@article{KohlRutschmann2018,
  author    = {Kohl, Patrick Laurenz and Rutschmann, Benjamin},
  title     = {The neglected bee trees: European beech forests as a home for feral honey bee colonies},
  series = {PeerJ},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {PeerJ},
  number    = {e4602},
  doi       = {10.7717/peerj.4602},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-176512},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {It is a common belief that feral honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera L.) were eradicated in Europe through the loss of habitats, domestication by man and spread of pathogens and parasites. Interestingly, no scientific data are available, neither about the past nor the present status of naturally nesting honeybee colonies. We expected near-natural beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forests to provide enough suitable nest sites to be a home for feral honey bee colonies in Europe. Here, we made a first assessment of their occurrence and density in two German woodland areas based on two methods, the tracing of nest sites based on forager flight routes (beelining technique), and the direct inspection of potential cavity trees. Further, we established experimental swarms at forest edges and decoded dances for nest sites performed by scout bees in order to study how far swarms from beekeeper-managed hives would potentially move into a forest. We found that feral honey bee colonies regularly inhabit tree cavities in near-natural beech forests at densities of at least 0.11-0.14 colonies/km\(^{2}\). Colonies were not confined to the forest edges; they were also living deep inside the forests. We estimated a median distance of 2,600 m from the bee trees to the next apiaries, while scout bees in experimental swarms communicated nest sites in close distances (median: 470 m). We extrapolate that there are several thousand feral honey bee colonies in German woodlands. These have to be taken in account when assessing the role of forest areas in providing pollination services to the surrounding land, and their occurrence has implications for the species' perception among researchers, beekeepers and conservationists. This study provides a starting point for investigating the life-histories and the ecological interactions of honey bees in temperate European forest environments.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Kohl2023,
  author    = {Kohl, Patrick Laurenz},
  title     = {The buzz beyond the beehive: population demography, parasite burden and limiting factors of wild-living honeybee colonies in Germany},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-33032},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-330327},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {The western honeybee (Apis mellifera) is widely known as the honey producer and pollinator managed by beekeepers but neglected as a wild bee species. Central European honeybee populations have been anthropogenically disturbed since about 1850 through introgression and moderate artificial selection but have never been truly domesticated due to a lack of mating control. While their decline in the wild was historically attributed to the scarcity of nesting cavities, a contemporary view considers the invasion of the parasitic mite Varroa destructor in the 1970s as the major driver. However, there are no longitudinal population data available that could substantiate either claim. Based on the insight that introduced European honeybees form viable wild populations in eastern North America and reports on the occurrence of wild-living colonies from various European countries, we systematically studied the ecology of wild-living honeybees in Germany. First, we investigated whether wild-living honeybees colonising German forests form a self-sustaining population. Second, we asked how the parasite burden of wild-living colonies relates to that of managed colonies. And third, we explored whether the winter mortality of wild-living colonies is associated with parasite burden, nest depredation, or the lack of resources on the landscape scale. Between 2017 and 2021, we monitored listed trees with black woodpecker cavities for honeybees in the managed forests of three study regions (Swabian Alb, counties Coburg and Lichtenfels, county Weilheim-Schongau). Continuity of occupation was determined using microsatellite genetic markers. Wild-living colonies predictably colonised forests in summer, when about 10\% of all cavities were occupied. The annual colony survival rate and colony lifespan (based on N=112 colonies) were 10.6\% and 0.6 years, with 90\% of colonies surviving summer (July-September), 16\% surviving winter (September-April), and 72\% surviving spring (April-July). The average maximum and minimum colony densities were 0.23 (July) and 0.02 (April) colonies per km^2. During the (re-)colonisation of forests in spring, swarms preferred cavities that had already been occupied by other honeybee colonies. We estimate the net reproductive rate of the population to be R0= 0.318, meaning that it is currently not self-sustaining but maintained by the annual immigration of swarms from managed hives. The wild-living colonies are feral in a behavioural sense. We compared the occurrence of 18 microparasites among feral colonies (N=64) and managed colonies (N=74) using qPCR. Samples were collected in four regions (the three regions mentioned above and the city of Munich) in July 2020; they consisted of 20 workers per colony captured at flight entrances. We distinguished five colony types representing differences in colony age and management histories. Besides strong regional variation, feral colonies consistently hosted fewer microparasite taxa (median: 5, range 1-8) than managed colonies (median: 6, range 4-9) and had different parasite communities. Microparasites that were notably less prevalent among feral colonies were Trypanosomatidae, Chronic bee paralysis virus, and Deformed wing viruses A and B. In the comparison of five colony types, parasite burden was lowest in newly founded feral colonies, intermediate in overwintered feral colonies and managed nucleus colonies, and highest in overwintered managed colonies and hived swarms. This suggests that the natural mode of colony reproduction by swarming, which creates pauses in brood production, and well-dispersed nests, which reduce horizontal transmission, explain the reduced parasite burden in feral compared to managed colonies. To explore the roles of three potential drivers of feral colony winter mortality, we combined colony observations gathered during the monitoring study with data on colony-level parasite burden, observations and experiments on nest depredation, and landscape analyses. There was no evidence for an effect of summertime parasite burden on subsequent winter mortality: colonies that died (N=57) did not have a higher parasite burden than colonies that survived (N=10). Camera traps (N=15) installed on cavity trees revealed that honeybee nests are visited by a range of vertebrate species throughout the winter at rates of up to 10 visits per week. Four woodpecker species, great tits, and pine martens acted as true nest depredators. The winter survival rate of colonies whose nest entrances were protected by screens of wire mesh (N=32) was 50\% higher than that of colonies with unmanipulated entrances (N=40). Analyses of land cover maps revealed that the landscapes surrounding surviving colonies (N=19) contained on average 6.4 percentage points more resource-rich cropland than landscapes surrounding dying colonies (N=94). We estimate that tens of thousands of swarms escape from apiaries each year to occupy black woodpecker cavities and other hollow spaces in Germany and that feral colonies make up about 5\% of the regional honeybee populations. They are unlikely to contribute disproportionately to the spread of bee diseases. Instead, by spatially complementing managed colonies, they contribute to the pollination of wild plants in forests. Honeybees occupying tree cavities likely have various effects on forest communities by acting as nest site competitors or prey, and by accumulating biomass in tree holes. Nest depredation (a consequence of a lack of well-protected nest sites) and food resource limitation seem to be more important than parasites in hampering feral colony survival. The outstanding question is how environmental and intrinsic factors interact in preventing population establishment. Nest boxes with movable frames could be used to better study the environmental drivers of feral colonies' mortality. Pairs of wild (self-sustaining) and managed populations known to exist outside Europe could provide answers to whether modern apiculture creates honeybee populations maladapted to life in the wild. In Europe, large continuous forests might represent evolutionary refuges for wild honeybees.},
  subject      = {Biene <Gattung>},
  language  = {en}
}