Suchergebnisse

Background and aims: Agricultural intensification and loss of farmland heterogeneity have contributed to population declines of wild bees and other pollinators, which may have caused subsequent declines in insect-pollinated wild plants. Material and methods: Using data from 37 studies on 22 pollinator-dependent wild plant species across Europe, we investigated whether flower visitation and seed set of insect-pollinated plants decline with an increasing proportion of arable land within 1 km. Key results: Seed set increased with increasing flower visitation by bees, most of which were wild bees, but not with increasing flower visitation by other insects. Increasing proportion of arable land had a strongly variable effect on seed set and flower visitation by bees across studies. Conclusion:Factors such as landscape configuration, local habitat quality, and temporally changing resource availability (e.g. due to mass-flowering crops or honey bee hives) could have modified the effect of arable land on pollination. While our results highlight that the persistence of wild bees is crucial to maintain plant diversity, we also show that pollen limitation due to declining bee populations in homogenized agricultural landscapes is not a universal driver causing parallel losses of bees and insect-pollinated plants. ; The original idea was conceived aspart of the project 'STEP - Status and trends of Europeanpollinators' funded by the European Union in the 7thFramework Programme (grant 244090), which fundedRB, ISD, HGS, SP, MR, LH, JME, and KS. JE and PCwere funded by MULTAGRI/FORMAS. MA was fundedby the EU FP5 project 'Evaluating current European agri-environment schemes to quantify and improve natureconservation efforts in agricultural landscapes' (EASY;QLRT-2001-01495) and the Swiss Federal Office for Scienceand Technology (01·0524-2). AJ and EÖ were funded byFORMAS. TTe and VS were supported by institutionalresearch funding IUT (IUT20-33) of the Estonian Ministryof Education and Research, and TTe also received funding(grant no. 42900/1312/3166) from the Internal Grant Agencyof the Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech Universityof Life Sciences Prague. IB was funded by MC-CIG BeeFunproject: PCIG14-GA-2013-631653 and thanks the DoñanaNP staff members for granting access to the Park and CurroMolina for conducting the field work. JS, EFP, and SM werefunded by DAFM and IRC. LH was funded by a grant fromFormas to HGS and by a mobility grant from Formas (2018-01466). ALH was funded by the FarmLand project supportedby the German Ministry of Research and Education (FKZ:01LC1104A). AKH was supported by the NKFIH project 348Pl. Ecol. Evol.154 (3), 2021(FK123813) and was a Bolyai Fellow of MTA. PB wassupported by the NKFIH (KKP 133839).

The foraging range of bees determines the spatial scale over which each species can provide pollination services. In agricultural ecosystems, productivity is related not only to the taxonomic diversity of bees per se, but also to the location of their nesting sites, which reflects on their flying range. Within this context, the present study sought to assess how wild bee assemblages affect the yield of Brassica napus at three different distances (25 m, 175 m, 325 m) from forest remnants in Southern Brazil. Bees were sampled by means of pan traps and findings were analyzed using the Shannon diversity index and generalized linear models. We identified 11 species of native bees, both solitary and social, as well as the exotic species Apis mellifera, which was most abundant. Our findings show that canola crop yield were positively influenced by the diversity of bee species. This demonstrates that native bees, not only A. mellifera, can contribute significantly to the productivity of canola crops. In addition, we found that bee body size is significantly associated with flight distance traveled within the canola fields, and demonstrated a relationship with nesting sites. Thus, we hypothesize that canola yields are associated with the presence of wild bee species, both social and solitary, and that maintenance of these pollinators is directly dependent on practices adopted in rural areas, whether within plantation fields per se or in forest remnants used as nesting sites by wild bees.

There is growing scientific evidence showing that many important pollinator species are in decline around the world. Bees are the most important pollinators in many parts of the world, and the combination of population declines in wild bees and widespread health problems among domesticated honey bees have potentially devastating impacts on both ecosystem health and agricultural prospects. Some scientists, native bee advocates, and beekeepers argue that cities can provide a refuge for bees from pesticide-laden rural landscapes, which has contributed to an increase in urban, hobbyist beekeeping and pollinator gardening. This dissertation employs a multispecies ethnography in two cities in Ontario, London and Toronto, to explore how the knowledges and experiences of urban bee advocates – who I call 'pollinator people' – shape the ways in which urban spaces are created, used, and managed. My approach is informed by a range of literatures, most notably urban political ecology and heterodox Marxism. A central argument of this dissertation is that urban, hobbyist beekeeping and pollinator gardening allow people to engage in 'playful work', a form of concrete, sensuous human activity that evokes feelings of curiosity and wonder. I also stress the importance of considering interspecies relations, highlighting how many of these pollinator people form strong emotional and embodied relationships with bees. Some native bee advocates argue that urban honey bees may cause some harm to native, wild bees through floral competition and pathogen transfer. This research suggests that bee-centred beekeeping utilizing organic management practices may help to sustain healthier, more resilient honey bees. Rather than banishing honey bees to rural landscapes of monocultures and pesticides where they are numerous but sickly, an emphasis should be placed on the creation of landscapes of abundance in which healthier honey bees can flourish together with native wild bees. Urban farms and community gardens are some of the most potent sites for landscapes of abundance in which people flourish alongside bees. Additionally, the experiences of beekeepers who collectively keep honey bees in shared apiaries can provide valuable insight into how humans can negotiate agency and autonomy with the animals whose lives they are managing to some degree. These experiences and knowledges can help create multispecies urban commons in which non-human animals, even insects, are integrated and considered within processes of radical democracy.

This work discusses the criteria proposed to consider wild bees as bioindicators and specifically applied to orchid bees in neotropical forests. Some of the issues are: 1) the deficiencies of the sampling methods, which makes it difficult to accurately assess species inventories. 2) missing knowledge about the biology of many species. 3) spatial or temporal distribution of most species remains unknown, which may misslead the results of short-term studies. 4) It is not clear whether orchid bees are affected by climate change as seen in other bees, which weakens their predictive potential. 5) A measure of the economic benefits provided by orchid bees is needed to better appraise them and their conservation. Finally, future studies should develop predictive models for conservation, accounting for evolutionary aspects like phylogeny or distributions; together with studies of the effect of disturbance on the physiology of the bees.

Throughout the Midwestern US, many public lands set aside for conservation engage in management activities (e.g., agriculture) that may act as stressors on wild bee populations. Several studies have investigated how wild bees respond to large-scale agriculture production; however, there has been limited assessment of how wild bees may be impacted by agricultural activity on public lands or how local variables may influence bee communities in these same areas. In this study, we assessed the abundance and richness of wild bee floral and nesting guilds at 30 agricultural field margins located on five Conservation Areas in Missouri. Generally, regardless of guild, bee abundance and richness was greater in field margins with more floral diversity and taller vegetation. Bee guilds responded negatively to agricultural production in Conservation Areas with fewer soil- and cavity-nesting bees collected in margins adjacent to annually cropped fields. Although fewer diet specialists were collected, specialist bee abundance and richness was greater in margins near fields that were uncropped (i.e., vegetated, but not row-cropped) during the previous year. Overall, the percentage of trees and shrubs within 800 m of study fields (i.e., "woodland") was negatively associated with abundance and richness of bees, but specifically, reduced richness of soil-nesters and diet specialists. Our findings indicate agricultural management activities on public lands may lead to decreased abundance and richness of wild bee guilds. If public lands are to be managed for species diversity, including wild bees, maintaining diverse plant communities with taller vegetation (>100 cm) near cultivated fields and/or modifying agricultural production practices on public lands may greatly improve the conservation of local bee communities. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC); Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; USDA-NIFAUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA) [MO-HANR0007]; Multi-State Working Group W3045 [MOMSNR0002]; MDC; University of Missouri; U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUS Fish & Wildlife Service; U.S. Geological SurveyUnited States Geological Survey; Wildlife Management Institute ; Special thanks to the MDC Conservation Area managers and biologists for their willing participation in this research: B. Anderson, D. Bryant, J. Demand, B. Diekmann, C. Freeman, A. Pearson, C. Smith, and N. Walker. We appreciate W. Boys, D. Corcoran, G. Graells, K. Kuechle, J. Piercefield, and A. Wilcox for their assistance in field data collection. Thank you to M. Arduser for his willingness to consult on identification of more challenging bee species. We thank M. Vandever (USGS) for his insightful reviewof our manuscript and the two other anonymous reviewers for their time and comments into strengthening this paper. This work was funded through a cooperative agreement with the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) in collaboration with L. Webb and K. Goyne. Partial support was also provided by Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and USDA-NIFA through Hatch funding (MO-HANR0007) and Multi-State Working Group W3045 (MOMSNR0002). The Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly sponsored by the MDC, the University of Missouri, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Wildlife Management Institute. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. ; Public domain authored by a U.S. government employee

Until now, the existing microeconomic models concerned with pollination markets have not accommodated the global diversity of beekeeper-farmer interactions. The most prominent of such theoretical models is dedicated to describing the determinants of colony stocking densities and of equilibrium wages that farmers have paid to commercial beekeepers for decades in the highly bee-pollination reliant almond monocultures of California. This cumulative dissertation generalizes this basic model by taking into account the marginal productivity of a given agro-ecosystem's wild bees and the opportunity costs that farmers incur when assigning labor time to beekeeping. In that regard, we assessed the economic potential of on-farm beekeeping, which can involve several bee species, by juxtaposing this activity's net benefits against those from hiring commercial pollination services. In addition to serving as a classification tool for a plurality of farmer-beekeeper-nature interactions and related optimization problems, the resulting analytical framework helps identifying the institutional settings that are most likely to lead to a specific bioeconomic equilibrium supply of pollination. What is more, it illustrates the interplay of the pertinent economic and agro-ecological factors, thus assisting the postulation of empirically testable hypotheses. We also conducted two separate discrete choice experiments (DCEs) with orchardists from the Thai provinces of Chiang Mai (N = 198 respondents) and Chanthaburi (N = 127), in order to elicit their preferences for changes in the population of local wild bees that would hypothetically result from a conservation policy consisting (along with a per-household implementation fee) of at least one of the following three measures: (i) offering farmers bee-friendly alternatives to conventional agro-chemicals, (ii) enabling the protection and/or rehabilitation of natural bee habitats near cropland, and (iii) fostering the husbandry of native bee species by transferring technical knowledge on the ...

INSIGNIA aims to design and test an innovative, non-invasive, scientifically proven citizen science environmental monitoring protocol for the detection of pesticides via honey bees. It is a pilot project initiated and financed by the European Commission (PP-1-1-2018; EC SANTE). The study is being carried out by a consortium of specialists in honey bees, apiculture, chemistry, molecular biology, statistics, analytics, modelling, extension, social science and citizen science from twelve countries. Honey bee colonies are excellent bio-samplers of biological material such as nectar, pollen and plant pathogens, as well as non-biological material such as pesticides or airborne contamination. Honey bee colonies forage over a circle of about 1 km radius, increasing to several km if required depending on the availability and attractiveness of food. All material collected is concentrated in the hive, and the honey bee colony can provide four main matrices for environmental monitoring: bees, honey, pollen and wax. For pesticides, pollen and wax are the focal matrices. Pollen collected in pollen traps will be sampled every two weeks to record foraging conditions. During the season, most of pollen is consumed within days, so beebread can provide recent, random sampling results. On the other hand wax acts as a passive sampler, building up an archive of pesticides that have entered the hive. Alternative in-hive passive samplers will be tested to replicate wax as a "pesticide-sponge". Samples will be analysed for the presence of pesticides and the botanical origin of the pollen using an ITS2 DNA metabarcoding approach. Data on pollen and pesticides will be then be combined to obtain information on foraging conditions and pesticide use, together with evaluation of the CORINE database for land use and pesticide legislation to model the exposure risks to honey bees and wild bees. All monitoring steps from sampling through to analysis will be studied and tested in four countries in year 1, and the best practices will then be ring-tested in nine countries in year 2. Information about the course of the project and its results and publications will be available in the INSIGNIA website www.insignia-bee.eu. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

This book discusses the interplay among bees, agriculture and the environment. Both managed and wild bees are critical for successful pollination of numerous fruit, vegetable, oilseed and legume seed crops and are considered here. So is treatment of how bees also impact the agro-ecosystem in ways beyond simple pollination, such as by transporting pollen from genetically modified plants and by enhancing biological control strategies. The principles and examples are international. The concept is in line with current thinking of pollination as an important ecological process, and an understanding of agriculture as disturbance ecology.

This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer Nature via the DOI in this record ; Intensive agricultural landscapes can be hostile for bees due to a lack of floral and nesting resources, and due to management-related stress such as pesticide use and soil tillage. This threatens the pollination services that bees deliver to insect-pollinated crops. We studied the effects of farming intensity (organic vs. conventional, number of insecticide applications) and availability of semi-natural habitats at the field and landscape scale on pollinator visits and pollen delivery to pumpkin in Germany. We found that wild bumble bees were the key pollinators of pumpkin in terms of pollen delivery, despite fivefold higher visitation frequency of honey bees. Critically, we observed that the area of cropland had stronger effects on bees' pollen deposition than the area of seminatural habitats. Specifically, a 10% increase of the proportion of cropland reduced pollen delivery by 7%. Pumpkin provides a striking example for a key role of wild pollinators in crop pollination even at high numerical dominance of honey bees. In addition, our findings suggest that habitat conversion to agricultural land is a driver of deteriorating pollination. This underlines the importance to maintain sufficient areas of non-crop habitats in agricultural landscapes. ; This work is part of the QuESSA project and has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No. 311879.

INSIGNIA aims to design and test an innovative, non-invasive, scientifically proven citizen science environmental monitoring protocol for the detection of pesticides by honey bees. It is a 30-month pilot project initiated and financed by the EC (PP-1-1-2018; EC SANTE). The study is being carried out by a consortium of specialists in honey bees, apiculture, statistics, analytics, modelling, extension, social science and citizen science from twelve countries. Honey bee colonies are excellent bio-samplers of biological material such as nectar, pollen and plant pathogens, as well as non-biological material such as pesticides or airborne contamination. Honey bee colonies forage over a circle of 1 km radius, increasing to several km if required, depending on the availability and attractiveness of food. All material collected is accumulated in the hive. ; The honey bee colony can provide four main matrices for environmental monitoring: bees, honey, pollen and wax. Because of the non-destructive remit of the project, for pesticides, pollen is the focal matrix and used as trapped pollen and beebread in this study. Although beeswax can be used as a passive sampler for pesticides, this matrix is not being used in INSIGNIA because of its polarity dependent absorbance, which limits the required wide range of pesticides to be monitored. Alternatively, two innovative non-biological matrices are being tested: i) the "Beehold tube", a tube lined with the generic absorbent polyethylene-glycol PEG, through which hive-entering bees are forced to pass, and ii) the "APIStrip" (Absorbing Pesticides In-hive Strips) with a specific pesticide absorbent which is hung between the bee combs. ; Beebread and pollen collected in pollen traps are being sampled every two weeks to be analysed for pesticide residues and to record foraging conditions. Trapped pollen provides snapshots of the foraging conditions and contaminants on a single day. During the active season, the majority of beebread is consumed within days, so beebread provides recent, random sampling results. The Beehold tube and the APIStrips are present throughout the 2-weeks sampling periods in the beehive, absorbing and accumulating the incoming contaminants. The four matrices i.e. trapped pollen, beebread, Beehold tubes and APIStrips will be analysed for the presence of pesticides. The botanical origin of trapped pollen, beebread and pollen in the Beehold tubes will also be determined with an innovative molecular technique. Data on pollen and pesticide presence will then be combined to obtain information on foraging conditions and pesticide use, together with evaluation of the CORINE database for land use and pesticide legislation to model the exposure risks to honey bees and wild bees. All monitoring steps from sampling through to analysis will be studied and rigorously tested in four countries in Year 1, and the best practices will then be ring-tested in nine countries in Year 2. Information about the course of the project, its results and publications will be available on the INSIGNIA website www.insignia-bee.eu and via social media: on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/insigniabee.eu/); Instagram insignia_bee); and Twitter (insignia_bee). Although the analyses of pesticide residues and pollen identification will not be completed until December 2019, in my talk I will present preliminary results of the Year 1 sampling. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

European Union Reference Laboratory (EURL) for Honeybee Health ; International audience ; Bees are exposed to a wide range of multiple chemicals "chemical mixtures" from anthropogenic (e.g. plant protection products or veterinary products) or natural origin (e.g. mycotoxins, plant toxins). Quantifying the relative impact of multiple chemicals on bee health compared with other environmental stressors (e.g. varroa, viruses, and nutrition) has been identified as a priority to support the development of holistic risk assessment methods. Here, extensive literature searches and data collection of available laboratory studies on combined toxicity data for binary mixtures of pesticides and non-chemical stressors has been performed for honey bees (Apis mellifera), wild bees (Bombus spp.) and solitary bee species (Osmia spp.). From 957 screened publications, 14 publications provided 218 binary mixture toxicity data mostly for acute mortality (lethal dose: LD50) after contact exposure (61%), with fewer studies reporting chronic oral toxicity (20%) and acute oral LC50 values (19%). From the data collection, available dose response data for 92 binary mixtures were modelled using a Toxic Unit (TU) approach and the MIXTOX modelling tool to test assumptions of combined toxicity i.e. concentration addition (CA), and interactions (i.e. synergism, antagonism). The magnitude of interactions was quantified as the Model Deviation Ratio (MDR). The CA model applied to 17% of cases while synergism and antagonism were observed for 72% (MDR > 1.25) and 11% (MDR < 0.83) respectively. Most synergistic effects (55%) were observed as interactions between sterol-biosynthesis-inhibiting (SBI) fungicides and insecticide/acaricide. The mechanisms behind such synergistic effects of binary mixtures in bees are known to involve direct cytochrome P450 (CYP) inhibition, resulting in an increase in internal dose and toxicity of the binary mixture. Moreover, bees are known to have the lowest number of CYP copies and other detoxification enzymes in ...

Wild bees support global agroecosystems via pollination of agricultural crops and maintaining diverse plant communities. However, with an increased reliance on pesticides to enhance crop production, wild bee communities may inadvertently be affected through exposure to chemical residues. Laboratory and semi-field studies have demonstrated lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoids on limited genera (e.g., Apis, Bombus, Megachile), yet full field studies evaluating impacts to wild bee communities remain limited. Here, we conducted a two-year field study to assess whether neonicotinoid seed treatment and presence in environmental media (e.g., soil, flowers) influenced bee nest and diet guild abundance and richness. In 2017 and 2018, we planted 23 Missouri agricultural fields to soybeans (Glycine max) using one of three seed treatments: untreated (no insecticide), treated (imidadoprid), or previously-treated (untreated, but neonicotinoid use prior to 2017). During both years, wild bees were collected in study field margins monthly (May to September) in tandem with soil and flowers from fields and field margins that were analyzed for neonicotinoid residues. Insecticide presence in soils and flowers varied over the study with neonicotinoids infrequently detected in both years within margin flowers (0%), soybean flowers (<1%), margin soils (<8%), and field soils (similar to 39%). Wild bee abundance and species richness were not significantly different among field treatments. In contrast, neonicotinoid presence in field soils was associated with significantly lower richness (ground- and aboveground-nesting, diet generalists) of wild bee guilds. Our findings support that soil remains an underexplored route of exposure and long-term persistence of neonicotinoids in field soils may lead to reduced diversity in regional bee communities. Future reduction or elimination of neonicotinoid seed treatment use on areas managed for wildlife may facilitate conservation goals to sustain viable, diverse wild bee populations. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC); USDA-NIFAUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA) [MO-HANR0007]; MultiState Working Group W3045 [MOMSNR0002]; MDC; University of Missouri; U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUS Fish & Wildlife Service; U.S. Geological SurveyUnited States Geological Survey; Wildlife Management Institute ; Published version ; Thank you to M. Arduser, T. Christensen, O. Hannig, K. Kuechle, R. Owen, and J. Piercefield for assistance in field data collection or bee identification. We appreciate the support and involvement of MDC Area Managers, biologists, and staff. Special thanks to A. HarmonThreatt and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments to help strengthen the manuscript. This work was funded through a cooperative agreement with the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) . Partial support was also provided to KG by USDA-NIFA through Hatch funding (MO-HANR0007) and MultiState Working Group W3045 (MOMSNR0002) . The Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly sponsored by MDC, the University of Missouri, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Wildlife Management Institute. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

European Union Reference Laboratory (EURL) for Honeybee Health ; International audience ; Bees are exposed to a wide range of multiple chemicals "chemical mixtures" from anthropogenic (e.g. plant protection products or veterinary products) or natural origin (e.g. mycotoxins, plant toxins). Quantifying the relative impact of multiple chemicals on bee health compared with other environmental stressors (e.g. varroa, viruses, and nutrition) has been identified as a priority to support the development of holistic risk assessment methods. Here, extensive literature searches and data collection of available laboratory studies on combined toxicity data for binary mixtures of pesticides and non-chemical stressors has been performed for honey bees (Apis mellifera), wild bees (Bombus spp.) and solitary bee species (Osmia spp.). From 957 screened publications, 14 publications provided 218 binary mixture toxicity data mostly for acute mortality (lethal dose: LD50) after contact exposure (61%), with fewer studies reporting chronic oral toxicity (20%) and acute oral LC50 values (19%). From the data collection, available dose response data for 92 binary mixtures were modelled using a Toxic Unit (TU) approach and the MIXTOX modelling tool to test assumptions of combined toxicity i.e. concentration addition (CA), and interactions (i.e. synergism, antagonism). The magnitude of interactions was quantified as the Model Deviation Ratio (MDR). The CA model applied to 17% of cases while synergism and antagonism were observed for 72% (MDR > 1.25) and 11% (MDR < 0.83) respectively. Most synergistic effects (55%) were observed as interactions between sterol-biosynthesis-inhibiting (SBI) fungicides and insecticide/acaricide. The mechanisms behind such synergistic effects of binary mixtures in bees are known to involve direct cytochrome P450 (CYP) inhibition, resulting in an increase in internal dose and toxicity of the binary mixture. Moreover, bees are known to have the lowest number of CYP copies and other detoxification enzymes in the insect kingdom. In the light of these findings, occurrence of these binary mixtures in relevant crops (frequency and concentrations) would need to be investigated. Addressing this exposure dimension remains critical to characterise the likelihood and plausibility of such interactions to occur under field realistic conditions. Finally, data gaps and further work for the development of risk assessment methods to assess multiple stressors in bees including chemicals and non-chemical stressors in bees are discussed.