@article{SeitzvanEngelsdorpLeonhardt2019, author = {Seitz, Nicola and vanEngelsdorp, Dennis and Leonhardt, Sara D.}, title = {Conserving bees in destroyed landscapes: The potentials of reclaimed sand mines}, series = {Global Ecology and Conservation}, volume = {19}, journal = {Global Ecology and Conservation}, doi = {10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00642}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-235877}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Sand mines represent anthropogenically impacted habitats found worldwide, which bear potential for bee conservation. Although floral resources can be limited at these habitats, vegetation free patches of open sandy soils and embankments may offer good nesting possibilities for sand restricted and other bees. We compared bee communities as found in three reclaimed sand mines and at adjacent roadside meadows in Maryland, USA, over two years. Both sand mines and roadsides hosted diverse bee communities with 111 and 88 bee species, respectively. Bee abundances as well as richness and Shannon diversity of bee species were higher in sand mines than at roadsides and negatively correlated with the percentage of vegetational ground cover. Species composition also differed significantly between habitats. Sand mines hosted a higher proportion of ground nesters, more uncommon and more 'sand loving' bees similar to natural sandy areas of Maryland. Despite the destruction of the original pre-mining habitat, sand mines thus appear to represent a unique habitat for wild bees, particularly when natural vegetation and open sand spots are encouraged. Considering habitat loss, the lack of natural disturbance regimes, and ongoing declines of wild bees, sand mines could add promising opportunities for bee conservation which has hitherto mainly focused on agricultural and urban habitats.}, language = {en} } @article{SeitzvanEngelsdorpLeonhardt2020, author = {Seitz, Nicola and vanEngelsdorp, Dennis and Leonhardt, Sara D.}, title = {Are native and non-native pollinator friendly plants equally valuable for native wild bee communities?}, series = {Ecology and Evolution}, volume = {10}, journal = {Ecology and Evolution}, number = {23}, doi = {10.1002/ece3.6826}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-218439}, pages = {12838-12850}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Bees rely on floral pollen and nectar for food. Therefore, pollinator friendly plantings are often used to enrich habitats in bee conservation efforts. As part of these plantings, non-native plants may provide valuable floral resources, but their effects on native bee communities have not been assessed in direct comparison with native pollinator friendly plantings. In this study, we performed a common garden experiment by seeding mixes of 20 native and 20 non-native pollinator friendly plant species at separate neighboring plots at three sites in Maryland, USA, and recorded flower visitors for 2 years. A total of 3,744 bees (120 species) were collected. Bee abundance and species richness were either similar across plant types (midseason and for abundance also late season) or lower at native than at non-native plots (early season and for richness also late season). The overall bee community composition differed significantly between native and non-native plots, with 11 and 23 bee species being found exclusively at one plot type or the other, respectively. Additionally, some species were more abundant at native plant plots, while others were more abundant at non-natives. Native plants hosted more specialized plant-bee visitation networks than non-native plants. Three species out of the five most abundant bee species were more specialized when foraging on native plants than on non-native plants. Overall, visitation networks were more specialized in the early season than in late seasons. Our findings suggest that non-native plants can benefit native pollinators, but may alter foraging patterns, bee community assemblage, and bee-plant network structures.}, language = {en} }