Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (12)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (12)
Document Type
- Journal article (12)
Language
- English (12)
Keywords
- foraging (3)
- nutrition (3)
- plant-insect interactions (3)
- bee decline (2)
- biodiversity (2)
- honey bees (2)
- nutrients (2)
- pollen (2)
- Apis mellifera (1)
- Meliponini (1)
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.
Adding amino acids to a sucrose diet is not sufficient to support longevity of adult bumble bees
(2020)
Dietary macro-nutrients (i.e., carbohydrates, protein, and fat) are important for bee larval development and, thus, colony health and fitness. To which extent different diets (varying in macro-nutrient composition) affect adult bees and whether they can thrive on nectar as the sole amino acid source has, however, been little investigated. We investigated how diets varying in protein concentration and overall nutrient composition affected consumption, longevity, and breeding behavior of the buff-tailed bumble bee, Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Queenless micro-colonies were fed either natural nutrient sources (pollen), nearly pure protein (i.e., the milk protein casein), or sucrose solutions with low and with high essential amino acid content in concentrations as can be found in nectar. We observed micro-colonies for 110 days. We found that longevity was highest for pure pollen and lowest for pure sucrose solution and sucrose solution supplemented with amino acids in concentrations as found in the nectar of several plant species. Adding higher concentrations of amino acids to sucrose solution did only slightly increase longevity compared to sucrose alone. Consequently, sucrose solution with the applied concentrations and proportions of amino acids or other protein sources (e.g., casein) alone did not meet the nutritional needs of healthy adult bumble bees. In fact, longevity was highest and reproduction only successful in micro-colonies fed pollen. These results indicate that, in addition to carbohydrates and protein, adult bumble bees, like larvae, need further nutrients (e.g., lipids and micro-nutrients) for their well-being. An appropriate nutritional composition seemed to be best provided by floral pollen, suggesting that pollen is an essential dietary component not only for larvae but also for adult bees.