4.2 Article

Use of human-made nesting structures by wild bees in an urban environment

期刊

JOURNAL OF INSECT CONSERVATION
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 239-253

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10841-016-9857-y

关键词

Wild bees; Nesting resource availability; Nest-site fidelity; Phylopatry; Nest-site selection; Substrate quality; Human-made nesting structures; Urban area

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most bees display an array of strategies for building their nests, and the availability of nesting resources plays a significant role in organizing bee communities. Although urbanization can cause local species extinction, many bee species persist in urbanized areas. We studied the response of a bee community to winter-installed human-made nesting structures (bee hotels and soil squares, i.e. 0.5 m deep holes filled with soil) in urbanized sites. We investigated the colonization pattern of these structures over two consecutive years to evaluate the effect of age and the type of substrates (e.g. logs, stems) provided on colonization. Overall, we collected 54 species. In the hotels, two gregarious species, Osmia bicornis L. and O. cornuta Latr. dominated the community (over 87 % of the data). Over 2 years, the age of the soil squares did not affect their level of colonization and the same was true for the hotels with respect to O. bicornis and 'other species'. However, O. cornuta occurred less often and raised fewer descendants in 1-year old hotels than in new ones. Bee nesting was not affected by the soil texture and, among above-ground nesting bees, only O. bicornis showed a preference for some substrates, namely Acer sp. and Catalpa sp. In a context of increasing urbanization and declining bee populations, much attention has focused upon improving the floral resources available for bees, while little effort has been paid to nesting resources. Our results indicate that, in addition to floral availability, nesting resources should be taken into account in the development of urban green areas to promote a diverse bee community.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据