DOCSLIB.ORG

UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Pollinator Effectiveness of Peponapis Pruinosa and Apis Mellifera on Cucurbita Pepo a Thesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Pollinator Effectiveness of Peponapis Pruinosa and Apis Mellifera on Cucurbita Pepo a Thesis UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Pollinator Effectiveness of Peponapis pruinosa and Apis mellifera on Cucurbita pepo A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Biology by Jessica Audrey Davids Committee in charge: Professor David Holway, Chair Professor Joshua Kohn Professor James Nieh 2018 © Jessica Audrey Davids, 2018 All rights reserved. The Thesis of Jessica Audrey Davids is approved and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2018 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page…………………………………………………………………………… iii Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………... iv List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………... v List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………. vi List of Appendices………………………………………………………………………. vii Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………... viii Abstract of the Thesis…………………………………………………………………… ix Introduction………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Methods…………………………………………………………………………………... 3 Results…………………………………………………………………………………......7 Estimated pollen deposition….…………………………………………..……......7 Fruit set……………………………………………………...…………………......7 Discussion………………………………………………………………………………....9 References………………………………………………………………………………. 12 Tables…………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Figures…………………………………………………………………………………... 16 Appendices……………………………………………………………………………… 20 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Behaviors of bees videotaped during visits to squash flowers………….…….... 15 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Comparison of time spent on stigmas during single visits of Cucurbita pepo by Apis mellifera and Peponapis pruinosa. The bottom and top of each box represent the first and third quartiles, respectively, and the middle line represents the median. The bottom and top whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values, respectively….16 Figure 2. Pollen deposition on stigmas of Cucurbita pepo flowers as a function of time spent on stigmas during single visits by both Apis mellifera and Peponapis pruinosa. The regression line includes both species…...………………………….………………...…. 17 Figure 3. Pollen deposition on female stigmas of Cucurbita pepo as a function of Julian day by both Apis mellifera and Peponapis pruinosa. Each regression line represents data from each bee species. …………….…………….………..……….....………………….. 18 Figure 4. Comparison of single visit pollen deposition on female stigmas of Cucurbita pepo by Apis mellifera and Peponapis pruinosa bee species. Box and whisker plots as in Fig.1………………………………………………………...……………………………19 vi LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1. Soil Moisture Data. This table summarizes soil moisture readings collected twice a week for the duration of the project. Each plant received four soil moisture readings per date, within an hour of watering, resulting in a mean per plot per date. The mean of all soil moisture readings spanning the duration of the project ...…………………...…..….. 20 Appendix 2. Protocols for behavioral analysis of single visits. …………………..……....22 Appendix 3. Fate of squash flowers allowed to set fruit. (HB = Apis mellifera, PP = Peponapis pruinosa (♀)).……………………………………...……………………........23 Appendix 4. Single Visit Pollen Deposition Data. The data associated with every single visit sacrificed for the pollen deposition component of the study. Pollinator taxa designations: HB = Apis mellifera, PP = Peponapis pruinosa (♀). For additional information on data collection see Appendix 5…………………………......………..…...24 Appendix 5. Single visit pollen transfer procedures. A detailed summary of stigma storage & preservation and pollen counting protocols……….………………....…….....27 Appendix 6. Fruit Data. Fruit resulted from single visits by pollinators on flowers allowed to set fruit. Pollinator taxa designations: HB = Apis mellifera, PP = Peponapis pruinosa (♀). For additional information on data collection see Appendix 7………………....…....29 Appendix 7. Fruit Processing Protocols. A detailed description of fruit handling protocols including fruit harvesting, fruit volume determination, seed weighing, counting and storage, and fruit sugar content estimation. ………………………………………………31 Appendix 8. Data from Behavioral Analysis of Videos. This table includes the data associated with behavior from each experimental single visit. Where Visit Code = (Plant Number. Flower Number. Pollinator [HB = Apis mellifera, PP = Peponapis pruinosa], Pollination Date. Fate of Flower [Fruit = F, No fruit = N, Stigma = S])..…...………..…...34 Appendix 9. R Code used for statistical analyses…………….. …………...……..………38 vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my undergraduate research assistants (Aaron Ta, Andrian Krastev, Blaine Novak-Pilch, Breana Garcia, Chandler Pourvahidi, Chantal Sengsourinho, Carline Hua, Crystal Chan, Danny Rummani, Jessica Miranda, Johana Leon, Kara Powell, Kiara Suzuki, Kylie Etter, Rosalba Herrera, Tori Renfro, Valerie Inthavong, Vanessa Heredia, William Bauer) for dedicating many hours of their time to help me both in the field and in the lab. I would like to thank the members of the Holway Lab, especially Jess Gambel, who helped me have a productive field season and guided my thesis to its completion by helping me with my analyses and R coding. Finally, I’d like to thank the members of my committee for their guidance through every step of this process, especially my committee chair, David Holway. viii ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS Pollinator Effectiveness of Peponapis pruinosa and Apis mellifera on Cucurbita pepo by Jessica Audrey Davids Master of Science in Biology University of California, San Diego, 2018 Professor David Holway, Chair Differences between specialist and generalist pollinators provide insight into the evolution of specialization in plant-pollinator interactions. Plants of the genus Cucurbita (Cucurbitaceae) are visited by both generalist pollinators (e.g., Apis mellifera) and by specialist pollinators (e.g., Peponapis pruinosa). Previous studies have estimated pollinator effectiveness of Apis mellifera (honey bees), and Peponapis pruinosa (squash bees) in agricultural Cucurbita species, but none have investigated behavioral differences that underlie variation in effectiveness. In the summer of 2017, I conducted single visit pollinator effectiveness trials on 21 acorn squash (Cucurbita pepo) plants at the UC San Diego Biology Field Station in San Diego County, California to link interspecific ix behavioral differences of pollinators to their effectiveness. Female squash bees spent more than seven times longer per single visit in contact with squash stigmas and in turn deposited more than ten times more pollen compared to generalist honey bees. For all trials combined pollen deposition and fruit set increased with time bees spent on receptive stigmatic surfaces. Single visits by squash bees were more likely to result in fruit set compared to honey bees (85% vs. 12%). In terms of single visits, these results indicate that Apis mellifera are less effective at pollinating acorn squash compared to female Peponapis pruinosa. The results of this study differ from previous studies because Apis mellifera on our study site forages for pollen from a variety of different plant species in the surrounding landscape. In agricultural systems, in contrast, honey bees may have fewer options for pollen foraging. x Introduction Investigating the key differences that make some pollinators more efficient than others is important because of the potential implications for potential changes in agricultural and land management practices needed to bolster specific species of pollinators (Garibaldi 2013). The use of single visit trials is a common means by which to estimate pollinator effectiveness (Artz and Nault 2011, Cane et al. 2011, King et al. 2013, Tepedino 1981, Thomson and Goodell 2001). Previous studies have used seed set, pollen removal, fruit set, seed set, seed weight, fruit development rate to assess pollinator effectiveness (Artz and Nault 2011, King et al. 2013, Tepedino 1981, Thomson and Goodell 2001). Single visit measures of pollinator effectiveness can clarify contributions made by individual species (Canto-Aguilar & Parra-Tabla 2000, Garibaldi et al. 2013, Hung et al. 2017, Winfree 2007). Single visit measures of pollinator effectiveness are also of interest as many crops have differing dependence on insect pollinators and managed honey bees in the United States have been in decline in recent decades (Ollerton 2011, Smith et al. 2013). Studies that focus on pollinator effectiveness are particularly insightful when they include measures of pollinator behavior. Acorn squash (Cucurbita pepo) is an agricultural crop that attracts both generalist and specialist pollinators. Cucurbita pepo is monoecious and produces unisexual flowers that are visited by a diversity of pollinators (McGregor 1976, Michelbacher 1964), including super generalist honey bees and specialist squash bees. Previous studies have compared the effectiveness of single visits by bees to female flowers of C. pepo (Artz and Nault 2011, Cane 2011, Tepedino 1981), but the behavior of bees during single visits has 1 received relatively little attention in these studies, which focus on visit duration, fruit set, fruit growth, and stigma contact. A gap in understanding thus exists with respect to the visitation behavior of individual pollinators and how it relates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of Sampling and Monitoring Methods for Beneficial Arthropods
    insects Review A Review of Sampling and Monitoring Methods for Beneficial Arthropods in Agroecosystems Kenneth W. McCravy Department of Biological Sciences, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, IL 61455, USA; [email protected]; Tel.: +1-309-298-2160 Received: 12 September 2018; Accepted: 19 November 2018; Published: 23 November 2018 Abstract: Beneficial arthropods provide many important ecosystem services. In agroecosystems, pollination and control of crop pests provide benefits worth billions of dollars annually. Effective sampling and monitoring of these beneficial arthropods is essential for ensuring their short- and long-term viability and effectiveness. There are numerous methods available for sampling beneficial arthropods in a variety of habitats, and these methods can vary in efficiency and effectiveness. In this paper I review active and passive sampling methods for non-Apis bees and arthropod natural enemies of agricultural pests, including methods for sampling flying insects, arthropods on vegetation and in soil and litter environments, and estimation of predation and parasitism rates. Sample sizes, lethal sampling, and the potential usefulness of bycatch are also discussed. Keywords: sampling methodology; bee monitoring; beneficial arthropods; natural enemy monitoring; vane traps; Malaise traps; bowl traps; pitfall traps; insect netting; epigeic arthropod sampling 1. Introduction To sustainably use the Earth’s resources for our benefit, it is essential that we understand the ecology of human-altered systems and the organisms that inhabit them. Agroecosystems include agricultural activities plus living and nonliving components that interact with these activities in a variety of ways. Beneficial arthropods, such as pollinators of crops and natural enemies of arthropod pests and weeds, play important roles in the economic and ecological success of agroecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • Growing a Wild NYC: a K-5 Urban Pollinator Curriculum Was Made Possible Through the Generous Support of Our Funders
    A K-5 URBAN POLLINATOR CURRICULUM Growing a Wild NYC LESSON 1: HABITAT HUNT The National Wildlife Federation Uniting all Americans to ensure wildlife thrive in a rapidly changing world Through educational programs focused on conservation and environmental knowledge, the National Wildlife Federation provides ways to create a lasting base of environmental literacy, stewardship, and problem-solving skills for today’s youth. Growing a Wild NYC: A K-5 Urban Pollinator Curriculum was made possible through the generous support of our funders: The Seth Sprague Educational and Charitable Foundation is a private foundation that supports the arts, housing, basic needs, the environment, and education including professional development and school-day enrichment programs operating in public schools. The Office of the New York State Attorney General and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation through the Greenpoint Community Environmental Fund. Written by Nina Salzman. Edited by Sarah Ward and Emily Fano. Designed by Leslie Kameny, Kameny Design. © 2020 National Wildlife Federation. Permission granted for non-commercial educational uses only. All rights reserved. September - January Lesson 1: Habitat Hunt Page 8 Lesson 2: What is a Pollinator? Page 20 Lesson 3: What is Pollination? Page 30 Lesson 4: Why Pollinators? Page 39 Lesson 5: Bee Survey Page 45 Lesson 6: Monarch Life Cycle Page 55 Lesson 7: Plants for Pollinators Page 67 Lesson 8: Flower to Seed Page 76 Lesson 9: Winter Survival Page 85 Lesson 10: Bee Homes Page 97 February
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Pollinator Effectiveness Of
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Pollinator Effectiveness of Peponapis pruinosa and Apis mellifera on Cucurbita foetidissima A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Biology by Jeremy Raymond Warner Committee in charge: Professor David Holway, Chair Professor Joshua Kohn Professor James Nieh 2017 © Jeremy Raymond Warner, 2017 All rights reserved. The Thesis of Jeremy Raymond Warner is approved and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2017 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page…………………………………………………………………………… iii Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………... iv List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………... v List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………. vi List of Appendices………………………………………………………………………. vii Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………... viii Abstract of the Thesis…………………………………………………………………… ix Introduction………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Methods…………………………………………………………………………………... 5 Study System……………………………………………..………………………. 5 Pollinator Effectiveness……………………………………….………………….. 5 Data Analysis……..…………………………………………………………..….. 8 Results…………………………………………………………………………………... 10 Plant trait regressions……………………………………………………..……... 10 Fruit set……………………………………………………...…………………... 10 Fruit volume, seed number,
    [Show full text]
  • (Native) Bee Basics
    A USDA Forest Service and Pollinator Partnership Publication Bee Basics An Introduction to Our Native Bees By Beatriz Moisset, Ph.D. and Stephen Buchmann, Ph.D. Cover Art: Upper panel: The southeastern blueberry bee Habropoda( laboriosa) visiting blossoms of Rabbiteye blueberry (Vaccinium virgatum). Lower panel: Female andrenid bees (Andrena cornelli) foraging for nectar on Azalea (Rhododendron canescens). A USDA Forest Service and Pollinator Partnership Publication Bee Basics: An Introduction to Our Native Bees By Beatriz Moisset, Ph.D. and Stephen Buchmann, Ph.D. Illustrations by Steve Buchanan A USDA Forest Service and Pollinator Partnership Publication United States Department of Agriculture Acknowledgments Edited by Larry Stritch, Ph.D. Julie Nelson Teresa Prendusi Laurie Davies Adams Worker honey bees (Apis mellifera) visiting almond blossoms (Prunus dulcis). Introduction Native bees are a hidden treasure. From alpine meadows in the national forests of the Rocky Mountains to the Sonoran Desert in the Coronado National Forest in Arizona and from the boreal forests of the Tongass National Forest in Alaska to the Ocala National Forest in Florida, bees can be found anywhere in North America, where flowers bloom. From forests to farms, from cities to wildlands, there are 4,000 native bee species in the United States, from the tiny Perdita minima to large carpenter bees. Most people do not realize that there were no honey bees in America before European settlers brought hives from Europe. These resourceful animals promptly managed to escape from domestication. As they had done for millennia in Europe and Asia, honey bees formed swarms and set up nests in hollow trees.
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri Bee Identification Guide Edward M
    Missouri Bee Identification Guide Edward M. Spevak 1, Michael Arduser 2, 1 Saint Louis Zoo 2 Missouri Department of Conservation Bees are Beneficial Honey bees (Apis mellifera) Leafcutter and Mason bees (Megachile spp. & Osmia spp.) Bees play an essential role in natural and agricultural systems Family: Apidae. Heart-shaped head; black Family: Megachilidae. Head as broad as as pollinators of flowering plants that provide food, fiber, to amber-brown body with pale and dark thorax; large mandibles; black body most spices, medicines and animal forage. Plants rely on pollinators stripes on abdomen; pollen baskets on hind with pale bands on abdomen (metallic green to reproduce and set seed and fruit. In fact, approximately legs; 10-15 mm. or blue for Osmia); pollen carrying hairs three-quarters of all flowering plants rely on pollinators to ● Large social colonies, 30,000 or more; live under abdomen; 5-20 mm. reproduce. Honey bees pollinate crops, but native bees also in man-made hives and natural cavities like ● Solitary, but nest in aggregations in have a role in agriculture and are essential for pollination in tree hollows. Swarm to locate new nests. natural or man-made holes such as beetle natural landscapes. There are over 425 native species of ground- ● Honey bees are not native to the U.S., but holes, nesting blocks, stems, or soil. nesting, wood-nesting and parasitic bees found within Missouri. were brought over by Europeans in the ● Females cut circular pieces from leaves This guide identifies 10 groups of bees commonly observed in 17th century. to line their nests.
    [Show full text]
  • Confirmed Presence of the Squash Bee, Peponapis Pruinosa
    Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection Vol 3(3) 2–6 Confirmed presence of the squash bee,Peponapis pruinosa (Say, 1837) in the state of Oregon and specimen-based observational records of Peponapis (Say, 1837) (Hymenoptera: Anthophila) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection Lincoln R. Best1, Christopher J. Marshall1 and Sarah Red-Laird2 1Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 2The Bee Girl Organization, PO Box 3257, Ashland, OR 97520 Cite this work as: Best, L. R., C. J. Marshall and S. Red-Laird. 2019. Confirmed presence of the squash bee, Peponapis pruinosa (Say, 1837) in the state of Oregon and specimen-based observational records of Peponapis (Say, 1837) (Hymenoptera: Anthophila) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection. 3(3) p 2–6 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.3.4614 Abstract A new Oregon record for Peponapis pruinosa (Say, 1837) is presented with notes on its occurrence and photographs. This record provides the first empirical evidence of the genus and species in the state of Oregon. A dataset of Peponapis (Say, 1837) specimens in the holdings of the Oregon State Arthropod Collection is included with a brief summary of its contents. Introduction Bees of the genus Peponapis (Say, 1837) (Apidae: Eucerini) are known pollen-collecting specialists of Cucurbita Linnaeus, a genus of plants containing native species occurring in Central America, Mexico and the southwestern United States of America (Hurd and Linsley 1964; Hurd et al. 1971). Domesticated Cucurbita species, including pumpkins, summer and fall squashes, marrows, and many other varieties, are widespread throughout North America, and have allowed members of the genus to expand their geographic range (López-Uribe et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biology and External Morphology of Bees
    3?00( The Biology and External Morphology of Bees With a Synopsis of the Genera of Northwestern America Agricultural Experiment Station v" Oregon State University V Corvallis Northwestern America as interpreted for laxonomic synopses. AUTHORS: W. P. Stephen is a professor of entomology at Oregon State University, Corval- lis; and G. E. Bohart and P. F. Torchio are United States Department of Agriculture entomolo- gists stationed at Utah State University, Logan. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The research on which this bulletin is based was supported in part by National Science Foundation Grants Nos. 3835 and 3657. Since this publication is largely a review and synthesis of published information, the authors are indebted primarily to a host of sci- entists who have recorded their observations of bees. In most cases, they are credited with specific observations and interpretations. However, information deemed to be common knowledge is pre- sented without reference as to source. For a number of items of unpublished information, the generosity of several co-workers is ac- knowledged. They include Jerome G. Rozen, Jr., Charles Osgood, Glenn Hackwell, Elbert Jay- cox, Siavosh Tirgari, and Gordon Hobbs. The authors are also grateful to Dr. Leland Chandler and Dr. Jerome G. Rozen, Jr., for reviewing the manuscript and for many helpful suggestions. Most of the drawings were prepared by Mrs. Thelwyn Koontz. The sources of many of the fig- ures are given at the end of the Literature Cited section on page 130. The cover drawing is by Virginia Taylor. The Biology and External Morphology of Bees ^ Published by the Agricultural Experiment Station and printed by the Department of Printing, Ore- gon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 1969.
    [Show full text]
  • Hymenoptera: Apidae: Eucerini)
    Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 83: 396-406, 2012 http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/ib.20078706e.2012.2.1247 Two new species of the bee genus Peponapis, with a key to the North and Central American species (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Eucerini) Dos especies nuevas de abejas del género Peponapis, con una clave para las especies de América del Norte y Central (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Eucerini) Ricardo Ayala1 and Terry Griswold2 1Estación de Biología Chamela, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Apartado Postal 21, 48980 San Patricio, Jalisco, México. 2USDA-ARS, Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5310, USA. [email protected] Abstract. Two new species of squash bees, Peponapis pacifica Ayala and Griswold sp. n. and P. parkeri Griswold and Ayala sp. n., are described and illustrated. Peponapis pacifica is oligolectic on flowers of Schizocarpum longisepalum (Cucurbitaceae) endemic to Mexico, where it is found in the tropical dry forest along the Pacific Coast, between Sonora and Chiapas and in the Balsas River basin; and P. parkeri is known only from the Pacific slope of Costa Rica. A key for the North and Central American species of Peponapis is provided. Key words: taxonomy, Hymenoptera, Apidae, squash bees, Cucurbitaceae, Schizocarpum. Resumen. Se describen e ilustran 2 especies nuevas de abejas, Peponapis pacifica Ayala and Griswold sp. n. y P. parkeri Griswold and Ayala sp. n. De éstas, P. pacifica es oligoléctica sobre flores de Schizocarpum longisepalum (Cucurbitaceae), endémica de México, con distribución asociada al bosque tropical caducifolio a lo largo de la vertiente del Pacífico entre Sonora y Chiapas y en la Cuenca del río Balsas; P.
    [Show full text]
  • Observer Cards—Bees
    Observer Cards Bees Bees Jessica Rykken, PhD, Farrell Lab, Harvard University Edited by Jeff Holmes, PhD, EOL, Harvard University Supported by the Encyclopedia of Life www.eol.org and the National Park Service About Observer Cards EOL Observer Cards Observer cards are designed to foster the art and science of observing nature. Each set provides information about key traits and techniques necessary to make accurate and useful scientific observations. The cards are not designed to identify species but rather to encourage detailed observations. Take a journal or notebook along with you on your next nature walk and use these cards to guide your explorations. Observing Bees There are approximately 20,000 described species of bees living on all continents except Antarctica. Bees play an essential role in natural ecosystems by pollinating wild plants, and in agricultural systems by pollinating cultivated crops. Most people are familiar with honey bees and bumble bees, but these make up just a tiny component of a vast bee fauna. Use these cards to help you focus on the key traits and behaviors that make different bee species unique. Drawings and photographs are a great way to supplement your field notes as you explore the tiny world of these amazing animals. Cover Image: Bombus sp., © Christine Majul via Flickr Author: Jessica Rykken, PhD. Editor: Jeff Holmes, PhD. More information at: eol.org Content Licensed Under a Creative Commons License Bee Families Family Name # Species Spheciformes Colletidae 2500 (Spheciform wasps: Widespread hunt prey) 21 Bees Stenotritidae Australia only Halictidae 4300 Apoidea Widespread (Superfamily Andrenidae 2900 within the order Widespread Hymenoptera) (except Australia) Megachilidae 4000 Widespread Anthophila (Bees: vegetarian) Apidae 5700 Widespread May not be a valid group Melittidae 200 www.eol.org Old and New World (Absent from S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of the Squash and Gourd Bee, Cucurbits
    Ecology of the Squash and Gourd Bee, Peponapis pruinosa, on Cultivated Cucurbits in California (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) PAUL D. HURD, JR., E. GORTON LINSLEY, and A. E. MICHELBACHER SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY • NUMBER 168 SERIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan for the Insti- tution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." This keynote of basic research has been adhered to over the years in the issuance of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian imprint, com- mencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Annals of Flight Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs dealing with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and of professional colleagues at other institutions of learning. These paj>ers report newly acquired facts, synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in specialized fields. These pub- lications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, laboratories, and other interested institutions and specialists throughout the world. Individual copies may be obtained from the Smithsonian Institution Press as long as stocks are available.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Northwest Citizen Science Monitoring Guide
    MARITIME NORTHWEST CITIZEN SCIENCE MONITORING GUIDE NATIVE BEES & BUTTERFLIES The Xerces® Society for Invertebrate Conservation is a nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of invertebrates and their habitat. Established in 1971, the Society is at the forefront of invertebrate protection, harnessing the knowledge of scientists and the enthusiasm of citizens to implement conservation programs worldwide. The Society uses advocacy, education, habitat restoration, consulting, and applied research to promote invertebrate conservation. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation 628 NE Broadway, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97232 Tel (855) 232-6639 Fax (503) 233-6794 www.xerces.org Regional offices in California, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin © 2016 by The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation The Xerces Society is an equal opportunity employer and provider. Xerces® is a trademark registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Authors: Ashley Minnerath, Mace Vaughan, and Eric Lee-Mäder, The Xerces Society for Invertabrate Conservation. Editing and layout: Sara Morris, The Xerces Society for Invertabrate Conservation. Acknowledgements This guide was adapted from the California Pollinator Project Citizen Scientist Pollinator Monitoring Guide by Katharina Ullmann, Mace Vaughan, Claire Kremen, Tiffany Shih, and Matthew Shepherd. Funding for the development of this guide was provided by the Port of Portland and the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service. Additional funding for the Xerces Society’s pollinator conservation program has been provided by Ceres Foundation, CS Fund, Disney Worldwide Conservation Fund, Endangered Species Chocolate, Turner Foundation, Whole Foods Market and their vendors, and Xerces Society members. We are grateful to the many photographers who allowed us to use their wonderful photographs in this monitoring guide.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Risk to Hoary Squash Bees (Peponapis Pruinosa) and Other Ground-Nesting Bees from Systemic Insecticides in Agricul
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Assessment of risk to hoary squash bees (Peponapis pruinosa) and other ground-nesting bees from systemic Received: 18 March 2019 Accepted: 22 July 2019 insecticides in agricultural soil Published: xx xx xxxx D. Susan Willis Chan 1, Ryan S. Prosser1, Jose L. Rodríguez-Gil 2 & Nigel E. Raine 1 Using the hoary squash bee (Peponapis pruinosa) as a model, we provide the frst probabilistic risk assessment of exposure to systemic insecticides in soil for ground-nesting bees. To assess risk in acute and chronic exposure scenarios in Cucurbita and feld crops, concentrations of clothianidin, thiamethoxam and imidacloprid (neonicotinoids) and chlorantraniliprole (anthranilic diamide) in cropped soil were plotted to produce an environmental exposure distribution for each insecticide. The probability of exceedance of several exposure endpoints (LC50s) was compared to an acceptable risk threshold (5%). In Cucurbita crops, under acute exposure, risk to hoary squash bees was below 5% for honey bee LC50s for all residues evaluated but exceeded 5% for clothianidin and imidacloprid using a solitary bee LC50. For Cucurbita crops in the chronic exposure scenario, exposure risks for clothianidin and imidacloprid exceeded 5% for all endpoints, and exposure risk for chlorantraniliprole was below 5% for all endpoints. In feld crops, risk to ground-nesting bees was high from clothianidin in all exposure scenarios and high for thiamethoxam and imidacloprid under chronic exposure scenarios. Risk assessments for ground-nesting bees should include exposure impacts from pesticides in soil and could use the hoary squash bee as an ecotoxicology model. Global insect pollinator declines are being driven by multiple interacting environmental stressors, including land-use intensifcation, pathogens, invasive species and climate change, and may threaten the production of crops that depend directly or indirectly on the pollination services that bees provide1,2.
    [Show full text]