DOCSLIB.ORG

Wild Bees Provide Sufficient Pollination Services to Pumpkin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wild Bees Provide Sufficient Pollination Services to Pumpkin Wild bees provide sufficient pollination services to pumpkin January 20, 2016 Jessica D. Petersen & Brian A. Nault Department of Entomology Cornell University, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Honey bee (Apis mellifera) Value attributed to honey bees for crop pollination in the U.S. estimated to be $15 billion (Morse & Calderone 2000) Honey Bee Populations are in Decline Data compiled from USDA-NASS Honey Bee Populations are in Decline • Pests and Parasites (e.g., Varroa mite, small hive beetle, Nosema apis) • Pathogens (e.g., American foulbrood, Chalk brood, Israel acute paralysis virus, others) • Pesticides (Death and perhaps sub-lethal effects) • Colony Collapse Disorder (Likely a combination of stress, sub-lethal effects of pesticides, viruses and pathogens) • What are the Alternatives to Honey Bees? • Wild bees • Provide about $3 billion in crop pollination services (Losey & Vaughan 2006) • In NJ and PA, native bees were estimated to provide sufficient pollination for watermelon in 21 of 23 small fields (<2 acres) • Alternative managed pollinators • Commercial bumble bees provide equally sufficient pollination compared to rented honey bees in blueberry systems What Bees Pollinate Pumpkins in NY? Common Eastern Honey Bee Squash Bee Bumble Bee (Apis mellifera) (Peponapis pruinosa) (Bombus impatiens) What Bees Pollinate Pumpkins in NY? Common Eastern Honey Bee Squash Bee Bumble Bee (Apis mellifera) (Peponapis pruinosa) (Bombus impatiens) • Managed and feral • Social • Generalist pollinator • Forages less in cool, cloudy weather • Prone to disease and pests What Bees Pollinate Pumpkins in NY? Common Eastern Honey Bee Squash Bee Bumble Bee (Apis mellifera) (Peponapis pruinosa) (Bombus impatiens) • Managed and feral • Wild bee • Social • Solitary • Generalist pollinator • Cucurbit specialist • Forages less in cool, • Nests on bare, cloudy weather undisturbed soil • Prone to disease and pests What Bees Pollinate Pumpkins in NY? Common Eastern Honey Bee Squash Bee Bumble Bee (Apis mellifera) (Peponapis pruinosa) (Bombus impatiens) • Managed and feral • Wild bee • Wild bee • Social • Solitary • Social • Generalist pollinator • Cucurbit specialist • Generalist pollinator • Forages less in cool, • Nests on bare, • Nests in rodent cloudy weather undisturbed soil burrows and other • Prone to disease and cavities in woods pests • Perhaps more active on cool cloudy days How are Pumpkins Pollinated? How are Pumpkins Pollinated? Male Female flower flower Pumpkin Pollination Female flower pollen Male flower Nectar and Pollen Nectar only • Monoecious = Separate female and male flowers on the same plant (range: 1:9 to 1:30 ratio ) • Flowers open at dawn and wilt by late morning; flowers last one day Pumpkin Pollination ? Does pollination affect fruit size? Pumpkin Pollination ✔ ? Seed set is a direct result of pollination, but does greater seed set result in greater fruit weight? Seed Set and Fruit Weight Relationship 16 R² = 0.56 14 YES! P < 0.0001 12 n = 288 10 8 6 4 Fruit Weight (kg) Weight Fruit 2 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Number of Viable Seeds Which Species is More Efficient? Female flower pollen Male flower Nectar and Pollen Nectar only Bumble Bees are the Best Pollinators • Bumble bees are efficient pumpkin pollinators – Deposit 3X more pollen per visit than honey bees – Contact the stigma more often than honey bees – Fewer visits to flowers required for pollination – Bumble bees are active on cool, cloudy days • Available commercially from Koppert and Biobest QUAD = 4 colonies Artz, Hsu & Nault (2011) Environ. Entomol. Artz & Nault (2011) J. Econ. Entomol. Objectives 1. Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none on… • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers, and • Fruit yield Bumble bee Honey bee None Supplementation Methods • Commercial pumpkin fields in NY in 2011 & 2012 • Fields randomly assigned for supplementation with bumble bees, honey bees or none (total of 43 fields) • No managed bees within 1 km • Jack-o-lantern variety planted in 3 locations per field • Bee visits recorded 3 times during bloom (3 x 40m transects) • Marketable fruit harvested and weighed Bumble bee Honey bee None n=12 fields n=17 fields n=14 fields Mean Marketable Pumpkin Yield Petersen et al. 2013 PLOS " 7" 6" 5" 4" N=12 N=17 3" N=14 2" 1" Average fruit weight per plant (kg) perplant weight fruit Average 0" Bumble bee Honey bee Non- supplemented" supplemented" supplemented" Bee Visits to Flowers Petersen et al. 2013 PLOS 12 10 8 6 4 2 Bumble beevisitsper100flowers 0 Bumble bee Non- supplemented supplemented Bee Visits to Flowers Petersen et al. 2013 PLOS 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 Honey beevisitsper100 flowers Bumble beevisitsper100flowers 0 0 Bumble bee Non- Honey bee Non- supplemented supplemented supplemented supplemented Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences Was the stocking density was not high enough? Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences Was the stocking density was not high enough? 2.! Determine effects of increasing the stocking density of bumble bees QUAD Density Methods • Commercial pumpkin fields in NY in 2012 & 2013 • Fields randomly assigned for supplementation with bumble bees at: • low density – 1 QUAD per 2 acres • high density – 3 QUADs per 2 acres • none • Jack-o-lantern variety planted in 3 locations per field • Bee visits recorded 3 times during bloom (3 x 40m transects) • Marketable fruit harvested and weighed QUAD Density Yield Results 2012 & 2013 7 6 5 4 N=10 N=10 3 N=10 2 1 Average fruit weight per plant (kg) perplant weight fruit Average 0 Low density High density Non- supplementation"supplementation"supplemented" QUAD Density Bee Visits Results 2012 & 2013 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Bumble beevisitsper100Bumble flowers 0 Low density High density Non- supplementation supplementation supplemented Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences 2.! Determine effects of increasing the stocking density of bumble bees • High density of commercial bumble bees did not increase yield or bee visits Bumble Bee Visitation and Yield 2011 & 2012 14 12 10 8 6 plant (kg) plant 4 y = 0.14x + 5.16 2 R² = 0.24 P<0.001 Average fruit weight per weight fruit Average 0 0 10 20 30 40 Bumble bee visits per 100 flowers Wild Bees in the Landscape Are there certain types of landscapes that support more wild bees and produce greater yield? Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences 2.! Determine effects of increasing the stocking density of bumble bees • High density of commercial bumble bees did not increase yield or bee visits Could landscape features affect wild bees and the pollination services they provide? Objectives 1.! Determine effects of supplementing pumpkin fields with bumble bees, honey bees or none • Pumpkin yield – NO differences • Bee visits to pumpkin flowers – NO differences 2.! Determine effects of increasing the stocking density of bumble bees • High density of commercial bumble bees did not increase yield or bee visits Could landscape features affect wild bees and the pollination services they provide? 3. Determine effects of landscape features on bee visitation rate and yield Landscape Methods • Ground-truthed and digitized the landuse features within 2km of each pumpkin field • Typical foraging distance of bees 1-2km • Landuse features that might be important: 2km Ø % Grassland pumpkin (7-40%) Ø % Forest (9-42%) Ø Landscape diversity/ heterogeneity Landscape Results 2011 & 2012 8 High % 7 grassland 6 5 Low % 4 grassland 3 Fruit yield perplant (kg) 2 Low honey bee High honey bee visitation frequency visitation frequency Landscape Results 2011 & 2012 8 High % 7 grassland 6 5 Low % 4 grassland 3 Fruit yield perplant (kg) 2 Low honey bee High honey bee visitation frequency visitation frequency Landscape Results 2011 & 2012 8 8" High % " High 7 grassland 7" diversity 6 6" 5 5" Low % 4 4" grassland Low Fruit yield per plant (kg) 3 Fruit yield perplant (kg) 3" diversity 2 2" Low honey bee High honey bee Low bumble bee High bumble bee visitation frequency visitation frequency visitation frequency" visitation frequency" Landscape Results 2011 & 2012 8 8" High % " High 7 grassland 7" diversity 6 6" 5 5" Low % 4 4" grassland Low Fruit yield per plant (kg) 3 Fruit yield perplant (kg) 3" diversity 2 2" Low honey bee High honey bee Low bumble bee High bumble bee visitation frequency visitation frequency visitation frequency" visitation frequency" Landscape Conclusions Honey bee density" % High" Low" Grassland" High" Supplementing Consider not necessary" supplementing" Low" Supplementing Consider recommended" supplementing" Landscape Conclusions Honey bee density" % High" Low" Grassland" High" Supplementing Consider not necessary" supplementing" Low" Supplementing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Species Lists
    Appendix B: Sepcies Lists Appendix B: Species Lists In this appendix: Plants Mammals Birds Pollinators Fish and Mussels Reptiles and Amphibians Plants Scientific Name Common Name Abutilon theophrasti velvetleaf Acalypha ostryifolia pineland threeseed mercury Acalypha rhomboidea common threeseed mercury Acalypha virginica Virginia threeseed mercury Alliaria petiolata garlic mustard Amaranthus tamariscinus tall amaranth Ambrosia artemisifolia annual ragweed Ambrosia trifida great ragweed Ammannia coccinea valley redstem Amorpha brachycarpa leadplant Ampelopsis cordata heartleaf peppervine Amphicarpaea bracteata var. comosa American hogpeanut Amsonia illustris Ozark bluestar Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone Apocynum cannabinum Indian hemp Aristolochia tomentosa Woolly dutchman's pipe Artemisia annua sweet sagewort Asarum canadense Canadian wildginger Asclepias incarnata swamp milkweed Asclepias purpurascens purple milkweed Asclepias syriaca common milkweed Asclepias verticillata whorled milkweed Aster lateriflorus calico aster Aster pilosus hairy white oldfield aster Aster subulatus eastern annual saltmarsh aster Bergia texana Texas bergia Bidens cernua nodding beggerstick Bidens connata purplestem beggarticks Boehmeria cylindrica smallspike false nettle Callitriche terrestris terrestrial water-starwort Calystegia sepium hedge false bindweed Campsis radicans trumpet creeper Cardamine hirsuta hairy bittercress Carex crus-corvi ravenfoot sedge Carex hyalinolepis shoreline sedge, thinscale sedge Carex molesta troublesome sedge Cassia fasciculata
    [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]
  • Neonicotinoid Exposure Affects Foraging, Nesting, and Reproductive Success of Ground-Nesting 2 Solitary Bees
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.07.330605; this version posted October 8, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Neonicotinoid exposure affects foraging, nesting, and reproductive success of ground-nesting 2 solitary bees 3 D. Susan Willis Chan1, Nigel E. Raine1 4 1School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada 5 Email: [email protected]; [email protected] 6 Despite their indispensable role in food production1,2, insect pollinators are 7 threatened by multiple environmental stressors, including pesticide exposure2-4. Although 8 honeybees are important, most pollinating insect species are wild, solitary, ground-nesting 9 bees1,4-6 that are inadequately represented by honeybee-centric regulatory pesticide risk 10 assessment frameworks7,8. Here, for the first time, we evaluate the effects of realistic 11 exposure to systemic insecticides (imidacloprid, thiamethoxam or chlorantraniliprole) on a 12 ground-nesting bee species in a semi-field experiment. Hoary squash bees (Eucera 13 (Peponapis) pruinosa) provide essential pollination services to North American pumpkin 14 and squash crops9-14 and commonly nest within cropping areas10, placing them at risk of 15 exposure to pesticides in soil8,10, nectar and pollen15,16. Hoary squash bees exposed to an 16 imidacloprid-treated crop initiated 85% fewer nests, left 84% more pollen unharvested, 17 and produced 89% fewer offspring than untreated controls. We found no measurable 18 impact on squash bees from exposure to thiamethoxam- or chlorantraniliprole-treated 19 crops.
    [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]
  • A New Genus of Eucerine Bees Endemic to Southwestern North America Revealed in Phylogenetic Analyses of the Eucera Complex (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Eucerini)
    76 (2): 215 – 234 18.7.2018 © Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, 2018. A new genus of eucerine bees endemic to southwestern North America revealed in phylogenetic analyses of the Eucera complex (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Eucerini) Achik Dorchin *, 1, 2, Bryan Nicolas Danforth 1 & Terry Griswold 2 1 Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA; Achik Dorchin * [[email protected]]; Bryan Nicolas Dan- forth [[email protected]] — 2 USDA-ARS, Pollinating Insects Research Unit, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA; Terry Griswold [[email protected]] — * Corresponding author Accepted 17.iii.2018. Published online at www.senckenberg.de/arthropod-systematics on 29.vi.2018. Editors in charge: Bradley Sinclair & Klaus-Dieter Klass Abstract. The Eucera complex (Apidae: Eucerini), which traditionally included the genus Eucera and a few other related genera comprises a large complex in which generic boundaries have long remained unsettled. Based on comprehensive phylogenetic analyses, a recent study completely reorganized the generic classifcation of the group. Unexpectedly, both morphological and molecular analyses indicated that the taxon known as the venusta-group of the Eucera subgenus Synhalonia is in fact an isolated early diverging lineage, distantly related to Synhalonia. The only three species currently known in the venusta-group are endemic to arid and semi-arid habitats of the southwestern USA and Baja California in Mexico, and are relatively rare in entomological collections. Here we recognize a new genus: Protohalonia Dorchin gen.n., compare its morphology with related genera, and present a revision and identifcation keys for the three species included. We reexamine the phylogenetic position of the new genus based on our previously published molecular and morphological datasets, which we supplement with data for the remaining Protohalonia species.
    [Show full text]
  • Mulch Effects on Squash (Cucurbita Pepo L.) and Pollinator (Peponapis Pruinosa Say.) Performance
    Mulch Effects on Squash (Cucurbita pepo L.) and Pollinator (Peponapis pruinosa Say.) Performance Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Caitlin Elizabeth Splawski Graduate Program in Horticulture and Crop Science The Ohio State University 2012 Thesis Committee: Dr. Emilie Regnier, Advisor Dr. Kent Harrison, Advisor Dr. Mark Bennett Dr. Jim Metzger Dr. Karen Goodell Copyright by Caitlin Elizabeth Splawski 2012 Abstract Growing interest in sustainable, local food production has created incentives for crop producers in urban areas to grow food for local consumption using low chemical inputs and sustainable or organic management techniques. Weeds represent a major obstacle to any organic crop production system and for small-scale producers in urban environments there is a need for organic weed control methods that are inexpensive, sustainable, and effective. Mulch has been successfully used for weed control in numerous fruit and vegetable crops. Cucurbita pepo has a high pollination demand and the native, ground- nesting bee, Peponapis pruinosa, provides the majority of the crop's pollination requirement. Peponapis pruinosa nests directly in crop fields and the nests can be disturbed by tillage operations used for weed control. Mulches that utilize municipal waste materials may provide a sustainable weed control strategy for application in urban C. pepo plantings that is more benign to P. pruinosa than tillage. Novel mulch materials remain to be investigated for their effects on weed suppression, crop performance, crop nectar and pollen production, and bee nesting. Field and greenhouse studies of pumpkin and zucchini were conducted in 2011 and 2012 to determine the effects of polyethylene black plastic, woodchips, shredded newspaper, a combination of shredded newspaper plus grass clippings (NP+grass), and bare soil on soil characteristics, C.
    [Show full text]