Native bees provide insurance against ongoing honey bee losses

One of the values of biodiversity is that it may provide 'biological insurance' for services currently rendered by domesticated species or technology. We used crop pollination as a model system, and investigated whether the loss of a domesticated pollinator (the honey bee) could be compensated for by native, wild bee species. We measured pollination provided to watermelon crops at 23 farms in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, USA, and used a simulation model to separate the pollen provided by honey bees and native bees. Simulation results predict that native bees alone provide sufficient pollination at > 90% of the farms studied. Furthermore, empirical total pollen deposition at flowers was strongly, significantly correlated with native bee visitation but not with honey bee visitation. The honey bee is currently undergoing extensive die-offs because of Colony Collapse Disorder. We predict that in our region native bees will buffer potential declines in agricultural production because of honey bee losses.     

Plant evolution can mediate negative effects from honey bees on wild pollinators

1. Pollinators are introduced to agroecosystems to provide pollination services. Introductions of managed pollinators often promote ecosystem services, but it remains largely unknown whether they also affect evolutionary mutualisms between wild pollinators and plants.
2. Here, we developed a model to assess effects of managed honey bees on mutualisms between plants and wild pollinators. Our model tracked how interactions among wild pollinators and honey bees affected pollinator and plant populations.
3. We show that when managed honey bees have a competitive advantage over wild pollinators, or a greater carrying capacity, the honey bees displace the wild pollinator. This leads to reduced plant density because plants benefit less by visits from honey bees than wild pollinators that coevolved with the plants.
4. As wild pollinators are displaced, plants evolve by increasing investment in traits that are attractive for honey bees but not wild pollinators. This evolutionary switch promotes wild pollinator displacement. However, higher mutualism investment costs by the plant to the honey bee can promote pollinator coexistence.
5. Our results show plant evolution can promote displacement of wild pollinators by managed honey bees, while limited plant evolution may lead to pollinator coexistence. More broadly, effects of honey bees on wild pollinators in agroecosystems, and effects on ecosystem services, may depend on the capacity of plant populations to evolve.

     

The influence of nest site selection on the population dynamics of Africanized honey bees in an urban landscape

Urban landscapes provide habitat for many species, including domesticated and feral honey bees, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). With recent losses of managed honey bee colonies, there is increasing interest in feral honey bee colonies and their potential contribution to pollination services in agricultural, natural, and urban settings. However, in some regions the feral honey bee population consists primarily of Africanized honey bees. Africanized honey bees (AHB) are hybrids between European honey bees and the African honey bee, Apis mellifera scutellataLepeletier, and have generated economic, ecological, and human health concerns because of their aggressive behavior. In this study, we used two long‐term datasets (7–10 years) detailing the spatial and temporal distribution of AHB colonies in Tucson, AZ, USA, where feral colonies occupy a variety of cavities including water meter boxes. A stage‐structured matrix model was used to elucidate the implications of nest site selection and the effects of colony terminations on the structure and dynamics of the AHB population. Our results suggest that Tucson's AHB population is driven by a relatively small number of ‘source’ colonies that escape termination (ca. 0.165 colonies per km² or 125 colonies in total), although immigrating swarms and absconding colonies from the surrounding area may have also contributed to the stability of the Tucson AHB population. Furthermore, the structure of the population has likely been impacted by the number and spatial distribution of water meter boxes across the city. The study provides an example of how urban wildlife populations are driven by interactions among landscape structure, human management, and behavioral traits conferred by an invasive genotype.     

Red mason bees cannot compete with honey bees for floral resources in a cage experiment

Intensive beekeeping to mitigate crop pollination deficits and habitat loss may cause interspecific competition between bees. Studies show negative correlations between flower visitation of honey bees (Apis mellifera) and wild bees, but effects on the reproduction of wild bees were not proven. Likely reasons are that honey bees can hardly be excluded from controls and wild bee nests are generally difficult to detect in field experiments. The goal of this study was to investigate whether red mason bees (Osmia bicornis) compete with honey bees in cages in order to compare the reproduction of red mason bees under different honey bee densities. Three treatments were applied, each replicated in four cages of 18 m³ with 38 red mason bees in all treatments and 0, 100, and 300 honey bees per treatment with 10–20% being foragers. Within the cages, the flower visitation and interspecific displacements from flowers were observed. Niche breadths and resource overlaps of both bee species were calculated, and the reproduction of red mason bees was measured. Red mason bees visited fewer flowers when honey bees were present. Niche breadth of red mason bees decreased with increasing honey bee density while resource overlaps remained constant. The reproduction of red mason bees decreased in cages with honey bees. In conclusion, our experimental results show that in small and isolated flower patches, wild bees can temporarily suffer from competition with honey bees. Further research should aim to test for competition on small and isolated flower patches in real landscapes.     

Resource overlap and possible competition between honey bees and wild bees in central Europe

Evidence for interspecific competition between honey bees and wild bees was studied on 15 calcareous grasslands with respect to: (1) foraging radius of honey bees, (2) overlap in resource use, and (3) possible honey bee effects on species richness and abundance of flower-visiting, ground-nesting and trap-nesting wild bees. The grasslands greatly differed in the number of honey bee colonies within a radius of 2 km and were surrounded by agricultural habitats. The number of flower-visiting honey bees on both potted mustard plants and small grassland patches declined with increasing distance from the nearest apiary and was almost zero at a distance of 1.5–2.0 km. Wild bees were observed visiting 57 plant species, whereas honey bees visited only 24 plant species. Percentage resource overlap between honey bees and wild bees was 45.5%, and Hurlbert’s index of niche overlap was 3.1. In total, 1849 wild bees from 98 species were recorded on the calcareous grasslands. Neither species richness nor abundance of wild bees were negatively correlated with the density of honey bee colonies (within a radius of 2 km) or the density of flower-visiting honey bees per site. Abundance of flower- visiting wild bees was correlated only with the percentage cover of flowering plants. In 240 trap nests, 1292 bee nests with 6066 brood cells were found. Neither the number of bee species nor the number of brood cells per grassland was significantly correlated with the density of honey bees. Significant correlations were found only between the number of brood cells and the percentage cover of shrubs. The number of nest entrances of ground-nesting bees per square metre was not correlated with the density of honey bees but was negatively correlated with the cover of vegetation. Interspecific competition by honey bees for food resources was not shown to be a significant factor determining abundance and species richness of wild bees. Received: 22 March 1999 / Accepted: 24 September 1999     

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.     

Pollen diets and niche overlap of honey bees and native bees in protected areas

The decline of both managed and wild bee populations has been extensively reported for over a decade now, with growing concerns amongst the scientific community. Also, evidence is growing that both managed and feral honey bees may exacerbate threats to wild bees. In Australia, there are over 1600 native bee species and introduced European honey bees (Apis mellifera) have established throughout most landscapes. There is a major gap in knowledge of the interactions between honey bees and native bees in Australian landscapes, especially floral resource use.Here we report on the pollen diets of wild bees in protected areas of coastal heathland, an ecosystem characterised by mass flowering in late winter and spring. We sampled bees within three sites and DNA metabarcoding was used to compare the pollen diets of honey bees and native bees. We recorded 2, 772 bees in total, with 13 genera and 18 described species identified. Apis mellifera was the most common species across all locations, accounting for 42% of all bees collected. Native bee genera included eusocial Tetragonula (stingless bees) (37%), and semi-social Exoneura and Braunsapis (19.8% combined). Metabarcoding data revealed both Tetragonula and honey bees have wide foraging patterns, and the bipartite network overall was highly generalised (H₂’ = 0.24). Individual honey bees carried pollen of 7–29 plant species, and significantly more species than all other bees. We found niche overlap in the diets of honey bees and native bees generally (0.42), and strongest overlap with stingless bees (0.70) and species of Braunsapis (0.62). A surprising finding was that many species carried pollen from Restionaceae and Cyperaceae, families generally considered to be predominantly wind-pollinated in Australia. Our study showed introduced honey bee use of resources overlaps with that of native bees in protected heathlands, but there are clear differences in their diet preferences.     

Gram-positive cocci from apiarian sources

Frass from the greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella, obtained from feral colonies of honey bees, Apis mellifera; from domesticated (managed) honey bee colonies; and from a laboratory culture of the wax moth was sampled for Gram-positive cocci. One hundred twenty-three of these organisms were isolated and identified. Frass from domesticated colonies yielded only one isolate. Equal numbers of isolates (61) were obtained from frass from feral bee colonies and from the wax moth culture. Catalase-negative cocci were predominant in frass from feral colonies, whereas catalase-positive cocci were the most common isolates from frass from the wax moth culture. Catalase-positive cocci were identified as Staphylococcus epidermidis and Micrococcus sp. Catalase-negative cocci were Streptococcus faecalis var. faecalis and S. faecium. These results are discussed in relation to the rarity of Gram-positive cocci associated with honey bees, pollen, and nectar in Arizona and the frequency of association with honey bees and wax moth frass of bacteria resembling Arthrobacter spp. that appear as Gram-positive cocci during one stage of the life cycle.     

Farmland in U.S. Conservation Reserve Program has unique floral composition that promotes bee summer foraging

Bee conservation is a topic of global concern, particularly in agroecosystems where their contribution to crop pollination is highly valued. Over a decade ago, bees and other pollinators were made a priority of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), a U.S. federal program that pays land owners to establish a conservation cover, typically grassland, on environmentally sensitive farmland. Despite large financial investment in this program, few studies have measured the benefit of CRP to bees, particularly in complex agroecosystems with abundant alternative forage. To determine if CRP land seeded with pollinator-attractive native flowers and/or introduced legumes provides distinct floral composition that attracts more foraging bees than non-CRP habitats, we compared CRP land to paired non-CRP fields and roadsides at 31 sites in Michigan, U.S.A.. We found CRP land had unique floral species community composition, higher floral abundance, greater species richness, more native floral species, and greater inflorescence coverage. Greater inflorescence coverage on CRP land was associated with a greater abundance of both honey bees and wild bees than either non-CRP fields or roadsides, as was native flower abundance for wild bees. Showy native plant species were important forage resources on CRP land: Monarda fistulosa was the most foraged upon species by both honey bees and wild bees, and goldenrod species were important late-summer forage resources for honey bees. These findings demonstrate the benefit of managing CRP land with herbaceous seed mixes to create dense, showy, native plant communities that provide summer-long resources to both bee groups. Insights from this study could be used to enhance the composition of future conservation program investments and management of non-CRP land to benefit pollinators.     

Relationships between wild bees,hoverflies and pollination success in apple orchards with different landscape contexts

相似文献   

Biodiversity buffers pollination from changes in environmental conditions

A hypothesized underlying principle of the diversity‐functioning relationship is that functional groups respond differently to environmental change. Over 3 years, we investigated how pollinator diversity contributes to the magnitude of pollination service through spatial complementarity and differential response to high winds in California almond orchards. We found honey bees preferentially visited the top sections of the tree. Where wild pollinators were present, they showed spatial complementarity to honey bees and visited the bottom tree sections more frequently. As wind speed increased, honey bees' spatial preference shifted toward the bottom tree sections. In high winds (>2.5 m s^?1), orchards with low pollinator diversity (honey bees only) received almost no flower visits. In orchards with high pollinator diversity, visitation decreased to a lesser extent as wild bee visitation was unaffected by high winds. Our results demonstrate how spatial complementarity in diverse communities can help buffer pollination services to environmental changes like wind speed.     

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.

     

Differential sensitivity of honey bees and bumble bees to a dietary insecticide (imidacloprid)

Currently, there is concern about declining bee populations and the sustainability of pollination services. One potential threat to bees is the unintended impact of systemic insecticides, which are ingested by bees in the nectar and pollen from flowers of treated crops. To establish whether imidacloprid, a systemic neonicotinoid and insect neurotoxin, harms individual bees when ingested at environmentally realistic levels, we exposed adult worker bumble bees, Bombus terrestris L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), and honey bees, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), to dietary imidacloprid in feeder syrup at dosages between 0.08 and 125 μg l^?1. Honey bees showed no response to dietary imidacloprid on any variable that we measured (feeding, locomotion and longevity). In contrast, bumble bees progressively developed over time a dose-dependent reduction in feeding rate with declines of 10–30% in the environmentally relevant range of up to 10 μg l^?1, but neither their locomotory activity nor longevity varied with diet. To explain their differential sensitivity, we speculate that honey bees are better pre-adapted than bumble bees to feed on nectars containing synthetic alkaloids, such as imidacloprid, by virtue of their ancestral adaptation to tropical nectars in which natural alkaloids are prevalent. We emphasise that our study does not suggest that honey bee colonies are invulnerable to dietary imidacloprid under field conditions, but our findings do raise new concern about the impact of agricultural neonicotinoids on wild bumble bee populations.     

Unifloral Honeys: Chemical Conversion and Pollen Reduction

Physico-chemical and pollen analyses were made of unifloral samples of nectar, crop content and honey. The samples were obtained by carrying out cage experiments exclusively with one plant species. The investigations of four plant species are presented: Centaurea montana, Coriandrum sativum. Euphorbia lathyris and Rubus idaeus. During the conversion of nectar to honey its chemical composition changes. The changes in carbohydrate composition cannot be explained by those enzymes described as specific for honey. During the period of time when the bees are working on gathered nectar, the chemical components of the honey, whose origin is the secretion from the bees, is increasing, while the amount of pollen is decreasing. There are negative correlations between the quantity of pollen grains and both enzymatic activity and the amount of proline. With respect to the botanical origin it is suggested that the absolute amount of pollen should be determined and compared with the chemical analysis of the honey.     

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.     

Competition between honey bees and wild bees and the role of nesting resources in a nature reserve

The European honey bee exploits floral resources efficiently and may therefore compete with solitary wild bees. Hence, conservationists and bee keepers are debating about the consequences of beekeeping for the conservation of wild bees in nature reserves. We observed flower-visiting bees on flowers of Calluna vulgaris in sites differing in the distance to the next honey-bee hive and in sites with hives present and absent in the Lüneburger Heath, Germany. Additionally, we counted wild bee ground nests in sites that differ in their distance to the next hive and wild bee stem nests and stem-nesting bee species in sites with hives present and absent. We did not observe fewer honey bees or higher wild bee flower visits in sites with different distances to the next hive (up to 1,229 m). However, wild bees visited fewer flowers and honey bee visits increased in sites containing honey-bee hives and in sites containing honey-bee hives we found fewer stem-nesting bee species. The reproductive success, measured as number of nests, was not affected by distance to honey-bee hives or their presence but by availability and characteristics of nesting resources. Our results suggest that beekeeping in the Lüneburg Heath can affect the conservation of stem-nesting bee species richness but not the overall reproduction either of stem-nesting or of ground-nesting bees. Future experiments need control sites with larger distances than 500 m to hives. Until more information is available, conservation efforts should forgo to enhance honey bee stocking rates but enhance the availability of nesting resources.     

Laboratory rearing of solitary bees and wasps

Ecological experiments often require standardized methods that exclude natural variation and allow manipulation of a single parameter. It has been shown that domesticated honey bee larvae are raisable in a controlled environment. Here we demonstrate that this approach is also transferable to wild solitary bees and wasps without inducing negative effects on their development. Wells may also be supplemented with the antibiotic substance oxytetracycline to control the presence of bacteria. The method thus provides a useful tool to investigate offspring recruitment and larval development in solitary bees and wasps, plus their responses to manipulation of factors as for example diets, toxins and microbiota.     

Higher immunocompetence is associated with higher genetic diversity in feral honey bee colonies (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Apis mellifera</Emphasis>)

Honey bees are the most important managed pollinators as they provide key ecosystem services for crop production worldwide. Recent losses of honey bee colonies in North America and Europe have demonstrated a need to develop strategies to improve their health and conserve their populations. Previously, we showed that feral honey bees—colonies that live in the wild without human assistance—exhibit higher levels of immunocompetence than managed colonies in North Carolina (USA). In a first attempt to investigate the underlying mechanisms of this difference in immune response, here we characterize the genetic composition of feral and managed honey bees using microsatellite markers. Our results reveal significant but small genetic differentiation between feral and managed honey bee colonies (?_CT = 0.047, P?=?0.03) indicating admixture between these two groups. Higher genetic diversity was correlated with higher immune response in feral (P _MANOVA = 0.011) but not managed bees, despite the fact that the latter group showed significantly higher average genetic diversity (P _ANCOVA < 0.001). These findings suggest that genetic diversity is positively associated with immunocompetence in feral honey bee colonies, and that the benefits of genetic diversity are obscured in managed bees, perhaps as a result of artificial selection. We hypothesize that high genetic variability provides the raw material upon which natural selection acts and generates adaptive genotypes in unmanaged populations. Feral populations could be useful sources of genetic variation to use in breeding programs that aim to improve honey bee health.     

Bee visitation rates to cultivated sunflowers increase with the amount and accessibility of nectar sugars

Pollinators make foraging decisions based on numerous floral traits, including nectar and pollen rewards, and associated visual and olfactory cues. For insect‐pollinated crops, identifying and breeding for attractive floral traits may increase yields. In this study, we examined floral trait variation within cultivated sunflowers and its effects on bee foraging behaviours. Over 2 years, we planted different sunflower inbred lines, including male‐fertile and male‐sterile lines, and measured nectar volume, nectar sugar concentration and composition, and corolla length. During bloom, we recorded visits by both managed honey bees and wild bees. We then examined consistency in relative nectar production by comparing field results to those from a greenhouse experiment. Sunflower inbred lines varied significantly in all floral traits, including the amount and composition of nectar sugars, and in corolla length. Both wild bee and honey bee visits significantly increased with nectar sugar amount and decreased with corolla length, but appeared unaffected by nectar sugar composition. While wild bees made more visits to sunflowers providing pollen (male‐fertile), honey bees preferred plants without pollen (male‐sterile). Differences in nectar quantity among greenhouse‐grown sunflower lines were similar to those measured in the field, and bumble bees preferentially visited lines with more nectar in greenhouse observations. Our results show that sunflowers with greater quantities of nectar sugar and shorter corollas receive greater pollination services from both managed and wild bees. Selecting for these traits could thus increase sunflower crop yields and provide greater floral resources for bees.     

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.