Bumblebee Abundance Research Articles

Eating versus heating: a study of the allocation of workers between foraging and nest incubation in bumble bees

1. Bumble bees are important eusocial pollinators whose worker caste, fuelled by nectar sugar, accelerate colony growth through brood incubation, but allocating workers to nectar foraging could compromise nest thermoregulation in daytime and produce ‘incubator limitation’.2. We hypothesise that colonies in nectar‐poor habitats experience stronger incubator limitation by diverting workers from incubation to foraging, but this potential effect of habitat quality on colony fitness via task allocation is not fully understood.3. We therefore modelled levels of nectar foraging in relation to forage richness and theoretically estimated the impact of incubator‐limitation on colony fitness. Additionally, we investigated whether live colonies of bumble bees (Bombus terrestris) responded to manipulation of their sugar supply as if incubator‐limited.4. Model solutions for environmentally realistic scenarios showed that colonies allocate up to one third of workers to nectar foraging in order to avoid sugar starvation during sustained incubation. The incubator‐limitation that results can strongly reduce colony reproduction, but its impact depends on the temperature regime of the nesting habitat.5. Live colonies allocated between one sixth and one third of daytime worker effort to foraging and responded to sugar supplementation as if incubator‐limited.6. These findings suggest that forage richness and nest temperature relations could interact to affect the fitness of wild bumble bee colonies through incubator limitation. Our testable theory promises an integrative understanding of how forage quality and climate could govern the distribution and abundance of bumble bees and other eusocial insects that utilise brood incubation by their worker caste.

Effects of three flower field types on bumblebees and their pollen diets

Agri-environment schemes, like flower fields, have been implemented in the EU to counteract the dramatic decline of farmland biodiversity. Farmers in Lower Saxony, Germany, may receive payments for three flower field types: annual, perennial (five years old), and mixed flower fields composed of yearly alternating annual and biannual parts. We assessed the effectiveness of these flower field types in providing bumblebee foraging habitat compared to control cereal fields. We sampled bumblebees with transect walks and assessed the richness of exploited pollen plants using DNA meta-barcoding and direct observations.All flower field types enhanced bumblebee abundance and species richness compared to control fields but attracted mostly three generalist species. Although we expected highest benefits from the more heterogeneous mixed flower fields, abundance was highest in annual, only intermediate in mixed, and lowest in perennial flower fields. Bumblebee species richness did not differ between flower field types.Overall, the proportion of sown plants in pollen loads was surprisingly low (< 50%). Bombus pascuorum, but not B. terrestris agg., exploited 10% of the sown plant species in perennial, 36% in annual and 45% in mixed flower fields, respectively. Compared to direct observations, pollen samples revealed 4.5 times more visited plant species and thus assessed floral resource use more reliably. Plant species richness in pollen loads decreased with local flowering plant species richness and increased with proportion of annual crops in the landscape, potentially due to the exploitation of more diverse and scattered resources, including flowering crops, in homogenized landscapes to fulfil dietary requirements.Our results indicate that under the current management, both annual and mixed flower fields provide the most attractive food resources, while perennial flower fields offered the poorest foraging habitats. Conclusively, flower fields seem important but resources from the surrounding landscape are still needed to sustain bumblebees in agricultural landscapes.

Bumble bee species distributions and habitat associations in the Midwestern USA, a region of declining diversity

Bumble bees (Bombus spp.) are important pollinators, yet rapidly declining globally. In North America some species are thriving while others are nearing extinction. Recognizing subtle differences in species’ biology and responses to environmental factors is required to illuminate key threats and to understand their different population trajectories. We intensively surveyed bumble bees in Ohio, USA, along the receding southern boundary of many species’ ranges, to evaluate current conservation status of the state’s species. In 318 90-min field surveys across two consecutive years we observed 23,324 bumble bees of 10 species visiting 170 plant species. Habitat, landscape, latitude, and their interactions significantly influenced bumble bee abundance, species richness, and community composition during peak season. Sites planted with flowers yielded more bumble bee individuals and species than did sites not planted with bee food plants. Bombus impatiens, B. griseocollis, and B. bimaculatus comprised 93% of all observations. Their abundances all peaked in habitats planted with wildflowers, but there were species-specific responses to local and landscape factors. Three less common species (B. fervidus, B. vagans, and B. perplexus) were more likely to be found in forested landscapes, particularly in the northeastern portion of the state. Bombus perplexus was also affiliated with planted urban wildflower patches. These results provide a strong starting point for future monitoring and conservation intervention that targets less common species. A quantitative synthesis of detailed state-level and regional datasets would allow additional insight into broad scale patterns of diversity in bumble bee communities and species conservation trajectories.

Crop pollination services: Complementary resource use by social vs solitary bees facing crops with contrasting flower supply

AbstractMany farmers are facing high economic risks if pollinator declines continue or temporal and spatial variation in wild bee communities cause reduced pollination services. Co‐flowering crops might compete for pollinators, while they also might facilitate the delivery of pollination services. This rarely studied topic is of particular interest with respect to the foraging decisions of bees from different functional groups and when more sparsely and mass‐flowering crops are in bloom at the same time.The abundance of honey bees, bumble bees and solitary bees in strawberry fields was quantified with transect walks along a gradient of oilseed rape (OSR) availability (product of OSR land cover and temporally changing OSR flower cover). We established a pollination experiment with pollination treatments (open‐, wind‐ and self‐pollination) to study the effects of insect pollination on strawberry fruit weight and quality.Changes in OSR availability exhibited contrasting effects on social versus solitary bees in strawberry fields. Bumble bees and honey bees were less abundant in strawberry fields when OSR availability was high, whereas solitary bees were facilitated. With more strawberry flowers, we found more bees in general.When flowers were open‐pollinated, they resulted in heavier fruits with better commercial grades compared to wind‐ and self‐pollinated flowers. A higher bee abundance enhanced the strawberry fruit weight and quality but depended on flower order and variety.Synthesis and applications. Sparsely flowering crops may compete with mass‐flowering crops for social bee pollinators, while solitary pollinators in the field might be evenly facilitated. To ensure best fruit weight and quality, it can be beneficial to support bee abundance in the field. While some social and solitary bee species can be managed for pollination services, wild bees, in particular solitary species, should be conserved and promoted for stable crop pollination services in dynamic agricultural landscapes.

Differential effects of fertilisers on pollination and parasitoid interaction networks

Grassland fertilisation drives non-random plant loss resulting in areas dominated by perennial grass species. How these changes cascade through linked trophic levels, however, is not well understood. We studied how grassland fertilisation propagates change through the plant assemblage into the plant-flower-visitor, plant-leaf miner and leaf miner-parasitoid networks using a year's data collection from a long-term grassland fertiliser application experiment. Our experiment had three fertiliser treatments each applied to replicate plots 15m2 in size: mineral fertiliser, farmyard manure, and mineral fertiliser and farmyard manure combined, along with a control of no fertiliser. The combined treatment had the most significant impact, and both plant species richness and floral abundance decreased with the addition of fertiliser. While insect species richness was unaffected by fertiliser treatment, fertilised plots had a significantly higher abundance of leaf miners and parasitoids and a significantly lower abundance of bumblebees. The plant-flower-visitor and plant-herbivore networks showed higher values of vulnerability and lower modularity with fertiliser addition, while leaf miner-parasitoid networks showed a rise in generality. The different groups of insects were impacted by fertilisers to varying degrees: while the effect on abundance was the highest for leaf miners, the vulnerability and modularity of flower-visitor networks was the most affected. The impact on the abundance of leaf miners was positive and three times higher than the impact on parasitoids, and the impact on bumblebee abundance was negative and double the magnitude of impact on flower abundance. Overall, our results show that while insect species richness was unaffected by fertilisers, network structure changed significantly as the replacement of forbs by grasses resulted in changes in relative abundance across trophic levels, with the direction of change depending on the type of network. Synthesis. By studying multiple networks simultaneously, we were able to rank the relative impact of habitat change on the different groups of species within the community. This provided a more holistic picture of the impact of agricultural intensification and provides useful information when deciding on priorities for mitigation.

Forest fragmentation modifies the composition of bumblebee communities and modulates their trophic and competitive interactions for pollination

Understanding the effects of landscape fragmentation on global bumblebee declines requires going beyond estimates of abundance and richness and evaluating changes in community composition and trophic and competitive interactions. We studied the effects of forest fragmentation in a Scandinavian landscape that combines temperate forests and croplands. For that, we evaluated how forest fragmentation features (patch size, isolation and shape complexity, percentage of forest in the surroundings) as well as local flowering communities influenced bumblebee abundance, richness and community composition in 24 forest patches along a fragmentation gradient. In addition, we assessed the effect of fragmentation on bumblebee–plant network specialization (H2′), and potential inter- and intraspecific competition via shared plants. Patch isolation was associated with lower bumblebee abundance, whereas flower density was positively related to both bumblebee abundance and richness. Overall, forest fragmentation reduced the abundance of forest-specialists while increasing the abundance of open-habitat species. Patches with complex shapes and few flowers showed more generalized bumblebee–plant networks (i.e., fewer specific interactions). Patch shape complexity and the percentage of forest also modified inter- and intraspecific competitive interactions, with habitat generalists outcompeting forest specialists in fragmented areas. Understanding these mechanisms is necessary to anticipate to the impact of forest fragmentation on bumblebee decline.

Bumble bee (Bombus spp.) diversity differs between forested wetlands and clearcuts in the Acadian forest

Bumble bees (species of Bombus Latreille, 1802) are important pollinators that are generally in population decline, but species presence and relative abundance are unknown in forested wetlands of the Acadian forest. To address this knowledge gap, we sampled bumble bees in forested wetlands and harvested sites (clearcuts) using vane and pan traps. We collected 617 specimens representing 11 species. We also included observations from iNaturalist (n = 70) in disturbed sites. We found that species-specific abundance in Acadian forested wetlands differed significantly from that in harvested sites. Wet coniferous forests with moderate to high herbaceous cover had greater overall bumble bee abundance than harvest sites. Species interactions may also influence community structure: sites with higher abundance of Bombus borealis Kirby, 1837 and B. ternarius Say, 1837 had fewer B. fervidus (Fabricius, 1798); B. flavidus Eversmann, 1852; and B. terricola Kirby, 1837. Differences in presence and abundance of bumble bee species may be explained by forested wetlands having a greater variety of flowering plants than forest harvest sites.

Forest proximity supports bumblebee species richness and abundance in hemi-boreal agricultural landscape

To create effective conservation measures for pollinators, we need to understand how landscape structure affects their distribution. We examined the effects of forest proximity on bumblebee communities in a modern agricultural landscape in the forest-rich hemi-boreal region. We contrasted bumblebee communities in field margins located next to forest with margins located next to open habitats. We also assessed the effect of forest proportion in the surrounding landscape on bumblebee species richness and abundance. Additionally, the effects of margin area, and flower abundance, on the species richness and abundance of bumblebees were evaluated. Both the species richness and abundance were higher in the margins next to forest compared to the margins next to open habitats. Higher proportion of forest in the surrounding landscape, as well as larger margin area and higher flower abundance, also resulted in the higher species richness and abundance of bumblebees. Importantly, these positive responses to increasing forest cover and habitat quality occurred only, or were considerably stronger, in the margins next to forest. In conclusion, our results show that the proximity of forest favours the species richness and abundance of bumblebees in modern agricultural hemi-boreal landscapes. The proportion of forest cover in the region should be considered while developing landscape-level conservation strategies, and margins next to forest should be given priority while planning local conservation measures.

Urban bumble bees are unaffected by the proportion of intensely developed land within urban environments of the industrial Midwestern USA

Urban environments have become an unexpected and promising avenue for pollinator conservation. One group of pollinators, bumble bees, might be especially well suited to utilize the heterogeneous landscape of urban ecosystems. Weedy margins (pervious land adjacent to impervious surfaces such as roads and paved lots) offer plentiful flowers for bees, but are often overlooked in urban pollinator studies. If weedy margins buffer urban bees from loss and fragmentation of foraging habitat in cities, then urban development may not have as strong of a negative effect on bumble bees as previously thought. In this study we test the hypothesis that bumble bee abundance and species richness in these weedy margins will not be affected by the degree of urbanization. We surveyed bees and flowers within weedy plots of land in six industrial cities of the Midwestern USA. Bumble bee abundance and richness were not influenced by the proportion of intensely developed land in the surrounding landscape, but abundance increased with local floral abundance. Bumble bees were also significantly more abundant than other bee groups (honeybees and ‘other’ wild bees). We found that weedy margins and weedy plant species provide important resources to urban pollinators, and to bumble bees in particular. If small patches of habitat can sustain bees in the city, future efforts of urban pollinator conservation could focus on the installation of high-quality micro-meadows, increasing the availability of quality habitat for pollinators.

Foraging of honey bees in agricultural landscapes with changing patterns of flower resources

The demand for crop pollination is increasing and honey bees are frequently used, in particular as wild pollinators are in decline. Temporal and spatial variation of flower resources affects foraging decisions of wild and honey bees. To optimise crop pollination management a better understanding of potential competition for pollinators in mass- and minor-flowering crops is needed.We combined waggle dance decoding, pollen load analysis and field surveys to identify the habitat preferences and pollen use of honey bees in response to spatio-temporal changes in resource availability. Observation hives were placed on the edge of eleven fields of blooming strawberries (mean 2.24 ha) located in landscapes with different amounts of oilseed rape (OSR), semi-natural habitats (SNH) and apple trees in Germany. In addition, we surveyed honey bees and wild bees in strawberry fields.Honey bee dances more often indicated strawberry, OSR fields and SNH than expected given their landscape-wide areas. Honey bees collected on average 7.9 % strawberry, 49.0 % OSR, 30.2 % Pyrus type (e.g. apple) and 12.9 % other pollen types. The mean honey bee foraging distance was 740 m, and decreased with OSR availability. In the observation hives, dances for strawberry fields were not directly affected by OSR availability or SNH land cover. But large amounts of OSR reduced overall honey bee and bumble bee abundance in strawberry fields, while solitary bees were unaffected. Bumble bees were most abundant in strawberry fields (54.1%) and together with solitary bees (19.7%) they represented about 75.0% of the observed bees.Minor-flowering strawberry fields represent a preferred resource for honey bees, especially for small colonies as indicated by decoding of waggle dances. However, the availability of more attractive OSR and local strawberry flower cover moderates the abundance of social bees (honey bees and bumble bees) in strawberry fields while other wild bees were less affected. Hence, we conclude that wild bee conservation plays a major role for strawberry pollination. If pollination services by solitary bees are limited, small honey bee hives can be used scrupulously to supplement pollination services in strawberries.

Bumble bee abundance and richness improves honey bee pollination behaviour in sweet cherry

Pollination service in agricultural crops increases significantly with pollinator diversity and wild pollinator abundance. Differences in the foraging behaviour of pollinating insects are one of the reasons why pollinator diversity and abundance enhances crop pollination. Here, we focused on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees in sweet cherry orchards. In addition, we studied the influence of bee diversity and abundance on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees. Honey bees were found to visit fewer flowers than bumble bees. Bumble bees also showed a higher probability of changing trees between rows than honey bees. Both visitation rate and probability of row changes of honey bees increased with bumble bee diversity and with bumble bee abundance. We also found that the probability of row changes of honey bees increased with increasing bumble bee abundance. These effects of bumble bee richness and abundance on the pollination behaviour of honey bees can improve the pollination performance of honey bees in crops that depend on cross pollination. Our results highlight the higher pollination performance of bumble bees and the facilitative effect of wild pollinators to crop pollination.

Management of mountainous meadows associated with biodiversity attributes, perceived health benefits and cultural ecosystem services

Associations between biodiversity, human health and well-being have never been discussed with reference to agriculturally managed, species-rich mountainous meadows. We evaluated these associations between extensively managed (one mowing a year, no fertilization) and abandoned (no mowing since more than 80 years, no fertilization) semi-dry meadows located in the Austrian and Swiss Alps. We quantified the richness and abundance of plants, grasshoppers, true bugs, bumblebees, syrphids and landscape characteristics in the surroundings of the meadows. Associations between these biodiversity attributes and short-term psychological and physiological human health effects were assessed with 22 participants (10 males, 12 females; mean age 27 years). Participants´ pulse rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were not affected during visits to managed or abandoned meadows. However, perceived health benefits (e.g., stress reduction, attention restoration) were higher during their stays in managed than in abandoned meadows. Also, the attractiveness of the surrounding landscape and the recreation suitability were rated higher when visiting managed meadows. Perceived naturalness was positively correlated with plant richness and flower cover. A positive correlation was found between SBP and forest cover, but SBP was negatively correlated with the open landscape. A negative association was found between grasshoppers and recreational and landscape perceptions. We suggest to discuss biodiversity attributes not only in connection with agricultural management but also with cultural ecosystem services and health benefits to raise more awareness for multifaceted interrelationships between ecosystems and humans.

Assessing agri-environmental schemes for semi-natural grasslands during a 5-year period: can we see positive effects for vascular plants and pollinators?

An important function of agri-environmental schemes (AES) is to change management of pastures to better conserve biodiversity. However, the effects of most AES on biodiversity are poorly understood, especially when it comes to effects of AES management over time. The main aim of this study is to investigate if the species richness and abundance of grassland specialists of vascular plants and two important insect pollinator groups (bumblebees and butterflies) differ over time (5 years) in pastures with AES management (two value levels; general values and special values) and pastures without AES management. We also investigate if local vegetation characteristics and landscape composition relate to species richness in semi-natural grasslands. Using data from more than 400 sites we found that species richness of vascular plants (grassland specialists) was higher in pastures with AES management (for special and general values) compared to those without AES, which implies that these schemes do have value of the conservation of plant diversity. However, species richness and abundance of butterflies (grassland specialists) and bumblebees (all species) did not differ significantly among the three AES categories. We found no evidence that the type of AES management caused any changes in species richness of plants, butterflies or bumblebees during the 5 year period of our investigation. It appears that AES management that encourages uniform and minimum levels of grazing can have both positive and negative effects on biodiversity. For example, pollinators may benefit from a lower grazing intensity that could increase flower richness and heterogeneity in vegetation height. However, low grazing intensity may lead to increased cover of trees and shrubs, which can have negative effects for both insect pollinators and vascular plants. The effects of landscape composition were weak and only species richness of bumble bees were associated with landscape composition. Designing management regimes to maintain suitably heterogeneous vegetation layer, and continued long-term monitoring of biodiversity will be critical for safeguarding culturally and functionally important semi-natural grasslands.

Agricultural field margins provide food and nesting resources to bumble bees (Bombus spp., Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Southwestern Ontario, Canada

Abstract Bumble bees are declining globally, largely due to habitat loss driven by agricultural intensification. Within agriculturally dominated landscapes, semi‐natural habitats (e.g. meadows, wetland edges) are fragmented, increasing the value of uncropped agricultural field margins for providing a source of food, nesting, and hibernation resources to bumble bees. We compared bumble bee communities sampled in agricultural field margins and semi‐natural habitats across Southwestern Ontario, Canada in order to assess differences in habitat quality. We then examined the effect of floral resources and soil characteristics on the bumble bee communities present in each site, independent of the habitat type classification. Our data revealed that bumble bee abundance, diversity, and community composition did not differ between habitat types. However, when examined independently of habitat type, bumble bee abundance and diversity increased with floral abundance, floral diversity, the number of rodent holes, and sandy soil texture. These results suggest that agricultural field margins are not inherently degraded bumble bee habitat and have the potential to provide food and nesting resources comparable to semi‐natural habitats in a fragmented agricultural landscape. Ensuring field margins contain the necessary floral resources and soil characteristics for bumble bees has implications for conservation and mitigating habitat loss caused by the agricultural fields themselves.

Pollinators on the polar edge of the Ecumene: taxonomy, phylogeography, and ecology of bumble bees from Novaya Zemlya.

The High Arctic bumble bee fauna is rather poorly known, while a growing body of recent molecular research indicates that several Arctic species may represent endemic lineages with restricted ranges. Such local endemics are in need of special conservation efforts because of the increasing anthropogenic pressure and climate changes. Here, we re-examine the taxonomic and biogeographic affinities of bumble bees from Novaya Zemlya using historical samples and recently collected materials (1895–1925 vs. 2015–2017). Three bumble bee species inhabit the Yuzhny (Southern) Island and the southern edge of Severny (Northern) Island of this archipelago: Bombusglacialis Friese, 1902, B.hyperboreus Schönherr, 1809, and B.pyrrhopygus Friese, 1902. Bombusglacialis shares three unique COI haplotypes that may indicate its long-term (pre-glacial) persistence on Novaya Zemlya. In contrast, Bombushyperboreus and B.pyrrhopygus share a rather low molecular divergence from mainland populations, with the same or closely related haplotypes as those from Arctic Siberia and Norway. A brief re-description of Bombuspyrrhopygus based on the newly collected topotypes is presented. Habitats, foraging plants and life cycles of bumble bees on Novaya Zemlya are characterized, and possible causes of extremely low bumble bee abundance on the archipelago are discussed. The species-poor bumble bee fauna of Novaya Zemlya is compared with those in other areas throughout the Arctic. The mean bumble bee species richness on the Arctic Ocean islands is three times lower than that in the mainland Arctic areas (3.1 vs. 8.6 species per local fauna, respectively). General linear models (GLMs) indicate that this difference can be explained by specific environmental conditions of insular areas. Our findings highlight that the insularity is a significant factor sharply decreasing species richness in bumble bee assemblages on the Arctic Ocean archipelagoes through colder climate (lower summer temperatures), prevalence of harsh Arctic tundra landscapes with poor foraging resources, and in isolation from the mainland.

Bumblebee Communities (Apidae, Bombini) in Urban Parks in Relation to Park Area and Other Characteristics

The diversity and abundance of bumblebees (Bombus Latr.) in eight parks of Warsaw city and the impact of park size (range from 1.9 to 73 ha) as well as other selected characteristics (the percentage of the area covered by tree and the quality of park surroundings) on the bumblebee community were evaluated. In each park, bumblebees were observed along designated paths for 30 minutes. In total, 12 species of bumblebees were recorded, of which four belonged to cuckoo bumblebees (Psithyrus subgenus). We found: B. terrestris (L.), B. lapidarius, (L.), B. pascuorum (Scop.), B. hortorum (L.), B. semenoviellus (Skorikov), B. hypnorum (L.), B. ruderarius (Muller), B. pratorum (L.) and four cuckoo bumblebee species: B. (Ps.) bohemicus (Seidl.), B. (Ps.) campestris (Pz.), B. (Ps.) rupestris (F.), B. (Ps.) vestalis (Fourc.).The size of parks, percentage of area covered by trees, and characteristics of the areas surrounding the parks were found to be not significant for the diversity and abundance of bumblebees in urban parks. However, our results indicate the importance of the semi-natural areas within the parks for the species diversity.

The effect of management practices on bumblebee densities in hedgerow and grassland habitats

Large-scale declines in pollinator species are a concern at present. Such declines have been attributed to a range of factors that act in tandem, rather than in isolation. Some of the most pervasive factors affecting pollinator populations are habitat loss and degradation, which results in the loss of floral resources, nesting sites and landscape connectivity. Intensification of agriculture and urbanisation are two major causes of such habitat alterations. Hedgerows and grasslands are two vital habitats for pollinators in European landscapes. When managed appropriately, these habitats may provide abundant floral resources and nesting opportunities, as well as connectivity between habitats in a fragmented landscape. This study examined the effects that management practices of hedgerows and grasslands may have on bumblebee species, an important group of wild pollinators. Bumblebee abundance was recorded using transect walks in managed and unmanaged sites, including both hedgerows and grasslands. Greater densities of bumblebees were found in unmanaged grasslands in comparison to managed grasslands. Unmanaged hedgerows were also found to have a greater density of bumblebees than managed hedgerows. These results indicate that sites which are less intensively managed provide a more suitable habitat for bumblebees. Therefore, our study underlines the importance of (a) enforcing restrictions on hedge-cutting, and (b) reducing the management intensity of grasslands to provide adequate habitat for pollinators.

Maize‐dominated landscapes reduce bumblebee colony growth through pollen diversity loss

Abstract Bumblebees are important pollinators for a wide range of crops and wild plants. Performance of their colonies depends on pollen and nectar as food resources, but flowering plants are scarce in modern agricultural landscapes. It is well‐known that semi‐natural habitats can enhance floral resources and bumblebee abundance, but the impact of different crop types and their heterogeneity at the landscape scale remains unclear. We tested the effect of two different crop types (oilseed rape [OSR] and maize) and of configurational (field border density) and compositional heterogeneity (crop diversity) on weight gain of buff‐tailed bumblebee colonies (Bombus terrestris) and the pollen diversity collected by them in 20 landscapes in Central Germany. We found that augmenting maize cover had a detrimental effect on pollen diversity collected by bumblebees, probably due to intensive management resulting in low plant diversity. This low pollen diversity translated into reduced colony growth, since colonies with high pollen diversity gained more weight than colonies with low pollen diversity. In contrast, OSR cover and configurational and compositional heterogeneity did neither affect colony growth nor pollen diversity. However, for OSR, the timing of the flowering period was important. When OSR fields had a high flower cover at the end of the OSR blooming period, colonies showed increased growth rates. Synthesis and applications. Our results complement previous laboratory studies by showing that high pollen diversity leads to better colony performance under field conditions. Therefore, the maintenance of floral diversity in agricultural landscapes is crucial to ensure that bumblebees can fulfil their nutritional needs. However, the heterogeneity of crops, at least under the currently very low levels of crop rotation, does not contribute to this aim. In contrast, crop identity and timing of mass‐flowering crops turned out to be important factors, as maize reduced pollen resources, while late blooming oilseed rape (OSR) was beneficial to bumblebee colonies. Hence, maize cover per landscape should be reduced and strategies to enhance landscape wide flower diversity, especially towards and after the end of oilseed rape bloom, should be promoted to support bumblebee colonies that provide important pollination services.

The impact of spatio-temporal changes in flora attributes and pollen availability on insect visitors in Lamiaceae species

Abstract There is growing evidence that food, in particular pollen, limitation is the strongest factor in pollinator decline. We have considered the potential effects of diversity in plant-community attributes as well as variations in the pollen and energy amount on the abundance and frequency of insect visitors to the Lamiaceae species Salvia pratensis L., S. verticillata L., Thymus serpyllum L., Betonica officinalis L. syn. Stachys officinalis (L.) Trevis., and Origanum vulgare L. The species were grown in two different habitat types (dry grassland vs. railway embankment) in the Lublin Upland, Poland. We found significant inter-species, inter-habitat, and inter-year disparities in the pollen mass and total energy amount per unit area. Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) revealed that the blossom cover, species richness, and diversity noted at the plant community level significantly influenced the distribution of insect visitors to Lamiaceae species. The pollen caloric value and pollen abundance (but not the protein content in the pollen) had a considerable impact on the abundance and frequency of honeybees, bumblebees, and solitary bees in Lamiaceae flowers. Butterflies, beetles and flies did not respond to these factors. The model including all variables explained 66.4% of the observed variance. The studied Lamiaceae species, due to abundant flowering and good pollen nutritional value should be considered in the protocols to improve food resources, especially for social bees; however, disparities in pollen quantity and energy amount should not be ignored.

Pollinator visitation to mass-flowering courgette and co-flowering wild flowers: Implications for pollination and bee conservation on farms

Managing the complex relationship between pollinators and their habitat requirements is of particular concern to growers of pollinator-dependent crop species, such as courgette (Cucurbita pepo). Naturally occurring wild flowers (i.e. agricultural weeds) offer a free, sustainable, and often underappreciated resource for pollinators, however, they may compete with crop flowers for visits. To understand the extent to which floral resources mediate pollinator visitation to courgette flowers and courgette fields, plant community and pollinator visitation data were collected at two spatial scales: field scale (in margins, and in the cropped area) and farm scale (500m and 2000m radii) for nine courgette fields across the UK. Apis mellifera (honeybees) and Bombus spp. (bumblebees) were the only pollinators observed to visit courgette flowers. Bumblebees were significantly more abundant on courgette flowers in fields with a greater species richness of wild flowers in the crop, whilst honeybees were significantly more abundant on courgette flowers in areas with less semi-natural habitat. For both honeybees and bumblebees, their abundance in field margins did not significantly reduce their abundance on courgette flowers, suggesting that wild flowers were not competing with courgette flowers for pollinator visitation. Although solitary bees were not observed to visit courgette flowers, their abundance and species richness in courgette fields were significantly greater with more semi-natural habitat and a greater species richness of wild flowers. Therefore, allowing uncultivated areas around the crop to be colonised by species-rich wild flowers is an effective way of boosting the abundance of bumblebees, which are important visitors to courgette flowers, as well as the abundance and species richness of solitary bees, thereby benefitting pollinator conservation.