Artificial Domicile Use by Bumble Bees (Bombus; Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Ontario, Canada.


Journal

Journal of insect science (Online)
ISSN: 1536-2442
Titre abrégé: J Insect Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101096396

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Jan 2019
Historique:
received: 31 08 2018
entrez: 19 1 2019
pubmed: 19 1 2019
medline: 8 2 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Bumble bees are an important group of pollinating insects that are of increasing conservation concern due to relatively recent and dramatic species-specific declines. Nesting ecology can vary significantly between species, and nest site selection may be affected by many factors, including heredity, individual experience, and habitat availability. Data on bumble bee nesting ecology are inherently difficult to collect in the wild as nests are often cryptic. Artificial domiciles (nest boxes) can be a useful tool for gathering information on species-specific nesting behavior to inform conservation management of native pollinator populations. The aim of this study was to examine the use of three different domicile designs for monitoring bumble bees: aboveground, underground, and false underground, while collecting information on occupying species identity and richness to compare with sampling with traditional netting survey methods. Across Ontario, the majority of sites had at least one domicile occupied, with the aboveground installation method proving most successful whereas no false-underground domiciles were occupied. Occupied domiciles appeared to preferentially sample certain species compared to netting surveys, and rarefied species richness of both methods was similar. Given that some bumble bees did occupy artificial domiciles, and species richness relative to sample size was high, with further refinement, this method may be useful for bumble bee research and monitoring: filling in nesting ecology knowledge gaps and potentially as a conservation management tool.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30657955
pii: 5292355
doi: 10.1093/jisesa/iey139
pmc: PMC6339236
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Références

Annu Rev Entomol. 2008;53:191-208
pubmed: 17803456
Syst Biol. 2008 Feb;57(1):58-75
pubmed: 18275002
Trends Ecol Evol. 2010 Jun;25(6):345-53
pubmed: 20188434
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jan 11;108(2):662-7
pubmed: 21199943
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Mar 19;110(12):4656-60
pubmed: 23487768

Auteurs

Sarah A Johnson (SA)

Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.
Wildlife Preservation Canada, Native Pollinator Initiative, Guelph, Canada.

Meagan M Tompkins (MM)

Department of Biology, York University, Toronto, Canada.

Hayley Tompkins (H)

Wildlife Preservation Canada, Native Pollinator Initiative, Guelph, Canada.
School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.

Sheila R Colla (SR)

Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Canada.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH