Sampling Native Bees in Proximity to a Highly Competitive Food Resource (Hymenoptera: Apiformes)

Stephen, W. P.; Rao, Sujaya

doi:10.2317/0022-8567(2007)80[369:snbipt]2.0.co;2

Cited by 57 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the use of pan trap sampling reveals numerous species not caught by hand-netting (Stephen & Rao 2007). Furthermore, some plant species in mixes likely serve as pollen and nectar sources for bee species, but were not represented in our remnants and thus we cannot estimate their contribution to restored prairies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Prairie restorations and bees: The potential ability of seed mixes to foster native bee communities

Harmon‐Threatt

Hendrix

2015

Basic and Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Prairie restorations and bees: The potential ability of seed mixes to foster native bee communities

Harmon‐Threatt

Hendrix

2015

Basic and Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We conducted 5 random transects of 50 sweeps apiece within each wetland per collection period to capture bees. Sweeps were conducted between 1100-1345 hrs (Stephen and Rao 2007) in 2015 and between 0900-1000 hrs (Roulston et al 2007) in 2016. Sweep net collection periods were altered between years because we observed bees were more active between 0730-1000 hrs during the previous year.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Checklist of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) from managed emergent wetlands in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley of Arkansas

Stephenson¹,

Griswold²,

Arduser³

et al. 2018

BDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHere we present the results from a two-year bee survey conducted on 18 managed emergent wetlands in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley of Arkansas, USA. Sample methods included pan traps, sweep netting and blue-vane traps. We document 83 bee species and morphospecies in 5 families and 31 genera, of which 37 species represent first published state records for Arkansas. The majority of species were opportunistic wetland species; only a small number were wetland-dependent species or species largely restricted to alluvial plains.New informationWe present new distributional records for bee species not previously recorded in managed emergent wetlands and report specimens of thirty-seven species for which no published Arkansas records exist, expanding the known ranges of Ceratina cockerelli, Diadasia enavata, Lasioglossum creberrimum, Svastra cressonii and Dieunomia triangulifera. We also distinguish opportunistic wetland bee species from wetland-dependent and alluvial plain-restricted species.

show abstract

“…Pitfall traps are a useful method for collecting surface-active arthropods (Fisher 1999;Ward et al 2001), and blue/yellow vane traps and sweep netting are efficient for collecting flying arthropods and arthropods inhabiting the vegetation (Haddad et al 2000;Stephen and Rao 2007). We used an ethylene glycol-based antifreeze solution for preserving the arthropods in both vane and pitfall traps, because of its low evaporation rate and easy availability in the study area.…”

Section: Arthropod Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural homegarden management practices mediate arthropod communities in Indonesia

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tropical forest loss and transformation to agroecosystems have serious impacts on biodiversity, associated ecosystem services and the livelihood of local people. The high crop plant biodiversity and low intensity management in many homegardens could play an important role in the preservation of biodiversity in modified landscapes, as well as sustain food security of low income households. In this study, we focused on the role of the owner's cultural background as migrants (from the island of Java) or non-migrants (local residents) for homegarden characteristics, such as size, management diversification, and crop species richness, and their effect on arthropod communities in Jambi province, Indonesia. Vane traps, pitfall traps and sweep netting were used to survey the arthropod communities, in particular bees and wasps, in 24 homegardens. Our results show that the native Jambi locals used a smaller number of management practices and had smaller homegardens than the Javanese transmigrants, whereas crop species richness did not differ. Management diversification and crop species richness were positively related to arthropod abundance as well as species richness of bees and wasps, presumably due to the enhanced homegarden heterogeneity. Our findings suggest that the cultural practices of migrant versus non-migrant land-use managers, which is usually neglected in agroecology, can be a major determinant of management practices shaping community structure and services of beneficial arthropods.

show abstract

Sampling Native Bees in Proximity to a Highly Competitive Food Resource (Hymenoptera: Apiformes)

Cited by 57 publications

References 8 publications

Prairie restorations and bees: The potential ability of seed mixes to foster native bee communities

Prairie restorations and bees: The potential ability of seed mixes to foster native bee communities

Checklist of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) from managed emergent wetlands in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley of Arkansas

Cultural homegarden management practices mediate arthropod communities in Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About