Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (17)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (16)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (17)
Keywords
- foraging (4)
- bee decline (3)
- nutrition (3)
- plant-insect interactions (3)
- resin (3)
- biodiversity (2)
- honey bees (2)
- nutrients (2)
- pollen (2)
- Apis mellifera (1)
Honeybees (Apis mellifera) are threatened by numerous pathogens and parasites. To prevent infections they apply cooperative behavioral defenses, such as allo-grooming and hygiene, or they use antimicrobial plant resin. Resin is a chemically complex and highly variable mixture of many bioactive compounds. Bees collect the sticky material from different plant species and use it for nest construction and protection. Despite its importance for colony health, comparatively little is known about the precise origins and variability in resin spectra collected by honeybees. To identify the botanical resin sources of A. mellifera in Western Europe we chemically compared resin loads of individual foragers and tree resins. We further examined the resin intake of 25 colonies from five different apiaries to assess the effect of location on variation in the spectra of collected resin. Across all colonies and apiaries, seven distinct resin types were categorized according to their color and chemical composition. Matches between bee-collected resin and tree resin indicated that bees used poplar (Populus balsamifera, P. x canadensis), birch (Betula alba), horse chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum) and coniferous trees (either Picea abies or Pinus sylvestris) as resin sources. Our data reveal that honeybees collect a comparatively broad and variable spectrum of resin sources, thus assuring protection against a variety of antagonists sensitive to different resins and/or compounds. We further unravel distinct preferences for specific resins and resin chemotypes, indicating that honeybees selectively search for bioactive resin compounds.
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.
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.
Preventing malnutrition through consuming nutritionally appropriate resources represents a challenge for foraging animals. This is due to often high variation in the nutritional quality of available resources. Foragers consequently need to evaluate different food sources. However, even the same food source can provide a plethora of nutritional and non‐nutritional cues, which could serve for quality assessment. We show that bumblebees, Bombus terrestris , overcome this challenge by relying on lipids as nutritional cue when selecting pollen. The bees ‘prioritised’ lipid perception in learning experiments and avoided lipid consumption in feeding experiments, which supported survival and reproduction. In contrast, survival and reproduction were severely reduced by increased lipid contents. Our study highlights the importance of fat regulation for pollen foraging bumblebees. It also reveals that nutrient perception, nutrient regulation and reproductive fitness can be linked, which represents an effective strategy enabling quick foraging decisions that prevent malnutrition and maximise fitness.
Biodiversity loss, as often found in intensively managed agricultural landscapes, correlates with reduced ecosystem functioning, for example, pollination by insects, and with altered plant composition, diversity, and abundance. But how does this change in floral resource diversity and composition relate to occurrence and resource use patterns of trap-nesting solitary bees? To better understand the impact of land-use intensification on communities of trap-nesting solitary bees in managed grasslands, we investigated their pollen foraging, reproductive fitness, and the nutritional quality of larval food along a land-use intensity gradient in Germany. We found bee species diversity to decrease with increasing land-use intensity irrespective of region-specific community compositions and interaction networks. Land use also strongly affected the diversity and composition of pollen collected by bees. Lack of suitable pollen sources likely explains the absence of several bee species at sites of high land-use intensity. The only species present throughout, Osmia bicornis (red mason bee), foraged on largely different pollen sources across sites. In doing so, it maintained a relatively stable, albeit variable nutritional quality of larval diets (i.e., protein to lipid (P:L) ratio). The observed changes in bee–plant pollen interaction patterns indicate that only the flexible generalists, such as O. bicornis, may be able to compensate the strong alterations in floral resource landscapes and to obtain food of sufficient quality through readily shifting to alternative plant sources. In contrast, other, less flexible, bee species disappear.
Bees receive nectar and pollen as reward for pollinating plants. Pollen of different plant species varies widely in nutritional composition. In order to select pollen of appropriate nutritional quality, bees would benefit if they could distinguish different pollen types. Whether they rely on visual, olfactory and/or chemotactile cues to distinguish between different pollen types, has however been little studied. In this study, we examined whether and how Apis mellifera workers differentiate between almond and apple pollen. We used differential proboscis extension response conditioning with olfactory and chemotactile stimulation, in light and darkness, and in summer and winter bees. We found that honeybees were only able to differentiate between different pollen types, when they could use both chemotactile and olfactory cues. Visual cues further improved learning performance. Summer bees learned faster than winter bees. Our results thus highlight the importance of multisensory information for pollen discrimination.
Tree invasions have substantial impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, and trees that are dispersed by animals are more likely to become invasive. In addition, hybridisation between plants is well documented as a source of new weeds, as hybrids gain new characteristics that allow them to become invasive. Corymbia torelliana is an invasive tree with an unusual animal dispersal mechanism: seed dispersal by stingless bees, that hybridizes readily with other species. We examined hybrids between C. torelliana and C. citriodora subsp. citriodora to determine whether hybrids have inherited the seed dispersal characteristics of C. torelliana that allow bee dispersal. Some hybrid fruits displayed the characteristic hollowness, resin production and resin chemistry associated with seed dispersal by bees. However, we did not observe bees foraging on any hybrid fruits until they had been damaged. We conclude that C. torelliana and C. citriodora subsp. citriodora hybrids can inherit some fruit characters that are associated with dispersal by bees, but we did not find a hybrid with the complete set of characters that would enable bee dispersal. However, around 20,000 hybrids have been planted in Australia, and ongoing monitoring is necessary to identify any hybrids that may become invasive.
Bees need food of appropriate nutritional quality to maintain their metabolic functions. They largely obtain all required nutrients from floral resources, i.e., pollen and nectar. However, the diversity, composition and nutritional quality of floral resources varies with the surrounding environment and can be strongly altered in human-impacted habitats. We investigated whether differences in plant species richness as found in the surrounding environment correlated with variation in the floral diversity and nutritional quality of larval provisions (i.e., mixtures of pollen, nectar and salivary secretions) composed by the mass-provisioning stingless bee Tetragonula carbonaria (Apidae: Meliponini). We found that the floral diversity of larval provisions increased with increasing plant species richness. The sucrose and fat (total fatty acid) content and the proportion and concentration of the omega-6 fatty acid linoleic acid decreased, whereas the proportion of the omega-3 fatty acid linolenic acid increased with increasing plant species richness. Protein (total amino acid) content and amino acid composition did not change. The protein to fat (P:F) ratio, known to affect bee foraging, increased on average by more than 40% from plantations to forests and gardens, while the omega-6:3 ratio, known to negatively affect cognitive performance, decreased with increasing plant species richness. Our results suggest that plant species richness may support T. carbonaria colonies by providing not only a continuous resource supply (as shown in a previous study), but also floral resources of high nutritional quality.
Numerous studies revealed a positive relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, suggesting that biodiverse environments may not only enhance ecosystem processes, but also benefit individual ecosystem members by, for example, providing a higher diversity of resources. Whether and how the number of available resources affects resource collection and subsequently consumers (e.g., through impacting functions associated with resources) have, however, been little investigated, although a better understanding of this relationship may help explain why the abundance and richness of many animal species typically decline with decreasing plant (resource) diversity. Using a social bee species as model (Tetragonula carbonaria), we investigated how plant species richness—recorded for study sites located in different habitats—and associated resource abundance affected the diversity and functionality (here defined as nutritional content and antimicrobial activity) of resources (i.e., pollen, nectar, and resin) collected by a generalist herbivorous consumer. The diversity of both pollen and resin collected strongly increased with increasing plant/tree species richness, while resource abundance was only positively correlated with resin diversity. These findings suggest that bees maximize resource diversity intake in (resource) diverse habitats. Collecting more diverse resources did, however, not increase their functionality, which appeared to be primarily driven by the surrounding (plant) source community in our study. In generalist herbivores, maximizing resource diversity intake may therefore primarily secure collection of sufficient amounts of resources across the entire foraging season, but it also ensures that the allocated resources meet all functional needs. Decreasing available resource diversity may thus impact consumers primarily by reduced resource abundance, but also by reduced resource functionality, particularly when resources of high functionality (e.g., from specific plant species) become scarce.
Social immunity is a key factor for honeybee health, including behavioral defense strategies such as the collective use of antimicrobial plant resins (propolis). While laboratory data repeatedly show significant propolis effects, field data are scarce, especially at the colony level. Here, we investigated whether propolis, as naturally deposited in the nests, can protect honeybees against ectoparasitic mites Varroa destructor and associated viruses, which are currently considered the most serious biological threat to European honeybee subspecies, Apis mellifera, globally. Propolis intake of 10 field colonies was manipulated by either reducing or adding freshly collected propolis. Mite infestations, titers of deformed wing virus (DWV) and sacbrood virus (SBV), resin intake, as well as colony strength were recorded monthly from July to September 2013. We additionally examined the effect of raw propolis volatiles on mite survival in laboratory assays. Our results showed no significant effects of adding or removing propolis on mite survival and infestation levels. However, in relation to V. destructor, DWV titers increased significantly less in colonies with added propolis than in propolis-removed colonies, whereas SBV titers were similar. Colonies with added propolis were also significantly stronger than propolis-removed colonies. These findings indicate that propolis may interfere with the dynamics of V. destructor-transmitted viruses, thereby further emphasizing the importance of propolis for honeybee health.