Ecology Of Bees Research Articles

Studies on the ecology of social wasps and bees in urban environments 1. Records on aerial nests of the giant hornet, Vespa mandarinia japonica (Hymenoptera : Vespidae) within human buildings

Studies on the ecology of social wasps and bees in urban environments 1. Records on aerial nests of the giant hornet, Vespa mandarinia japonica (Hymenoptera : Vespidae) within human buildings

Biologia e ecologia de Anthodioctes moratoi Urban (Hymenoptera, Megachilidae, Anthidiini) em matas contínuas e fragmentos na Amazônia Central, Brasil

Anthodioctes moratoi Urban, 1999 was described based on specimens collected in tlhe state of Amazonas during a study of the ecology of trap-nesting bees and wasps. Sampling was done between 1988 and 1990 north of Manaus, in areas of the Forest Fragment Biological Dynamics Project. Wooden trap-nests were set in different heights inside continuous forests, forest fragments of different sizes, natural gaps inside continuous forest, and in cleared areas between forest fragments. A total of 61 nests were collected from which 33 males and 46 females emerged. The majority of nests was collected in continuous forests, at 15 m height, in holes 4.8 mm in diameter. No nest was collected in cleared areas. There was no correlation, neither between number of nests and monthly precipitation, nor between the monthly number of nests constructed in the two consecutive years. No nest was constructed between January and June 1989. Overall, this coincided with the period of least activity of other trap-nesting bees in the studied areas. The nests consisted of a linear series of brood cells with walls made of resinous material mixed with small wood chips. The average length of the provisioned cell was 13,4 mm. Half of this length was occupied by a pollen mass. The number of provisioned cells varied between two and nine. In 52% of the nests there was brood mortality in at least one cell. The phorid fly Phalacrotophora (Omapanta) sp. was the only nest associate, emerged, from just one cell.

Nest and colony characteristics of log-hived Melipona beecheii (Apidae: Meliponinae)

SUMMARYThe log hives of 19 colonies of the stingless bee Melipona beecheii were opened and adult and brood populations, stored nectar and pollen, and other nest characteristics were recorded. Adult populations were found to be between 500 and 2500. The presence of queen pupae in the brood and the size of the brood nest were found to be positively correlated. Adult gynes and males were seldom observed. Brood populations were generally found to be two to four times the number of adult bees. Honey stores were often smaller than pollen stores, and only few colonies contained more than 1litre. The volume of the cavity of the hives was between 5 litres and 16 litres. Blackened and useless pollen was found in several nests, usually in the bigger ones. New for Central American species of Melipona is the description of radiating entrance structures. The ultimate function of several nest structures is discussed in relation to the typical stingless bee biology and ecology. Recommendations for hive design are made.

Monitoring Solitary Bees in Modified Wildland Habitats: Implications for Bee Ecology and Conservation

The long-term goal of this study was to use solitary bees to assess the impact of advancing Africanized honey bees (Apis mellifcra scutcllata Lepeletier) on the native California bee fauna. Cavity-nesting, solitary bee species were systematically monitored in wooden trap nests at 6 sites in northern central California from 1990 to 1992. Three sites were in the San Joaquin Valley in wildlife refuges or preserves; 3 were in coastal mountain or Sierran foothill parks or reserves. Differences in frequencies of nesting bees were observed and recorded among sites and habitats through time. A Poisson regression indicated that all explanatory variables and their 1st order interactions were highly significant. There were significant differences among bee taxa, sites and years, and their interactions (bee X site; bee X year; site X year). Mcgachile species were the predominant cavity nesters in the 3 valley sites; Osmia species were the common group in coastal mountain I foothill sites. In a computer simulation, using a variation of the Poisson regression, several significant differences were also observed between yearly frequency counts for certain bee species at the same site. Possible reasons for year to year changes included differential natural mortality, extreme annual weather patterns, use of marginal habitats, and negative impacts from exotic solitary bee species. Three exotic megachilids (Mcgachile rotundata (F.), M. apicalis Spinola, and M. concinna Smith) have successfully invaded and become established in California. Possibly, M. apicalis has affected other cavity nesting bee species, including the exotic M. rotundata in our Central Valley sites.

Roland L. Fischer

Roland L. Fischer, pro fessor of entomology and curator, Entomology Museum, Michigan State University, died 3 June 1992 of complications following heart surgery. Fischer was born 9 September 1924 in Detroit, MI, and graduated from the University of Michigan in 1946 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Zoology. He taught high school biology in Greenville, MI, from 1946 to 1947 before entering graduate school. Fischer received a Master of Science degree in entomology from Michigan State University in 1949 and a Doctor of Philosophy degree in entomology from Kansas State University in 1951. He was a research associate with Charles Michener at the University of Kansas for several months before becoming a research fellow in entomology at the University of Minnesota from 1951–1953, where he studied the pollination ecology of wild bees in alfalfa in northwestern Minnesota. In 1953, Fischer accepted a position as assistant professor and curator in the Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, where he concentrated his efforts on teaching, building the insect collection and guiding 28 M.S. and Ph.D. students.

Tropical Bee Ecology

Tropical Bee Ecology

Warm-Up Rates and Body Temperatures in Bees: The Importance of Body Size, Thermal Regime and Phylogeny

ABSTRACT We assess the importance of body mass and the minimum ambient temperature at which foraging occurs in determining the warm-up rates and thoracic temperatures in flight at an air temperature of 22 °C of 55 species of bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) from six families adapted to a variety of thermal environments. To control for the effects of taxonomic differences in the relationships between these variables, we use multiple regression incorporated in the phylogenetic regression method developed by Grafen (1989). The prediction made by May (1976) that for very small heterotherms warmup rate will correlate positively with body mass is confirmed when the effects of phylogeny and the thermal environment to which the bee is adapted have been controlled for. The relationship between warm-up rate and body mass within the Apoidea is thus not an extension to lower body masses of the relationship found for heterothermic vertebrates. Having controlled for the effects of body mass in our analyses, we demonstrate that bees able to fly at lower ambient temperatures have higher thoracic temperatures and warm-up rates than bees adapted to warmer environments. There is some suggestion that kleptoparasitic bees, being freed from the need to forage in order to provision cells, have lower warm-up rates than provisioning species. The significance of these relationships in the ecology of bees is discussed in relation to studies of body temperatures and warm-up rates in bees and other insects.

The Ecology and Sociobiology of Bumble Bees

The bumble bees (genus Bombus Latreille) and their parasites (genus Psithyrus Lepeletier) comprise a group of several hundred species found primarily in north temperate regions. During the past 25 years, no less than 5 books on the general biology of bumble bees have appeared (2,34,57,81,101). Various aspects of bumble bee biology have been covered as part of more general reviews: bees as pollinators (80), the energetics of pollination (54, 61), forag­ ing and mating behavior (3 1), the sociobiology (121,226,227), biogeography (104), and social behavior (105) of bees, and bees as crop pollinators (33, 102). In addition, the bionomic characteristics of the group have been discussed by Sakagami (186). Morse ( l16a) recently reviewed the ecology and behavior of bumble bees and Milliron (108) gave a relatively complete bibliography of bumble bee literature prior to 1962. Our purpose in the present review has been to provide a guide to, and some critical assessment of, part of the literature on the genus Bombus that has appeared during the past decade. We have concentrated primarily on two areas in which research activity has been particularly high: (a) social behavior and (b) evolutionary ecology, within which we have treated foraging behavior exten­ sively, both because of the volume of recent work and because of current interest in bumble bees as components in the ecology of pollination. Limita­ tions of space precluded the incorporation of several important aspects of bumble bee biology, such as sensory physiology, mating behavior, parasites and commensals, biogeography, and biosystematics.

Foraging Ecology of Bees in an Old Field

In an abandoned field near Ithaca, New York, bee species partitioned the available flower resources, primarily by foraging at different times of the season and by visiting different flower species. Honey bees (Apis mellifera) concentrated on different flower species than did native bees. In spring, most flowers bloomed along roadsides, in cultivated fields, or in forests. Many were clustered in spatial distribution and had short blooming times. Spring—flying native bees included many species adapted to forage on native flower species that bloom before the tree canopy closes. Apis mellifera, an introduced species, appeared to outcompete native bees at large clusters of attractive flower species such as apple and the crucifer Barbarea vulgaris. Blooming of introduced herbs increased in the field in early summer. This period of resource abundance was exploited primarily by primitively eusocial halictine bees. The multivoltine seasonal cycle of these bees allowed them to build populations over the season and to forage in large numbers in early and mid summer. Halictus ligatus was the most common early summer halictine. This species concentrated its foraging on different flowers than did other early summer bees, probably because of differences in innate flower preferences. A profuse bloom of native goldenrods in late summer was the seasonal peak of resource abundance. Honey bees partitioned goldenrod species with late summer native bees on the basis of flowering time. Native bees must complete their seasonal cycles and enter diapause before the killing frost. They therefore foraged on early—blooming goldenrod species such as Solidago juncea. In contrast, honey bees overwinter as active bees within their hives. They were most common on later—blooming goldenrods, where they collected much of the nectar required for overwintering. Competition among foraging bees was probably most important in the spring at this site. Partitioning of flower species and differences in seasonal flight times resulted primarily from differences in innate flower preferences, number of generations per season, and means of overwintering.

Taxonomy and ecology of Ceratinini of North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Abstract A key, synonymy, descriptions and distributions are given for twelve species of Ceratina (Euceratina), including three new species, C.maghrebensis, C.neocallosa, C.saundersi; two species of Ceratina (Ceratina, s.s.); and two species of Pithitis. A neotype is designated for C.callosa and lectotypes for C.callosa algeriensis, C.chalybea, C.cyanea imitatrix, C.decolorans, C.laevifrons moricei, C.mocsaryi and C.nigrolabiata. Ecology of bees in overwintering nests in Tunisia is discussed. Evidence is given for congeneric interference competition for nesting substrates and resource partitioning. C.dallatorreana is shown to reproduces probably entirely by thelytoky and thus is unique among Apoidea.

Historical Development of Bee ForagingPatterns in Central New York State

markedly in the past few centuries. The impetus for this change came largely from human activities, notably from introductions of foreign species and modifications of the regional flora. Several bee species, most notably the honey bee (Apis mellifera), were introduced into this region (Crane 1975; Linsley 1958). Honey bees can powerfully influence the foraging patterns of native bees (Pearson 1933; Eickwort and Ginsberg 1980). Replacement of forests over large areas by cities and farms (Ferguson and Mayer 1970; Vaughan 1929) and numerous introductions of alien plant species (Wiegand and Eames 1925) have resulted in major changes in northeastern plant communities. How broad were these changes and how have they influenced the foraging ecology of northeastern bees? What was this area like before the European settlers arrived? The answers to these questions are vital to an understanding ofcontemporary bee foraging patterns and of community level interactions between flowers and their pollinators. The purpose of this paper is to describe some general trends in the foraging patterns of Apoidea in central New York State, and to interpret them in terms of the historical development of the flora and bee fauna of the region.

The ecology of solitary bees

Bees play an important and necessary role in the pollination of agricultural crops grown for fruit and seed and of forage and browse plants important in range management for production of both livestock and game animals. Nearly 20,000 different kinds of bees are now known, some, like the imported honey bee, the bumble bees, and the stingless bees of the tropics, are social and live together in colonies subject to manipulation and movement from place to place. However, by far the majority of bees are solitary, living in burrows in the ground, in wood, or in plant stems, where they store pollen and nectar as food for their young. Many of these take pollen only from certain kinds of plants and are very efficient pollinators of these. Others, like the honey bee, visit a wide variety of pollen plants, both native and introduced. Although management procedures have been developed for certain crops in certain areas which permit the effective use of honey bees for increased production through better pollination, these are not universally applicable to our agriculture as a whole. For certain crops, both cultivated and wild, supplemental pollination is necessary. The development of management procedures which will permit increased utilization of native solitary bees and perhaps lead to the importation of foreign species native to the areas in which our agricultural crops originated, requires a detailed knowledge of the ecology, or environmental relationships, of these bees. This article is intended to review as briefly as possible, the current status of our knowledge of the subject and to indicate published papers in which various aspects may be pursued further. Prominence has been given to publications of the last fifteen years and to those which are most comprehensive and include references to earlier literature. Factors which appear to have had an influence in the economy, evolution, and survival of solitary bees have been especially emphasized.

The Excessive Abundance of Certain Bees

Previous article No AccessShorter Articles and DiscussionThe Excessive Abundance of Certain BeesT. D. A. CockerellT. D. A. Cockerell Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 67, Number 710May - Jun., 1933 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/280490 Views: 4Total views on this site Citations: 4Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Jerome G. Rozen Nesting Biologies and Mature Larvae of Oxaeine Bees (Apoidea: Andrenidae), American Museum Novitates 3893, no.38933893 (Feb 2018): 1–31.https://doi.org/10.1206/3893.1Shahla Farzan Progeny Density and Nest Availability Affect Parasitism Risk and Reproduction in a Solitary Bee (Osmia lignaria) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae), Environmental Entomology 47, no.11 (Dec 2017): 70–76.https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvx189Laura Sarzetti, Jorge Genise, Maria Victoria Sanchez Nest architecture of Oxaea austera (Andrenidae, Oxaeinae) and its significance for the interpretation of Uruguayan fossil bee cells, Journal of Hymenoptera Research 39 (Sep 2014): 59–70.https://doi.org/10.3897/JHR.39.8201E. Gorton Linsley The ecology of solitary bees, Hilgardia 27, no.1919 (Feb 2014): 543–599.https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v27n19p543

The Color Sense of the Honey-Bee: Is Conspicuousness an Advantage to Flowers?

Previous articleNext article FreeThe Color Sense of the Honey-Bee: Is Conspicuousness an Advantage to Flowers?John H. LovellJohn H. Lovell Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 43, Number 510Jun., 1909 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/279064 Views: 147Total views on this site Citations: 2Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:E. Gorton Linsley The ecology of solitary bees, Hilgardia 27, no.1919 (Feb 2014): 543–599.https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v27n19p543 John H. Lovell The Color Sense of the Honey-Bee: Can Bees Distinguish Colors?, The American Naturalist 44, no.527527 (Sep 2015): 673–692.https://doi.org/10.1086/279182

Flower Visits of Oligotropic Bees

Previous articleNext article FreeBriefer ArticlesFlower Visits of Oligotropic BeesCharles RobertsonCharles Robertson Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 28, Number 3Sep., 1899 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/327900 Views: 94 Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in the Botanical Gazette (1876-1991), which is continued by International Journal of Plant Sciences (1992-present). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:E. Gorton Linsley The ecology of solitary bees, Hilgardia 27, no.1919 (Feb 2014): 543–599.https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v27n19p543