The effect of introduced honeybees on native bee visitation and fruit-set in Dillwynia juniperina (Fabaceae) in a fragmented ecosystem

Gross, C. L.

doi:10.1016/s0006-3207(01)00088-x

Cited by 110 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The great majority of the studies were carried out in areas where honey bees were introduced relatively recently (Wils, Lyons & Bell, 1990;Schwarz, Gross & Kukuk, 1991;Bailey, 1994;Roubik, 1996;Paton, 1999;Gross, 2001;Goulson, Stout & Kells, 2002;Inoue, Yokoyama & Washitani, 2008). There are a comparatively small number of studies from Europe and even fewer from the Mediterranean area, where there is a long history of beekeeping (Pechhacker & Zeillinger, 1994; Ingolf & Tscharnkte, 2000;Dupont et al, 2004;Shavit, Amots & Ne'eman, 2009;Hudewenz & Klein, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…floral resources, foraging behaviour, population density, fecundity). 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).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

show abstract

“…Two of the most observed visitors of dense inflorescences of P. spruceanum are Apis mellifera and Trigona sp., and the opportunistic behavior of such family (Apidae) has been reported in many habitats and associated with plant density and clusters (Ramalho 1990). Thought exotic honeybees can be important competitors of native pollinators (Carmo et al 2004), sometimes they have neutral or even beneficial effects on the pollination of native plants (Gross 2001, Dick et al 2003, Suzuki 2003, because of their high density, social organization and propensity for agricultural landscapes (Dick et al 2003). High temperatures around midday could result in high insect activity, as observed in this study, and this could lead to high visiting rates (Arroyo et al 1985).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive biology of Protium spruceanum (Burseraceae), a dominant dioecious tree in vegetation corridors in Southeastern Brazil

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-(Reproductive biology of Protium spruceanum (Burseraceae), a dominant dioecious tree in vegetation corridors in Southeastern Brazil). We investigated the reproductive biology of Protium spruceanum (Benth.) Engler in vegetation corridors of secondary Atlantic forest in Lavras, southern Minas Gerais State, Brazil. The reproductive phenology was investigated fortnightly over a one year period. Floral biology studies involved pollen viability analysis, nectar production, stigmatic receptivity, pollen tube growth, visiting insect species and visit rates. The small, pale yellowish flowers (0.3-0.4 cm diameter) are functionally unisexual and organized in dense inflorescences (ca. 45 flowers). P. spruceanum presented annual flowering between September and November. Staminate flowers supplied a high percentage of viable pollen (90.6%) and relatively abundant nectar (x = 4.5 µL). Pistillate flowers produced only nectar to flower visitors (x = 4.0 µL). The effective pollinators were Apis mellifera and Trigona sp. (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Pollen tubes of cross-pollinated flowers were observed entering the ovaries 48 h after pollination. The fruiting season is from October to March, with a peak in November, coinciding with the rainfall peak. Ecological implications of these findings, and alternative arguments to explain the high genetic diversity at regional landscape are discussed.Key words -dioecy, floral visitors, flowering, fruiting, secondary forest RESUMO -(Biologia reprodutiva de Protium spruceanum (Burseraceae), uma espécie arbórea dioica e dominante em corredores de vegetação no sudeste do Brasil). A fenologia e a biologia reprodutiva de Protium spruceanum (Benth.) Engl. foram avaliadas mediante observações quinzenais pelo período de um ano, em corredores de vegetação secundária em Lavras, sul de Minas Gerais. As análises da biologia floral compreenderam a viabilidade polínica, produção de néctar, receptividade estigmática, crescimento do tubo polínico, visitantes florais e taxas de visitas. As flores são pequenas (0,3-0,4 cm de diâmetro), de cor amarela clara, funcionalmente unissexuais e dispostas em densas inflorescências (média de 45 flores). P. spruceanum apresentou floração anual e massiva entre setembro e novembro. As flores estaminadas produzem alta porcentagem de pólen viável (90,6%) e quantidade de néctar (x = 4,5 µL). Flores pistiladas oferecem apenas néctar para os visitantes (x = 4,0 µL). Os polinizadores efetivos são Apis mellifera e Trigona sp. (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Os tubos polínicos de flores de polinização cruzada foram observados na base do estilete e no ovário após 48 h da polinização. A frutificação ocorre entre outubro e março, com pico em novembro, coincidindo com o período de maior precipitação. São discutidas as implicações ecológicas dos resultados e os argumentos para explicar a alta diversidade genética da espécie na paisagem local.Palavras-chave -dioicia, floração, floresta secundária, frutificação, visitantes florais

show abstract

“…Introduction of the honey bee (A. mellifera) in a crop could lead to competition with native pollinators for floral resources. For instance, honey bees lessened the availability of pollen and nectar of foraging sites, obliging other insects to forage elsewhere (Horskins and Turner, 1999;Gross, 2001). In another study, the presence of the honeybee, A. Mellifera, in pumpkin fields significantly reduced visits of Peponapis pruinosa, a pollinator of this crop (Artz et al, 2011).…”

Section: Limitations and Challenges Of The Use Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%