Abstract

Buzz-pollinated plants require visitation from vibration producing bee species to elicit full pollen release. Several important food crops are buzz-pollinated including tomato, eggplant, kiwi, and blueberry. Although more than half of all bee species can buzz pollinate, the most commonly deployed supplemental pollinator, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae; honey bees), cannot produce vibrations to remove pollen. Here, we provide a list of buzz-pollinated food crops and discuss the extent to which they rely on pollination by vibration-producing bees. We then use the most commonly cultivated of these crops, the tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L. (Solanales: Solanaceae), as a case study to investigate the effect of different pollination treatments on aspects of fruit quality. Following a systematic review of the literature, we statistically analyzed 71 experiments from 24 studies across different geopolitical regions and conducted a meta-analysis on a subset of 21 of these experiments. Our results show that both supplemental pollination by buzz-pollinating bees and open pollination by assemblages of bees, which include buzz pollinators, significantly increase tomato fruit weight compared to a no-pollination control. In contrast, auxin treatment, artificial mechanical vibrations, or supplemental pollination by non-buzz-pollinating bees (including Apis spp.), do not significantly increase fruit weight. Finally, we compare strategies for providing bee pollination in tomato cultivation around the globe and highlight how using buzz-pollinating bees might improve tomato yield, particularly in some geographic regions. We conclude that employing native, wild buzz pollinators can deliver important economic benefits with reduced environmental risks and increased advantages for both developed and emerging economies.

Highlights

  • Buzz-pollinated plants require visitation from vibration producing bee species to elicit full pollen release

  • Effect of Pollination Treatment on Tomato Weight Among the 73 experiments from 24 studies, 47.5% investigated the effect of pollination by vibration-producing bees on tomato fruit weight, 8.2% the effect of non-buzz pollinating, 18% the effect of open pollination, 21% the effect of mechanical vibrations, and 4.9% the effect of auxin application

  • We found a statistically significant increase in fruit weight in both open pollination and buzz-pollinating bee treatments on fruit weight (Fig. 1; Table 2, (A))

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Buzz-pollinated plants require visitation from vibration producing bee species to elicit full pollen release. We provide a list of buzz-pollinated food crops and discuss the extent to which they rely on pollination by vibration-producing bees. Auxin treatment, artificial mechanical vibrations, or supplemental pollination by non-buzz-pollinating bees (including Apis spp.), do not significantly increase fruit weight. Bee pollinators use vibrations generated by their thoracic muscles to efficiently remove pollen from flowers with specialized morphologies (Buchmann 1983, Vallejo-Marin 2019). The most important supplemental bee pollinator, the honey bee, is incapable of vibrating flowers to remove pollen (King and Buchmann 2003), and may have a reduced effectiveness as a pollinator of buzz-pollinated plants

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call