DOCSLIB.ORG

The Bees of Algonquin Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Bees of Algonquin Park The Bees of Algonquin Park: A Study of their Distribution, their Community Guild Structure, and the Use of Various Sampling Techniques in Logged and Unlogged Hardwood Stands by Erika Nardone A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Biology Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Erika Nardone, January, 2013 ABSTRACT THE BEES OF ALGONQUIN PARK: A STUDY OF THEIR DISTRIBUTION, THEIR COMMUNITY GUILD STRUCTURE, AND THE USE OF VARIOUS SAMPLING TECHNIQUES IN LOGGED AND UNLOGGED HARDWOOD STANDS Erika Nardone Advisor: University of Guelph, 2012 Professor Peter G. Kevan This study investigates the distribution and functional guild structure of the bee community in hardwood stands of Algonquin Provincial Park under different logging regimes, assessing both the role of different aspects of the habitat in affecting this distribution and structure, as well as the use of different sampling techniques. The distribution of bee individuals and species was most dependent on the abundance of raspberry (Rubus strigosus), an important floral and nesting resource. Also of importance were total floral resources, microclimate, and habitat heterogeneity. The functional guild structure of the bee community, which was relatively resilient to habitat variation, was related to a greater variety of factors, reflecting wide-ranging behaviours and requirements of different guilds. Malaise traps, pan traps and nets varied in their effectiveness at collecting different bee genera and a high percentage of species were collected only with one trap type. Malaise traps performed relatively poorly in forested environments, though very well in more disturbed, open habitats. Pan traps and nets performed better in forested environments. Trap nests were an inefficient sampling technique in forests, but were effective at collecting some species of cavity-nesting bees. These findings underline the importance of raspberry for bee communities of northern hardwood forests, and the importance of heterogeneity, both of habitat types and sampling techniques, to attain the highest species richness of bees. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I need to start by thanking my supervisor, Dr. Peter Kevan, for his advice, support and encouragement throughout this project, which he made possible. I would also like to thank Dr. Erica Nol, Dr. Cory Sheffield and Dr. Madhur Anand for their guidance and assistance as my advisory committee. I am greatly indebted to Dr. Cory Sheffield, as well as Dr. Jason Gibbs, who identified all of my bees to species for me. Thank you also to the staff of the Wildlife Research Station, who were responsible for housing and feeding me during my field seasons, and without whom this project would not have been possible. I am also very grateful for the work of my field assistants, Andrew Morse, Kelly Grieg and Eleanor Proctor, for their help with data collection. Lastly, I thank my parents, Hilde and Gary Nardone, and my boyfriend, Damian Douglas, who have kept me going though this experience with their love and support. Funding for this project was provided by the Canadian Pollination Initiative (NSERC- CANPOLIN), the National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS). Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) also provided funding to assist with transportation costs in 2010. Thank you to the Algonquin Forestry Authority (AFA) for the initial experimental set-up of the group-selection and control stands (funded by an NSERC collaborative grant with Canadian Forest Service), and for assistance with selection of the single-tree selection stands. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1 1.1 What is Pollination? .............................................................................................................1 1.2 Bees and Pollination ............................................................................................................1 1.3 Guilds of Bees ......................................................................................................................3 1.3.1 Nesting Guilds ............................................................................................................3 1.3.2 Social Guilds ...............................................................................................................4 1.3.3 Pollen Specificity Guilds ............................................................................................5 1.3.4 Flight Season Guilds ...................................................................................................5 1.3.5 Overwintering Guilds..................................................................................................6 1.4 Bees and Anthropogenic disturbance...................................................................................7 1.5 Bees and Habitat Heterogeneity...........................................................................................9 1.6 Logging in Hardwood Stands of Algonquin Park..............................................................11 1.7 Bee Sampling Techniques..................................................................................................14 1.7.1 Malaise Traps ............................................................................................................14 1.7.2 Pan Traps ..................................................................................................................15 1.7.3 Trap Nests .................................................................................................................15 1.7.4 Netting.......................................................................................................................16 1.8 Summary of Objectives......................................................................................................16 CHAPTER 2. THE DISTRIBUTION AND COMMUNITY STRUCTURE OF BEES IN LOGGED AND UNLOGGED HARDWOOD FOREST STANDS ........................................18 2.1 Abstract ..............................................................................................................................18 2.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................19 2.3 Methods..............................................................................................................................27 2.3.1 Study Sites ................................................................................................................27 2.3.2 Site Conditions and Characteristics ..........................................................................31 2.3.2.1 Plot Geography and Parameters .......................................................................31 2.3.2.2 Microclimate ....................................................................................................32 2.3.2.3 Canopy Cover ..................................................................................................32 2.3.2.4 Deadwood Volume ..........................................................................................32 iv 2.3.2.5 Soil Texture ......................................................................................................33 2.3.2.6 Habitat Diversity ..............................................................................................33 2.3.3 Vegetation Surveys ...................................................................................................33 2.3.4 Bee Sampling ............................................................................................................35 2.3.4.1 Malaise Traps ...................................................................................................35 2.3.4.2 Pan Traps .........................................................................................................37 2.3.4.3 Trap Nests ........................................................................................................38 2.3.4.4 Netting..............................................................................................................40 2.3.5 Bee Processing and Identification .............................................................................41 2.3.6 Statistical Analysis ....................................................................................................41 2.3.6.1 Stand-level Variables .......................................................................................41 2.3.6.2 Habitat Variables Used in Analysis .................................................................43 2.3.6.3 Comparison of Habitat Variables
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Taxon Order Family Scientific Name Common Name Non-Native No. of Individuals/Abundance Notes Bees Hymenoptera Andrenidae Calliop
    Taxon Order Family Scientific Name Common Name Non-native No. of individuals/abundance Notes Bees Hymenoptera Andrenidae Calliopsis andreniformis Mining bee 5 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Apis millifera European honey bee X 20 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Bombus griseocollis Brown belted bumble bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Bombus impatiens Common eastern bumble bee 12 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Ceratina calcarata Small carpenter bee 9 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Ceratina mikmaqi Small carpenter bee 4 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Ceratina strenua Small carpenter bee 10 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Melissodes druriella Small carpenter bee 6 Bees Hymenoptera Apidae Xylocopa virginica Eastern carpenter bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Colletidae Hylaeus affinis masked face bee 6 Bees Hymenoptera Colletidae Hylaeus mesillae masked face bee 3 Bees Hymenoptera Colletidae Hylaeus modestus masked face bee 2 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Agapostemon virescens Sweat bee 7 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Augochlora pura Sweat bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Augochloropsis metallica metallica Sweat bee 2 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Halictus confusus Sweat bee 7 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Halictus ligatus Sweat bee 2 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Lasioglossum anomalum Sweat bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Lasioglossum ellissiae Sweat bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Lasioglossum laevissimum Sweat bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Lasioglossum platyparium Cuckoo sweat bee 1 Bees Hymenoptera Halictidae Lasioglossum versatum Sweat bee 6 Beetles Coleoptera Carabidae Agonum sp. A ground beetle
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada
    Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada Vol. 40(1) Summer 2021 The Newsletter of the BSC is published twice a year by the In this issue Biological Survey of Canada, an incorporated not-for-profit From the editor’s desk............2 group devoted to promoting biodiversity science in Canada. Membership..........................3 President’s report...................4 BSC Facebook & Twitter...........5 Reminder: 2021 AGM Contributing to the BSC The Annual General Meeting will be held on June 23, 2021 Newsletter............................5 Reminder: 2021 AGM..............6 Request for specimens: ........6 Feature Articles: Student Corner 1. City Nature Challenge Bioblitz Shawn Abraham: New Student 2021-The view from 53.5 °N, Liaison for the BSC..........................7 by Greg Pohl......................14 Mayflies (mainlyHexagenia sp., Ephemeroptera: Ephemeridae): an 2. Arthropod Survey at Fort Ellice, MB important food source for adult by Robert E. Wrigley & colleagues walleye in NW Ontario lakes, by A. ................................................18 Ricker-Held & D.Beresford................8 Project Updates New book on Staphylinids published Student Corner by J. Klimaszewski & colleagues......11 New Student Liaison: Assessment of Chironomidae (Dip- Shawn Abraham .............................7 tera) of Far Northern Ontario by A. Namayandeh & D. Beresford.......11 Mayflies (mainlyHexagenia sp., Ephemerop- New Project tera: Ephemeridae): an important food source Help GloWorm document the distribu- for adult walleye in NW Ontario lakes, tion & status of native earthworms in by A. Ricker-Held & D.Beresford................8 Canada, by H.Proctor & colleagues...12 Feature Articles 1. City Nature Challenge Bioblitz Tales from the Field: Take me to the River, by Todd Lawton ............................26 2021-The view from 53.5 °N, by Greg Pohl..............................14 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Specialist Foragers in Forest Bee Communities Are Small, Social Or Emerge Early
    Received: 5 November 2018 | Accepted: 2 April 2019 DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13003 RESEARCH ARTICLE Specialist foragers in forest bee communities are small, social or emerge early Colleen Smith1,2 | Lucia Weinman1,2 | Jason Gibbs3 | Rachael Winfree2 1GraDuate Program in Ecology & Evolution, Rutgers University, New Abstract Brunswick, New Jersey 1. InDiviDual pollinators that specialize on one plant species within a foraging bout 2 Department of Ecology, Evolution, and transfer more conspecific and less heterospecific pollen, positively affecting plant Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey reproDuction. However, we know much less about pollinator specialization at the 3Department of Entomology, University of scale of a foraging bout compared to specialization by pollinator species. Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, CanaDa 2. In this stuDy, we measured the Diversity of pollen carried by inDiviDual bees forag- Correspondence ing in forest plant communities in the miD-Atlantic United States. Colleen Smith Email: [email protected] 3. We found that inDiviDuals frequently carried low-Diversity pollen loaDs, suggest- ing that specialization at the scale of the foraging bout is common. InDiviDuals of Funding information Xerces Society for Invertebrate solitary bee species carried higher Diversity pollen loaDs than Did inDiviDuals of Conservation; Natural Resources social bee species; the latter have been better stuDied with respect to foraging Conservation Service; GarDen Club of America bout specialization, but account for a small minority of the worlD’s bee species. Bee boDy size was positively correlated with pollen load Diversity, and inDiviDuals HanDling EDitor: Julian Resasco of polylectic (but not oligolectic) species carried increasingly Diverse pollen loaDs as the season progresseD, likely reflecting an increase in the Diversity of flowers in bloom.
    [Show full text]
  • Wedge-Shaped Beetles (Suggested Common Name) Ripiphorus Spp. (Insecta: Coleoptera: Ripiphoridae)1 David Owens, Ashley N
    EENY613 Wedge-Shaped Beetles (suggested common name) Ripiphorus spp. (Insecta: Coleoptera: Ripiphoridae)1 David Owens, Ashley N. Mortensen, Jeanette Klopchin, William Kern, and Jamie D. Ellis2 Introduction Ripiphoridae are a family of unusual parasitic beetles that are thought to be related to tumbling flower beetles (Coleoptera: Mordellidae) and blister beetles (Coleoptera: Meloidae). There is disagreement over the spelling of the family (Ripiphoridae) and genus (Ripiphorus) names. Here we use the original spelling that starts with only the letter Figure 1. Adult specimens of the two genera of Ripiphoridae. A) “R”; however, an initial “Rh” has also been used in the Macrosiagon Hentz, and B) Ripiphorus Bosc. scientific community (Rhipiphoridae and Rhipiphorus). Credits: Allen M. Boatman There are an estimated 35 nearctic species of Ripiphorus, Generally, the biology of the family Ripiphoridae is poorly two of which have been collected in Florida: Ripiphorus known. Ripiphorids parasitize bees and wasps (Hymenop- schwarzi LeConte (Figure 2A) and Ripiphorus fasciatus Say tera), roaches (Blattodea), and wood-boring beetles (Co- (Figure 2B). Due to limited information for both of these leoptera). However, the specific hosts for many ripiphorid species, the information presented below is characteristic species are unknown. Furthermore, only one sex (either of the genus Ripiphorus. Information specific to Ripiphorus male or female) has been described for several species, and fasciatus and Ripiphorus schwarzi is presented where the males and females of some species look different. detailed information is available. Two genera of Ripiphoridae infest hymenopteran (bee and wasp) nests: Macrosiagon Hentz (Figure 1A) and Ripiphorus Bosc (formerly Myodites Latreille) (Figure 1B). Species of Macrosiagon are parasites of a variety of hymenopteran families including: Halictidae, Vespidae, Tiphiidae, Apidae, Pompilidae, Crabronidae, and Sphecidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Bee Declines and Changes in Plant-Pollinator Networks Over 125 Years Revealed Through Museum Collections
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Master's Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2018 WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Minna Mathiasson University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Mathiasson, Minna, "WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS" (2018). Master's Theses and Capstones. 1192. https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/1192 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS BY MINNA ELIZABETH MATHIASSON BS Botany, University of Maine, 2013 THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences: Integrative and Organismal Biology May, 2018 This thesis has been examined and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences: Integrative and Organismal Biology by: Dr. Sandra M. Rehan, Assistant Professor of Biology Dr. Carrie Hall, Assistant Professor of Biology Dr. Janet Sullivan, Adjunct Associate Professor of Biology On April 18, 2018 Original approval signatures are on file with the University of New Hampshire Graduate School.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Subgenus Micrandrena of the Genus Andrena of Eastern Asia (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Andrenidae)
    九州大学学術情報リポジトリ Kyushu University Institutional Repository A Revision of the Subgenus Micrandrena of the Genus Andrena of Eastern Asia (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Andrenidae) Xu, Huan-li Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, China Agricultural University Tadauchi, Osamu Department of Agricultural Bioresource Sciences, Faculty of Agricultur, Kyushu University https://doi.org/10.5109/20321 出版情報：九州大学大学院農学研究院紀要. 56 (2), pp.279-283, 2011-09. 九州大学大学院農学研究院 バージョン： 権利関係： J. Fac. Agr., Kyushu Univ., 56 (2), 279–283 (2011) A Revision of the Subgenus Micrandrena of the Genus Andrena of Eastern Asia (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Andrenidae) XU Huan–li* and Osamu TADAUCHI Laboratory of Entomology, Division of Zoology & Entomology, Department of Agricultural Bioresource Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812–8581, Japan (Received April 28, 2011 and accepted May 9, 2011) The subgenus Micrandrena of the genus Andrena from eastern Asia is revised and twelve species are recognized. Andrena (Micrandrena) kaguya Hirashima, A. (Micrandrena) komachi Hirashima, A. (Micrandrena) munakatai Tadauchi, A. (Micrandrena) semirugosa Cockerell, A. (Micrandrena) sub- levigata Hirashima, A. (Micrandrena) subopaca Nylander are recorded from China for the first time. Subgenus Micrandrena Ashmead INTRODUCTION Micrandrena Ashmead, 1899, Trans. Amer. ent. Soc., The subgenus Micrandrena was erected by W. H. 26: 89; Lanham, 1949, Univ. California Pub. Ent., 8: Ashmead in 1899. It is distinctly separated from the other 208–209 (in part); Hirashima, 1965, J. Fac. Agr., subgenera by the tiny body size, tessellated or polished Kyushu Univ., 13: 461; LaBerge, 1964, Bull. Univ. metasomal terga. It is characterized in having the vein Nebraska St. Mus., 4: 301–302; Ribble, 1968, Bull. first transverse cubitus ending close to the pterostigma.
    [Show full text]
  • Bees in the Trees: Diverse Spring Fauna in Temperate Forest Edge Canopies
    Forest Ecology and Management 482 (2021) 118903 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco Bees in the trees: Diverse spring fauna in temperate forest edge canopies Katherine R. Urban-Mead a,*, Paige Muniz~ a, Jessica Gillung b, Anna Espinoza a, Rachel Fordyce a, Maria van Dyke a, Scott H. McArt a, Bryan N. Danforth a a Cornell Department of Entomology, Ithaca, NY 14853, United States b Department of Natural Resource Sciences at McGill University in Quebec, Canada ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Temperate hardwood deciduous forest is the dominant landcover in the Northeastern US, yet its canopy is usually Temperate deciduous forests ignored as pollinator habitat due to the abundance of wind-pollinated trees. We describe the vertical stratifi­ Wild bees cation of spring bee communities in this habitat and explore associations with bee traits, canopy cover, and Forest management coarse woody debris. For three years, we sampled second-growth woodlots and apple orchard-adjacent forest Canopy ecology sites from late March to early June every 7–10 days with paired sets of tri-colored pan traps in the canopy (20–25 m above ground) and understory (<1m). Roughly one fifthof the known New York state bee fauna were caught at each height, and 90 of 417 species overall, with many species shared across the strata. We found equal species richness, higher diversity, and a much higher proportion of female bees in the canopy compared to the understory. Female solitary, social, soil- and wood-nesting bees were all abundant in the canopy while soil- nesting and solitary bees of both sexes dominated the understory.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating a Pollinator Garden for Native Specialist Bees of New York and the Northeast
    Creating a pollinator garden for native specialist bees of New York and the Northeast Maria van Dyke Kristine Boys Rosemarie Parker Robert Wesley Bryan Danforth From Cover Photo: Additional species not readily visible in photo - Baptisia australis, Cornus sp., Heuchera americana, Monarda didyma, Phlox carolina, Solidago nemoralis, Solidago sempervirens, Symphyotrichum pilosum var. pringlii. These shade-loving species are in a nearby bed. Acknowledgements This project was supported by the NYS Natural Heritage Program under the NYS Pollinator Protection Plan and Environmental Protection Fund. In addition, we offer our appreciation to Jarrod Fowler for his research into compiling lists of specialist bees and their host plants in the eastern United States. Creating a Pollinator Garden for Specialist Bees in New York Table of Contents Introduction _________________________________________________________________________ 1 Native bees and plants _________________________________________________________________ 3 Nesting Resources ____________________________________________________________________ 3 Planning your garden __________________________________________________________________ 4 Site assessment and planning: ____________________________________________________ 5 Site preparation: _______________________________________________________________ 5 Design: _______________________________________________________________________ 6 Soil: _________________________________________________________________________ 6 Sun Exposure: _________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Diversified Floral Resource Plantings Support Bee Communities After
    www.nature.com/scientificreports Corrected: Publisher Correction OPEN Diversifed Floral Resource Plantings Support Bee Communities after Apple Bloom in Commercial Orchards Sarah Heller1,2,5,6, Neelendra K. Joshi1,2,3,6*, Timothy Leslie4, Edwin G. Rajotte2 & David J. Biddinger1,2* Natural habitats, comprised of various fowering plant species, provide food and nesting resources for pollinator species and other benefcial arthropods. Loss of such habitats in agricultural regions and in other human-modifed landscapes could be a factor in recent bee declines. Artifcially established foral plantings may ofset these losses. A multi-year, season-long feld study was conducted to examine how wildfower plantings near commercial apple orchards infuenced bee communities. We examined bee abundance, species richness, diversity, and species assemblages in both the foral plantings and adjoining apple orchards. We also examined bee community subsets, such as known tree fruit pollinators, rare pollinator species, and bees collected during apple bloom. During this study, a total of 138 species of bees were collected, which included 100 species in the foral plantings and 116 species in the apple orchards. Abundance of rare bee species was not signifcantly diferent between apple orchards and the foral plantings. During apple bloom, the known tree fruit pollinators were more frequently captured in the orchards than the foral plantings. However, after apple bloom, the abundance of known tree fruit pollinating bees increased signifcantly in the foral plantings, indicating potential for foral plantings to provide additional food and nesting resources when apple fowers are not available. Insect pollinators are essential in nearly all terrestrial ecosystems, and the ecosystem services they provide are vital to both wild plant communities and agricultural crop production.
    [Show full text]
  • Maternal Manipulation of Pollen Provisions Affects Worker Production in a Small Carpenter Bee
    Behav Ecol Sociobiol DOI 10.1007/s00265-016-2194-z ORIGINAL ARTICLE Maternal manipulation of pollen provisions affects worker production in a small carpenter bee Sarah P. Lawson1 & Krista N. Ciaccio1 & Sandra M. Rehan1 Received: 22 February 2016 /Revised: 23 June 2016 /Accepted: 28 July 2016 # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016 Abstract Mothers play a key role in determining the body evolution of highly social groups. One of the major transitions size, behavior, and fitness of offspring. Mothers of the small to the formation of highly social groups is division of labor. carpenter bee, Ceratina calcarata, provide smaller pollen By manipulating resource availability to offspring, parents can balls to their first female offspring resulting in the develop- force offspring to remain at the nest to serve as a worker ment of a smaller female. This smaller female, known as the leading to a division of labor between parent and offspring. dwarf eldest daughter, is coerced to stay at the nest to forage In the small carpenter bee, C. calcarata, mothers provide their and feed siblings as a worker. In order to better understand eldest daughter with less food resulting in a smaller adult body how this maternal manipulation leads to the physiological and size. This dwarf eldest daughter (DED) does not have the behavioral differences observed in dwarf eldest daughters, we opportunity to reproduce and serves only as a worker for the characterized and compared the quality of the pollen balls fed colony. In addition to overall reduced investment, we found to theses females vs. other offspring. Our results confirm ear- that mothers also provide a different variety of pollen to her lier studies reporting that there is a female-biased sex alloca- DED.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Bee Benefits
    Bryn Mawr College and Rutgers University May 2009 Native Bee Benefits How to increase native bee pollination on your farm in several simple steps For Pennsylvania and New Jersey Farmers In this pamphlet, Why are native bees important? Insect pollination services are a highly important you can find out… agricultural input. Two-thirds of crop varieties require animal pollination for production and many crops have higher quality after The most effective native bees insect pollination.1,2,3 Bees are the most important pollinators in in PA and NJ and how to most ecosystems. They facilitate reproduction and improve seed set for half of Pennsylvania’s and New Jersey’s top fruit and identify them 4,5,6 vegetable commodities. Estimated value of their pollination services range from $6 - 263 million each year.7 Their habitat and foraging Honeybee numbers in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have needs been declining over the past several years. Beekeepers recorded overwinter losses of 26- 48% and 17-40% respectively in PA and Strategies for encouraging NJ between 2006 and 2009.8,9,10 These losses are much higher than their presence on your farm the typical 15% losses seen in previous years.10 Although many farmers rent managed honeybees to increase crop yield and quality, Sources of funding surveys of small to medium size PA and NJ farms have shown that native bees provide a substantial portion of pollination services.11,12 By increasing the number and diversity of native bees, PA and NJ farmers may be able to counter rising costs of rented bee colonies while supporting sustainable native plant and pollinator communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Interactions of Wild Bees with Landscape, Farm Vegetation, and Flower Pollen
    WILD BEE SPECIES RICHNESS ON NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA PRODUCE FARMS: INTERACTIONS OF WILD BEES WITH LANDSCAPE, FARM VEGETATION, AND FLOWER POLLEN By ROSALYN DENISE JOHNSON A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2016 © 2016 Rosalyn Denise Johnson To my family and friends who have supported me through this process ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To Rose and Robert, Rhonda and Joe, and Katherine and Matthew without whose encouragement and support I could not have done this. I am grateful to my co- advisors, Kathryn E. Sieving and H. Glenn Hall, and my committee, Rosalie L. Koenig, Emilio M. Bruna III, David M. Jarzen, and Mark E. Hostetler for the opportunity to contribute to the knowledge of wild bees with their expert guidance. I would also like to thank the farmers who allowed me to work on their land and my assistants Michael Commander, Amber Pcolka, Megan Rasmussen, Teresa Burlingame, Julie Perreau, Amanda Heh, Kristen McWilliams, Matthew Zwerling, Mandie Carr, Hope Woods, and Mike King for their hard work 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 7 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 8 ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]