34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Do managed bees have negative effects on wild bees?: A systematic review of the literature

      research-article
      * , ,
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Managed bees are critical for crop pollination worldwide. As the demand for pollinator-dependent crops increases, so does the use of managed bees. Concern has arisen that managed bees may have unintended negative impacts on native wild bees, which are important pollinators in both agricultural and natural ecosystems. The goal of this study was to synthesize the literature documenting the effects of managed honey bees and bumble bees on wild bees in three areas: (1) competition for floral and nesting resources, (2) indirect effects via changes in plant communities, including the spread of exotic plants and decline of native plants, and (3) transmission of pathogens. The majority of reviewed studies reported negative effects of managed bees, but trends differed across topical areas. Of studies examining competition, results were highly variable with 53% reporting negative effects on wild bees, while 28% reported no effects and 19% reported mixed effects (varying with the bee species or variables examined). Equal numbers of studies examining plant communities reported positive (36%) and negative (36%) effects, with the remainder reporting no or mixed effects. Finally, the majority of studies on pathogen transmission (70%) reported potential negative effects of managed bees on wild bees. However, most studies across all topical areas documented the potential for impact (e.g. reporting the occurrence of competition or pathogens), but did not measure direct effects on wild bee fitness, abundance, or diversity. Furthermore, we found that results varied depending on whether managed bees were in their native or non-native range; managed bees within their native range had lesser competitive effects, but potentially greater effects on wild bees via pathogen transmission. We conclude that while this field has expanded considerably in recent decades, additional research measuring direct, long-term, and population-level effects of managed bees is needed to understand their potential impact on wild bees.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Generalization in Pollination Systems, and Why it Matters

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems.

            Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions.

              Mutually beneficial interactions between flowering plants and animal pollinators represent a critical 'ecosystem service' under threat of anthropogenic extinction. We explored probable patterns of extinction in two large networks of plants and flower visitors by simulating the removal of pollinators and consequent loss of the plants that depend upon them for reproduction. For each network, we removed pollinators at random, systematically from least-linked (most specialized) to most-linked (most generalized), and systematically from most- to least-linked. Plant species diversity declined most rapidly with preferential removal of the most-linked pollinators, but declines were no worse than linear. This relative tolerance to extinction derives from redundancy in pollinators per plant and from nested topology of the networks. Tolerance in pollination networks contrasts with catastrophic declines reported from standard food webs. The discrepancy may be a result of the method used: previous studies removed species from multiple trophic levels based only on their linkage, whereas our preferential removal of pollinators reflects their greater risk of extinction relative to that of plants. In both pollination networks, the most-linked pollinators were bumble-bees and some solitary bees. These animals should receive special attention in efforts to conserve temperate pollination systems.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                8 December 2017
                2017
                : 12
                : 12
                : e0189268
                Affiliations
                [001]Department of Entomology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America
                University of Guelph, CANADA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                [¤]

                Current address: Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3782-1710
                Article
                PONE-D-16-40735
                10.1371/journal.pone.0189268
                5722319
                29220412
                cf799711-b244-4cf9-81f5-036f24f9c651
                © 2017 Mallinger et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 12 October 2016
                : 23 November 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 3, Pages: 32
                Funding
                The University of Wisconsin Vilas Associates Award and University of Wisconsin Hatch Funds (WIS201516) awarded to Claudio Gratton, and the United States Department of Agriculture Specialty Crop Block Grant (SCBG 15-02) awarded to Claudio Gratton and Hannah Gaines, provided funds to cover publication costs. These funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Hymenoptera
                Bees
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Behavior
                Animal Behavior
                Foraging
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Zoology
                Animal Behavior
                Foraging
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Hymenoptera
                Bees
                Honey Bees
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Plant Science
                Plant Anatomy
                Pollen
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Ecology
                Plant Ecology
                Plant Communities
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Ecology
                Plant Ecology
                Plant Communities
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Plant Science
                Plant Ecology
                Plant Communities
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Plants
                Fruits
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Agroecology
                Colony Collapse
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Ecology
                Agroecology
                Colony Collapse
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Ecology
                Agroecology
                Colony Collapse
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Plant Science
                Plant Anatomy
                Seeds
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article