Bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) Functional Traits in Relation to Sampling Methodology in a Restored Tallgrass Prairie

Abstract

BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Two common bee-sampling methods reflect different assemblages of the bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) community in mixed-grass prairie systems and are dependent on surrounding floral resource availability

“…However, few studies comparing functional trait representation between active netting and passive sampling in natural systems specifically exist (Rhoades et al 2017), which reduces our ability to give sufficient context to our trait-based results. Our current available understanding of functional group differences between sampling methods is primarily based on comparisons between passive trap techniques (Wilson et al 2016;McCravy et al 2019). We have results that both support and contrast with the most relatable studies (Rhoades et al 2017;McCravy et al 2019;O'Connor et al 2019).…”

“…Our current available understanding of functional group differences between sampling methods is primarily based on comparisons between passive trap techniques (Wilson et al 2016;McCravy et al 2019). We have results that both support and contrast with the most relatable studies (Rhoades et al 2017;McCravy et al 2019;O'Connor et al 2019). As such, the few available comparisons necessitate future inclusion of functional traits in active vs. passive method comparisons specifically.…”

“…We chose bee bowls on adjustable stands to match the height of flowering forbs of grasslands and to potentially lessen the trap attraction for high-flying and typically large-bodied species from outside of the study site (Gonzalez et al 2016). Other passive methods, such as vane traps, are effective in capturing bee diversity and can capture unique assemblages of bees from bee bowls (Geroff et al 2014;Joshi et al 2015) but over-represent the highflying and larger-bodied species, with particular biases for genera Bombus and Melissodes (Joshi et al 2015;McCravy et al 2019;Packer and Darla-West 2021). While our study only compared netting to bee bowls, future investigations into compositional differences between active and passive method capture could include additional methods, especially in mixed-grass prairie systems where methodological evaluations are lacking.…”

“…For example, past research in North America has assumed that netting techniques better represent larger bees likely due to their greater visibility to a collector, while passive methods may provide a greater relative representation of smaller bees (Cane et al 2000). However, studies that incorporate functional trait groupings of bees in methodological studies are often limited to studies comparing within passive methodologies only (Leong and Thorp 1999;Gonzalez et al 2016;McCravy et al 2019). Though species compositions can differ between passive methods such as bee bowls and vane traps (Rhoades et al 2017), differences between passive methods may be less discrete than between passive and active methods (McCravy et al 2019).…”

“…However, studies that incorporate functional trait groupings of bees in methodological studies are often limited to studies comparing within passive methodologies only (Leong and Thorp 1999;Gonzalez et al 2016;McCravy et al 2019). Though species compositions can differ between passive methods such as bee bowls and vane traps (Rhoades et al 2017), differences between passive methods may be less discrete than between passive and active methods (McCravy et al 2019). There is need for more research that compares functional differences between active and passive methods specifically (Rhoades et al 2017;O'Connor et al 2019) to ensure inferences from data gathered on this ecologically important group of species is accurate and representative as possible.…”