Competitive Interactions Between the Invasive European Honey Bee and Native Bumble Bees

Thomson, Diane M.

doi:10.1890/02-0626

Cited by 246 publications

(228 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

205

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Schaffer et al 1983;Thomson 2004;Goulson and Sparrow 2009;Hudewenz and Klein 2013). We found a positive co-variation between numbers of honeybees and bumblebees in urban gardens and flowerbeds at our study sites.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Bumblebees in the city: abundance, species richness and diversity in two urban habitats

Gunnarsson

Federsel

2014

J Insect Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bumblebees are well known for their contribution to the ecosystem service of pollination. In urban areas, green space management beneficial to pollinators can be an important step in sustaining large urban bee populations. The abundance, number of species and diversity of bumblebees (Bombus spp), as well as the abundance of honeybees (Apis mellifera), were studied in 13 urban gardens (including allotments) and 13 ornamental flowerbeds (in parks and green spaces) in the city centre of Gothenburg, Sweden. In total, 12 species of bumblebees were observed. Species richness was significantly higher in gardens than in flowerbeds, but diversity (Berger-Parker and Simpson indices) was higher in flowerbeds than in urban gardens. The abundance in gardens was significantly higher and approximately twice that found in flowerbeds. The number of honeybee individuals was positively correlated with the abundance of bumblebees. Neither species richness nor abundance of bumblebees was affected by site size. However, a high flowering frequency positively affected the total number of bumblebee and honeybee individuals at the sites. We conclude that urban gardens contribute to sustaining a high abundance of bumblebees in the city centre, and indirectly facilitates small scale urban food production. A pollinator-friendly management of urban green space with plentiful flowering may promote a community of bumblebees with high abundance and diversity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Bumblebees in the city: abundance, species richness and diversity in two urban habitats

Gunnarsson

Federsel

2014

J Insect Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…mellifera may directly and indirectly compete for ßoral resources with native bees in both natural and agricultural ecosystems worldwide (Paini 2004, Thomson 2004, Goulson and Sparrow 2009, Shavit et al 2009). Moreover, many empirical studies have documented various interspeciÞc behavioral interactions at ßowers and noted that these interactions may have both negative and positive implications for pollination success (Corbet et al 1995, Irwin andBrody 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Artz¹,

Hsu²,

Nault³

2011

Environ Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to identify bee species active in pumpkin Þelds in New York and to estimate their potential as pollinators by examining their foraging activity. In addition, we examined whether foraging activity was affected by either the addition of hives of the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., or by Þeld size. Thirty-Þve pumpkin (Cucurbita spp.) Þelds ranging from 0.6 to 26.3 ha, 12 supplemented with A. mellifera hives and 23 not supplemented, were sampled during peak ßowering over three successive weeks in 2008 and 2009. Flowers from 300 plants per Þeld were visually sampled for bees on each sampling date. A. mellifera, Bombus impatiens Cresson, and Peponapis pruinosa (Say) accounted for 99% of all bee visits to ßowers. A. mellifera and B. impatiens visited signiÞcantly more pistillate ßowers than would be expected by chance, whereas P. pruinosa showed no preference for visiting pistillate ßowers. There were signiÞcantly more A. mellifera visits per ßower in Þelds supplemented with A. mellifera hives than in Þelds not supplemented, but there were signiÞcantly fewer P. pruinosa visits in supplemented Þelds. The number of B. impatiens visits was not affected by supplementation, but was affected by number of ßowers per Þeld. A. mellifera and P. pruinosa visits were not affected by Þeld size, but B. impatiens visited fewer ßowers as Þeld size increased in Þelds that were not supplemented with A. mellifera hives. Declining A. mellifera populations may increase the relative importance of B. impatiens in pollinating pumpkins in New York.

show abstract

“…An additional causal factor might be because of the various methodologies applied to examine the potential effects of honey bees on wild bees (Aizen & Feinsinger, 1994;Roubik & Wolda, 2001;Thomson, 2004;Forup & Memmott, 2005;Shavit, Amots & Ne'eman, 2009;Gross, 2001). An indicated method to study the competition between honey bees and wild bees is the manipulation of hone-bee abundance by the introduction and/or removal of beehives (Schaffer et al, 1983;Thomson, 2004;Paini, Williams & Roberts, 2005;Shavit, Amots & Ne'eman, 2009). In the present study, we aimed to examine the impact of honey bees on wild bees.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) density on wild bee foraging behaviour

Goras

Tananaki

Dimou

et al. 2016

Journal of Apicultural Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A b s t r a c t Honey bees are globally regarded as important crop pollinators and are also valued for their honey production. They have been introduced on an almost worldwide scale. During recent years, however, several studies argue their possible competition with unmanaged pollinators. Here we examine the possible effects of honey bees on the foraging behaviour of wild bees on Cistus creticus flowers in Northern Greece. We gradually introduced one, five, and eight honey-bee hives per site, each containing ca. 20,000 workers. The visitation frequency and visit duration of wild bees before and after the beehive introductions were measured by flower observation. While the visitation frequencies of wild bees were unaffected, the average time wild bees spent on C. creticus increased with the introduction of the honey-bee hives. Although competition between honey bees and wild bees is often expected, we did not find any clear evidence for significant effects even in honey-bee densities much higher than the European-wide average of 3.1 colonies/km 2 .Keywords: Apis mellifera, Cistus creticus, competition, Mediterranean, native bees 1 Laboratory of Apiculture-Sericulture, School of Agriculture, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece 2 Laboratory of Biogeography and Ecology, Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, Greece INTRODUCTIONMost plant species depend on animal pollination for their reproduction . Plant-pollinator relationships are of great importance to ecosystem health (Costanza et al., 1997; Kearns, Inouye & Weser, 1998). During recent years, the biodiversity and number of native bees have been repeatedly reported to be in decline worldwide. The decline is mainly due to changes of agricultural activities such as changes in land use, modern agricultural practices, and pesticide use (Allen-Wardell et al., 1998;Potts et al., 2006;Kremen et al., 2007;Goulson et al., 2008; Brown & Paxton, 2009). Pollinator efficiency, and therefore, pollination effectiveness, is strongly related to the compatibility between flowers and their pollinators. Honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are extremely polylectic insects (Cane & Sipes, 2006) visiting and pollinating a variety of species (Crane, 1990;Free, 1993;Vaughton, 1992;Gross, 2001;Dupont et al., 2004). In addition, honey bees have been widely and successfully used as pollinators in crop systems (Free, 1993;Morse & Calderone, 2000;Artz, Hsu & Nault, 2011). Several studies, however, have shown that for certain plant species, honey bees are less efficient pollinators compared to wild flower visitors. The continued use of the honey bees and their possible competition with wild bees in natural areas might gradually affect both fauna and flora (Schaffer et al., 1983;Taylor & Whelan, 1988;Westerkamp, 1991;Vaughton, 1996;Gross & Mackay, 1998; Hansen, Olsen & Jones, 2002; Whelan, Ayre & Benyuon, 2009 Impact of honeybee density on wild bees Competition between honey bees and wild bees is believed to affect the foraging behaviour of wild bees. Consequently the fecundity...

show abstract

Competitive Interactions Between the Invasive European Honey Bee and Native Bumble Bees

Cited by 246 publications

References 63 publications

Bumblebees in the city: abundance, species richness and diversity in two urban habitats

Bumblebees in the city: abundance, species richness and diversity in two urban habitats

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Impact of honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) density on wild bee foraging behaviour

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About