eastern Australia in order to evaluate the extent to which introduced honeybees (Apis mellifera) compete with native honeyeaters for floral nectar. Data on nectar production, nectar availability, ambient air temperature and the numbers of visiting honeyeaters and honeybees were collected. Most of the daily nectar production in E. incrassata occurs early in the morning when temperatures are too low for insects to forage. In addition, insects, particularly honeybees, are unable to exploit nectar in the youngest flowers because the stamens are clustered tightly around the style. As a result of these temporal and structural characteristics of the flowers, honeyeaters are able to harvest most of the nectar. Honeybees potentially have access to 35–47% of the average daily production of floral nectar in E. incrassata and actually harvest considerably less. These data show that E. incrassata flowers are adapted to restrict insect foragers despite their superficially unspecialized appearance. Eight forest and woodland eucalypts do not have a flower stage which excludes insects and the significance of this difference is discussed.     

Mutualistic interdependence between mistletoes (Amyema quandang), and spiny-cheeked honeyeaters and mistletoebirds in an arid woodland

The mutualism involving mistletoes (Amyema quandangj, spiny-cheeked honeyeaters (Acan-thagenys rufogularis) and mistletoebirds (Dicaeum hirundinaceum) was studied in arid woodland in South Australia between 1980 and 1984. Plants and birds were locally interdependent: mistletoes supplied a continuous resource of fruits or nectar that sustained permanent populations of pollinators (honeyeaters) and dispersers (honeyeaters and mistletoebirds). The reproductive phenology of Amyema quandang was central to the interactions. Amyema quandang flowered in winter and annual fruit crops overlapped so that ripe fruit was continuously available. Spiny-cheeked honeyeaters obtained most of their energy requirements from mistletoe nectar in winter and mistletoe fruit in summer. Higher honeyeater densities were sustained by flowering in winter. Mistletoebirds were present in low density throughout the year and subsisted on a diet of mistletoe fruit and a few insects. The reproductive strategy of A. quandang probably evolved in response to the pollination and dispersal service provided by honeyeaters in inland Australia. Neither spiny-cheeked honeyeaters nor mistletoebirds have adaptations resulting from evolutionary interactions with A. quandang. The high specificity of their mutualism is a result of: (i) the abundance of A. quandang in relation to other nectar and fruit producing plants in the community: (ii) the year-round production by A. quandang of the primary source of fruit or nectar for honeyeaters and mistletoebirds: (iii) the facultative specialization of both birds on A. quandang; and (iv) the reluctance or inability of other frugivorous birds in the community to consume A. quandang fruit.     

Primary nectar robbing by Apis mellifera (Apidae) on Pyrostegia venusta (Bignoniaceae): behavior,pillaging rate,and its consequences

The interactions between plants and their pollinators are the result of convergent evolution of floral attributes reflecting pressure exerted by pollinators. Nonetheless, the strategies employed by floral visitors to collect floral resources are extremely complex, and commonly involve theft or robbery in addition to pollination. We describe here the behavioral repertory of Apis mellifera during the collection of the floral resources, and evaluated the robbing rates of A. mellifera on the buds and flowers of Pyrostegia venusta during periods of intense and sparse flowering. We recorded the behaviors exhibited by foraging bees while collecting floral resources, quantified the numbers of floral buds and flowers with perforations in their corolla tissues, and determined whether that damage reduced nectar production. The evaluations were conducted during two distinct periods: during the period of intense flowering of P. venusta, and during the period of sparse flowering. Nectar robbing was observed during 93.4% of the visits of foraging A. mellifera bees, while nectar theft was observed during only 0.7% of the visits, and pollen theft during 5.9%. The robbing of floral buds and flowers was most intense during the period of heavy flowering. Flowers that had been intensely robbed secreted significantly less nectar than those non-robbed. The unusual nectar robbing activities of A. mellifera, especially during the period of intense flowering indicates an optimization of access to larger volumes of food resources. Our results therefore point to a major limitation of nectar per floral unit during the intense flowering period of P. venusta due to the high activity of nectar robbing by A. mellifera bees.

     

Partitioning of nectar sources in an Australian honeyeater community

Feeding by honeyeaters was found to maintain nectar at low levels at three sites studied on Kangaroo Island in May-June 1978. The productivity of nectar at a site and position in a dominance hierarchy appeared to determine which bird species used each site. Correa was the main nectar source in the poorest area and produced 0.05 kJ m^?2 per day. The small eastern spinebill was the most abundant honeyeater. The purple-gaped honeyeater also occurred but fed mostly on honeydew. The medium sized New Holland honeyeater was common and territorial in the second area, where Banksia marginata and B. ornata inflorescences and Adenanthos flowers produced 0.7 kJ m^?2 of nectar per day. Spinebills and crescent honeyeaters also visited flowers and were sometimes chased by New Holland honeyeaters. The richest site was a flowering Eucalyptus cosmophylla tree (5.1 kJ m^?2 of nectar per day). A red wattlebird, the largest honeyeater, held a territory in part of this tree and chased other honeyeaters from the territory. New Holland, crescent and purple-gaped honeyeaters fed on flowers in other parts of the tree. The spinebill was absent. We conclude that nectar was partitioned along a spectrum of rich to poor sources. Larger more aggressive species used and sometimes defended the richest sources while the smaller birds used the poorer sources.     

Functional Invertebrate Prey Groups Reflect Dietary Responses to Phenology and Farming Activity and Pest Control Services in Three Sympatric Species of Aerially Foraging Insectivorous Birds

Farming activity severely impacts the invertebrate food resources of farmland birds, with direct mortality to populations of above-ground arthropods thorough mechanical damage during crop harvests. In this study we assessed the effects of phenological periods, including the timing of harvest, on the composition and biomass of prey consumed by three species of aerial insectivorous birds. Common Swifts Apus apus, Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica and House Martins Delichon urbica breed sympatrically and most of their diet is obtained from agricultural sources of invertebrate prey, especially from oil-seed rape crops. We categorized invertebrate prey into six functional groups, including oil-seed rape pests; pests of other arable crops; other crop-provisioned taxa; coprophilous taxa; and taxa living in non-crop and mixed crop/non-crop habitats. Seasonality impacted functional groups differently, but the general direction of change (increase/decrease) of all groups was consistent as indexed by prey composition of the three aerial insectivores studied here. After the oil-seed rape crop harvest (mid July), all three species exhibited a dietary shift from oil-seed rape insect pests to other aerial invertebrate prey groups. However, Common Switfts also consumed a relative large quantity of oil-seed rape insect pests in the late summer (August), suggesting that they could reduce pest insect emigration beyond the host plant/crop. Since these aerially foraging insectivorous birds operate in specific conditions and feed on specific pest resources unavailable to foliage/ground foraging avian predators, our results suggest that in some crops like oil-seed rape cultivations, the potential integration of the insectivory of aerial foraging birds into pest management schemes might provide economic benefits. We advise further research into the origin of airborne insects and the role of aerial insectivores as agents of the biological control of crop insect pests, especially the determination of depredation rates and the cascading effects of insectivory on crop damage and yield.     

Review of South-Island High Country Land Management Issues-Joint Submission to the Ministerial High Country Review Committee from the New Zealand Ecological Society and the New Zealand Society of Soil Science

Recent work at several central South Island sites has shown that the bird-pollinated mistletoe Peraxilla tetrapetala (Loranthaceae) is extensively pollen-limited. We studied the diet, time-budget, and densities of its principal pollinator, bellbirds (Anthornis melanura, Meliphagidae), at Craigieburn to find out what aspect of bellbird ecology may be limiting pollination. Direct observations of bellbird diets showed that they are annual generalists on invertebrates (diet range 22-85% of food items) and honeydew (diet range 2-45%), and concentrate seasonally on mistletoe fruit (18-60%) and mistletoe nectar (27-58%) when available. The bellbirds at Craigieburn are more insectivorous than New Zealand's other two honeyeaters (tui and stitchbirds). In general, bellbirds are most similar to the short-billed guild of Australian honeyeaters in their beak morphology, foraging behaviour, and diet choice, but with a greater importance of fruit in the bellbird diet. The annual mean number of bellbirds recorded per 5-minute count (1.05) at Craigieburn was relatively low, even compared to other eastern South Island sites, which have lower counts of bellbirds than the western South Island and offshore islands. As mistletoe fruit and nectar were preferred foods when in season, and bellbird counts were low at Craigieburn, we conclude that it is the probable low number of bellbirds in the area, and not their choice of diet, which limits mistletoe pollination and dispersal. The bellbird population at Craigieburn did not appear to be food limited as bellbirds spent less than 20% of their time feeding, and the number of hours per day bellbirds spent feeding and foraging did not change significantly from winter to summer while food resources became more plentiful. Other pressures that limit the bellbird population size, particularly predation from introduced mammals, would appear more likely explanations for poor pollination and disperser services to mistletoes at Craigieburn.     

Consequences of differences in body mass,wing length and leg morphology for nectar-feeding birds

Nectar-feeding birds are prominent in many parts of the world, and vary with respect to body size. Despite the availability of considerable morphometric data, few concerted efforts have been made to assess the influence of attributes such as mass, wing length and leg morphology upon the speed, acceleration, mode and energetic cost of movement by birds between flowers when foraging for nectar. This review attempts to consolidate and interpret available data and highlight areas where further investigations appear warranted. Australian honeyeaters are generally larger, and American hummingbirds smaller, than Hawaiian honeycreepers and sunbirds of Africa or Asia. Sunbirds, honeyeaters and honeycreepers generally perch while extracting nectar from flowers. Hummingbirds usually hover, apparently because suitable perches close to flowers are lacking, and not because hovering increases the speed at which flowers can be visited. Honeyeaters move from one flower to another at speeds that are at least as great as those for hummingbirds. Most passerine nectarivores need to ingest more nectar per day than hummingbirds in order to maintain energy balance, some species devoting more than 60% of the day to foraging. The major consequence of reduced foraging activity by hummingbirds, which spend only 5–30% of the day in this manner, appears to be male emancipation from nest construction and care of offspring. Large nectarivores have a greater capacity to store surplus food and to fast than smaller birds, and so can take advantage of short-lived peaks in nectar abundance. Nectarivores such as honeyeaters should therefore be favoured by the rapid diurnal changes in nectar availability which are characteristic of many Australian and African habitats. Body mass also determines the likely access to rich sources of nectar through size-related interspecific dominance hierarchies. In all families, larger species tend to monopolize the most rewarding nectar supplies, forcing smaller subordinate species to use poorer, more scattered sources. Within particular species, males usually have longer wings and greater masses than females. These variations imply that the two sexes differ with regard to their foraging ecology, although few supporting data are currently available.     

Seasonal variation in honeyeater foraging behaviour,infloresence abundance and fruit set in Banksia spinulosa (Proteaceae)

Seasonal variation in the foraging behaviour of honeyeaters and the production of fruit were examined in relation to the flowering intensity of Banksia spinulosa over two flowering seasons. The abundance of inflorescences was greater in the mid than in the early and late periods of the flowering season. In the mid period, many plants were blooming and each plant had many flowering inflorescences. Inflorescences received most visits by honeyeaters in the early flowering period; the visitation rate declining as flowering progressed. Eastern spinebills were the most common floral visitors at all times during the season. The number of foraging probes made at inflorescences by eastern spinebills did not differ throughout the season. Foraging movements between inflorescences on the same plant were more frequent in the mid period than in the early and late periods. Long distance movements between plants (more than 10 m apart) were promoted by aggressive interactions between honeyeaters. Inflorescences flowering in the late period were less likely to develop follicles because there were fewer visits by birds and/or because resources had been allocated to inflorescences pollinated earlier in the season. The number of follicles produced per infructescence did not differ between flowering periods. Overall, the number of inflorescences produced per plant, the number of visits received per inflorescence and the proportion of inflorescences that developed follicles were greater in 1987 than in 1988.     

Nectar utilization and pollination by Australian honeyeaters and insects visiting Calothamnus quadrifidus (Myrtaceae)

Nectar availability in Calothamnus quadrifidus flowers was studied at Wongamine Nature Reserve in late spring (November). Despite some overnight depletion by moths and other invertebrates, more nectar was present in flowers at dawn than at the preceding dusk. Significant nectar depletion occurred within a few hours after dawn, mainly due to foraging by two honeyeater species. Lichmera indistincta and Phylidonyris nigra. Thereafter, nectar availability was maintained at relatively low levels, principally because of foraging by honeyeaters and honey bees. Apis mellifera, that became active during the warmer part of the day. Although individual honeyeaters consumed more nectar than A. mellifera, honey bees were so abundant that their total impact was greater than that of either honeyeater species for much of the day. Transfer of C. quadrifidus pollen between flowers is necessary in order to achieve a high level of seed set, as the flowers appear to be protandrous. Honeyeaters appeared to be considerably more significant pollen vectors than A. mellifera.     

Honeyeater population changes in relation to food availability in the Jarrah forest of Western Australia

The numbers of honeyeaters present at particular sites in the Jarrah forest varied significantly from month to month, with peak abundance occurring between May and September. Numbers also varied from site to site, depending upon the major plant species present. Honeyeater abundance was not limited by arthropod availability, but in many instances was closely correlated with the availability of nectar, particularly that produced by Dryandra sessilis. Large honeyeaters, such as Anthochaera chrysoptera and Phylidonyris novaehollandiae, were generally most abundant at times and sites of greatest nectar production. Small honeyeaters, such as Acanthorhynchus superciliosis, were never abundant but were present for most of the year. The production of nectar between October and December was such that more honeyeaters could have been supported than were actually present. Low numbers at these times can be explained in terms of reduced foraging efficiency that would have resulted from more widely dispersed flowers, and the possible availability of more rewarding nectar resources at other sites.     

The foraging behaviour of Australian honeyeaters: a review and some comparisons with hummingbirds

The foraging behaviour of Australian honeyeaters is reviewed in terms of diet, foraging selectivity, foraging flight mode, quality and quantity of nectar encountered per flower, flower densities encountered and effect of predation. At the same time comparisons are made between honeyeaters and hummingbirds. These two groups of birds are superficially similar. Both feed on nectar and insects. Both tend to have long curved bills and tongues adapted for removal of nectar from flowers. Both tend to feed at long, red flowers. However, on close inspection, honeyeaters and hummingbirds are quite dissimilar. For example, many honeyeaters include fruit in their diets. Hummingbirds almost never eat fruit. Honeyeaters appear to be considerably less nectarivorous and more insectivorous than hummingbirds. Honeyeaters are, for the most part, larger than hummingbirds and they usually perch while feeding whereas hummingbirds usually hover. Honeyeaters but not hummingbirds often flock while feeding. Predation appears to be considerably more important for honeyeaters than for hummingbirds. Territorial defense of flowers seems common in hummingbirds but uncommon in honeyeaters. These differences are discussed in detail and explanations are offered for them wherever possible.     

Contrasting effects of warming and increased snowfall on Arctic tundra plant phenology over the past two decades

Recent changes in climate have led to significant shifts in phenology, with many studies demonstrating advanced phenology in response to warming temperatures. The rate of temperature change is especially high in the Arctic, but this is also where we have relatively little data on phenological changes and the processes driving these changes. In order to understand how Arctic plant species are likely to respond to future changes in climate, we monitored flowering phenology in response to both experimental and ambient warming for four widespread species in two habitat types over 21 years. We additionally used long‐term environmental records to disentangle the effects of temperature increase and changes in snowmelt date on phenological patterns. While flowering occurred earlier in response to experimental warming, plants in unmanipulated plots showed no change or a delay in flowering over the 21‐year period, despite more than 1 °C of ambient warming during that time. This counterintuitive result was likely due to significantly delayed snowmelt over the study period (0.05–0.2 days/yr) due to increased winter snowfall. The timing of snowmelt was a strong driver of flowering phenology for all species – especially for early‐flowering species – while spring temperature was significantly related to flowering time only for later‐flowering species. Despite significantly delayed flowering phenology, the timing of seed maturation showed no significant change over time, suggesting that warmer temperatures may promote more rapid seed development. The results of this study highlight the importance of understanding the specific environmental cues that drive species’ phenological responses as well as the complex interactions between temperature and precipitation when forecasting phenology over the coming decades. As demonstrated here, the effects of altered snowmelt patterns can counter the effects of warmer temperatures, even to the point of generating phenological responses opposite to those predicted by warming alone.     

Interspecific competition in Australian honeyeaters—depletion of common resources

Many species of honeyeaters and other nectar-feeding birds occur in most habitats in South Australia. They frequently feed on nectar of the same species of plants. A succession of species of plants provide nectar for birds throughout the year. Nectar is most abundant in winter and early spring and least abundant in summer and autumn. There is more nectar per flower and more flowers in winter and spring. Nectar is often depleted by honeyeaters, and sometimes other visitors (silvereyes, lorikeets and insects) between December and May. It is at times reduced to a level at which it is uneconomical for some species to exploit. There are seasonal movements of honeyeaters into areas of abundant nectar and out of these areas when nectar becomes scarce. Breeding coincides with peak abundance of nectar. Diversity of honeyeaters is probably maintained by an interaction of two types of competition, exploitation and interference. The larger species use the richest sources of nectar and aggressively exclude the smaller species (interference) whereas the smaller species can use poorer sources of nectar because their energy requirements are less (exploitation).     

Nectar-feeding by suburban Blue Tits: contribution to the diet in spring

The incidence of nectar feeding by 2 pairs of Blue Tits Parus caeruleus was investigated in relation to the availability of nectar and alternative food. Nectar was not the most preferred food and the occurrence of nectar feeding did not correlate significantly with most measures of nectar availability, but the Blue Tits selected the most productive flowers. Nectar feeding frequently occurred when the preferred peanuts were unavailable due to interspecific competition. The nectar resource was under-utilized by the Blue Tits except at the beginning of the flowering period. Despite this, nectar was a highly profitable food source, yielding 0.33-0.38 kJ min^?1 foraging. During the flowering period nectar was estimated to contribute up to 32.7% of the average daily metabolic rate (ADMR) of the male and up to 49.3% of the ADMR of the female, with means over the 2 years of 7.4% and 13.2% per day for the male and female, respectively. The importance of nectar in the ecology of Blue Tits is discussed.     

The diet of the New Holland honeyeater,Phylidonyris novaehollandiae

New Holland honeyeaters collect nectar, manna or honeydew for energy and hawk small flying insects for protein. The insects taken were usually Diptera and Hymenoptera weighing 0.7 mg dry weight or less. Net rates of energy gain from hawking small flying insects were usually less than 20 J min^?1 and sometimes negative and insufficient to meet the bird's daily energy requirements. Those from feeding on nectar, manna or honeydew were usually above 40J min^?1 and often above 400J min^?1 at dawn and the birds depended on these carbohydrates for energy. Nectar, manna and honeydew contained negligible amounts of protein, and the birds used small flying insects as sources of protein, and presumably other nutrients. Given that carbohydrate resources supply better rates of energy gain than insects. New Holland honeyeaters should collect their energy requirements from carbohydrates and only collect sufficient insects to satisfy their protein requirements. Estimates of the food intakes of both non-breeding and breedig birds showed that they did this. Non-breeding New Holland honeyeaters collected from 72 to 125 (mean 92) kJ of carbohydrates per day and 17 to 58 (mean 31) mg of protein per day. These meet the daily energy (75 kJ) and protein (20 mg) requirements of the birds. Breedig birds collected more carbohydrates and more insects, but in proportion to their increased energy and protein requirements respectively. New Holland honeyeaters are probably limited by their ability to meet their energy requirements from nectar, manna or honeydew and not by insects. Non-breeding birds collected their protein requirements in about 10 min of insect-feeding, but spent from 33 to 90% of the day collecting carbohydrates to meet their energy requirements. The maintenance requirement of 20 mg of protein per day for New Holland honeyeaters is about 25% of that estimated from standard equations for a bird of the same size. This low level may have evolved in response to low energy availability.     

Coexistence and Habitat Preference of Two Honeyeaters and a Sunbird on Lombok,Indonesia

On the island of Lombok, Indonesia, three nectarivorous birds partially coexist: the two closely related and very similar Lichmera honeyeaters and a sunbird (Cinnyris jugularis). We investigated how these species segregated ecologically in areas where they coexisted by evaluating foraging visits and aggressive interactions at rich and poor nectar resources in different habitats (forest and open areas) along an altitudinal gradient (800–1600 m asl). The two honeyeaters were partially segregated by altitude. In the zone of overlap, Lichmera limbata dominated the richest forest resources, while Lichmera lombokia dominated the richest resources in open land. The sunbird, C. jugularis, was only observed in open habitats and mostly at poor resource patches. In the three‐species community in open habitats a dominance hierarchy was apparent with L. lombokia as the superior species and C. jugularis as the inferior species. Studies on how segregated species interact in their transition zone can help us to understand interactions between otherwise ecologically segregated species.     

Winter Active Bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) Achieve High Foraging Rates in Urban Britain

Background

Foraging bumblebees are normally associated with spring and summer in northern Europe. However, there have been sightings of the bumblebee Bombus terrestris during the warmer winters in recent years in southern England. But what floral resources are they relying upon during winter and how much winter forage can they collect?

Methodology/Principal Findings

To test if urban areas in the UK provide a rich foraging niche for bees we set up colonies of B. terrestris in the field during two late winter periods (2005/6 & 2006/7) in London, UK, and measured their foraging performance. Fully automatic radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology was used in 2006/7 to enable us to record the complete foraging activity of individually tagged bees. The number of bumblebees present during winter (October 2007 to March 2008) and the main plants they visited were also recorded during transect walks. Queens and workers were observed throughout the winter, suggesting a second generation of bee colonies active during the winter months. Mass flowering shrubs such as Mahonia spp. were identified as important food resources. The foraging experiments showed that bees active during the winter can attain nectar and pollen foraging rates that match, and even surpass, those recorded during summer.

Conclusions/Significance

B. terrestris in the UK are now able to utilise a rich winter foraging resource in urban parks and gardens that might at present still be under-exploited, opening up the possibility of further changes in pollinator phenology.