beemonitoring : Messages : 1392-1421 of 2726

Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date

#1392 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 4:58 pm
Subject: BIML Update - Faunas, Agapostemon, Colletes, Nomada, Bombus sam_droege
Send Email

3/1/2011

Bee Faunas

Bee Faunas are now available for sharing in the Faunas ftp site:
ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/er/md/laurel/Droege/Faunas/
If you have additional faunas please send....(for example, we need the Carlinville Illinois Faunas)

Bahamas Bimini 1953 Krombein.pdf
Canada Maritimes 2003 Javorek.pdf
Canada Ontario Southern Bombus 2010 Colla.pdf
Cuba 2008 Genaro.pdf
Cuba Island of Pines 2004 Genaro.pdf
Czech Republic Birch Stand 2003 Kula.pdf
Czech Republic Spruce Stand 2003 Kula 1.pdf
Czech Republic Spruce Stand 2003 Kula 2.pdf
Hispanola 2007 Genaro.pdf
Trinidad Near 2004 Starr.doc
United Kingdom Yorkshire Crow Wood 1995 Archer.pdf
USA Alaska Interior 1989 Armbruster.pdf
USA Berkeley 2005 Frankie.pdf
USA Colorado Boulder County 2009 Kearns.pdf
USA Colorado Urban 2009 Kearns.pdf
USA Florida Alachua county 2010 Hall.pdf
USA Florida Everglades 1999 Pascarella.pdf
USA Illinois Chicago 2009 Tonietto.pdf
USA Kansas Lawrence 1983 Laroca.pdf
USA Louisiana Mississippi 2006 Bartholomew.pdf
USA Maryland Anne Arundel Microdeserts 2009 Droege.pdf
USA Maryland Assateague Island National Seashore 2010 Orr.pdf
USA Maryland Plummers Island 1979 Krombein.pdf
USA Mississippi Lower 1947.pdf
USA New York New York Urban 2008 Matteson.pdf
USA New York New York Suburban 2008 Fetridge.pdf
USA Ohio kitty todd preserve 2011 Arduser.pdf
USA Pennsylvania 2010 Donovall.pdf
USA Puerto Rico 2008 Genaro.pdf
USA Virginia Great Galls 2009 Steury.pdf

Sue Boo from our lab found a cool utility for extracting names of files in a folder: http://www.infonautics.ch/directorylistprint/

We are going back now over many guide characters and states and refining them...here are some:

Nomada Female - White Setae on Hind Tibia

N. cressonii vs. N. parva vs. N. pygmaea vs. N. illinoensis vs. and N. sayi - NOTE - These are all common species that are almost ALWAYS confused by the beginning practitioner, they have no completely unambiguous characteres that always separate all specimens, and usually require comparative material as well as an expectation that some will not resolve

N. cressonii - LARGEST species - Usually separated by its large size, T5 with clear yellow markings, and a pseudopygidium that is comparatively wider than the others - In comparison, N. pygmaea almost never has anything more than yellow smudges on T5 or T4, N. sayi-illinoensis-parva are smaller in size with slender mandibles - Note that N. denticulata is often confused with this species

N. parva - Usually the SMALLEST species, but there is overlap with N. sayi and N. illinoensis who average slightly larger - T2 and T3 with small pale yellow circular marks on the FAR lateral sides - Tergites shiny and WITHOUT any pitting - T4 with a complete latitudinal basal dark band, this band not completely black but as dark as the dark marks found on the LATERAL edges of the base of T1 - note that other species have the base of T1 blacker and this mark goes COMPLETELY across the segment, many have PITTING on T2 but many also do not, other small species almost always have relatively larger spots on the lateral sides of T2 and 3 and these often extent to T5, these spots area also more sharply defines and of a brighter color

N. pygmaea - An INTERMEDIATE sized species - Abdomen, yellow coloring, usually restricted to lateral patches on T2-T3 - In direct comparison to the smaller species, which it can overlap in size with, the mandibles are thicker and not as long, additionally, when viewed from the side, in profile, the top of the clypeus clearly rises upwards from the base of the supraclypeus to the rim and is readily visible most of the way above the profile of the compound eye, in contrast the smaller species clypeus, in profile, angles upward hardly at all and is visible above the level of the compound eye only towards the end - In contrast to N. cressonii N. pygmaea never appears to have anything more than indistinct yellow smudges on T4-5, but N. cressonii may not have markings on those tergites either, in comparison the pseudopygidial area is narrower and longer than N. cressonii

N. sayi and N. illinoensis - It is uclear if N. sayi and N. illinoensis are different species, at this point the BIML group does not differentiate the two - These species are characterized by thin mandibles and small size, but see comments under N. pygmaea and N. parva for further means of differentiating this

Male, A. sericeus vs A. texanus

A. sericeus - T2-4 has scattered thin, dark hairs that emerge from the dark latitudinal integument bands and lay prone across the narrow transparent rims of these segments, but are not noticeable except under magnfication - In direct comparison, the dark latitudinal bands of the tergites have no or only vague green overtones

A. texanus - T2-4 has scattered thin and white or pale hairs that emerge from the dark latitudinal integument bands and lay prone across the narrow transparent rims of these segments, but are not noticeable except under magnfication, - In direct comparison, the dark latitudinal bands of the tergites have a STRONG metallic green to blue overtone

The follow Agapostemon Characters are from Michael Orr and Kim Huntzinger.
.
Female, scutellum, surface texture, NOT counting the large and areolate patterning along the posterior rim

Scutellum doubly punctate, having both small and large pits, with the smaller pits of roughly equal density throughout (ang/tex, obliquus, splendens, tyleri)

Scutellum variably punctate, having pits of many different sizes, with the smallest pits present far more densely in the anterior and often medial portions of the
scutellum, sometimes forming a T with a bare and shiny spot to each side (coloradinus, femoratus, melliventris, nasutus, obliquus, sericeus, splendens, tyleri, virescens)

Scutellum with all pits of roughly one size and their pit density uniform, except in some specimens where this is a pair of lateral spots where pitting is either less dense or absent, giving these areas a shinier appearance (leunculus, melliventris, splendens)

Female, A. nasutus vs all others

A nasutus - With a pale yellow or creamy spot at the apex of the pronotal lobe - Clypeus strongly concave medially within the apically yellow clypeal rim - Clypeus considerably broader than long, often more than three times as wide as its length

All others - Pronotal lobe apex similarly colored in comparison to the surrounding integument, without a pale yellow or creamy spot - Clypeus flat in the variably-colored apical rim, or if concave then only very slightly and most often as a result of pitting, rather than a literal dip in the integument - Clypeus with variable breadth, most often only double the clypeal length at most

Female, A. femoratus vs A. obliquus and A. sericeus, thorax, scutum, surface between parapsidal lines

A. femoratus - Coarsely rugose to areolate, with the patterning enlarged to the point that the bottoms of all or nearly all of the enclosed, pit-like structures are visible and shiny - Patterning between parapsidal lines largely made up of non-circular formations

A. obliquus and A. sericeus - Coarsely punctate, with many pits that are not large enough for the bottom of them to be seen, although the surface may be slightly rugose laterally and apically - Patterning between parapsidal lines largely made up of circular formations

Female, A. angelicus vs A. texanus

A. angelicus - The females of this species can not be reliably distinguished from the females of A. texanus based on morphology. However, the range of A. angelicus is limited to the area West of the Mississippi river, making it impossible to tell the species in that region.

A. texanus - The females of this species can not be reliably distinguished from the females of A. angelicus based on morphology. As A. texanus has a distribution including East of the Mississippi river, any specimens that are either A. angelicus or A. texanus in this area may be safely regarded as A. texanus.

Female, head, supraclypeal area, pitting

Supraclypeus produced into a strong bump, the pinnacle of which is largely unpitted and unpatterned such that it has a smooth and shiny appearance in comparison to the integument elsewhere on the supraclypeus (ang/tex, coloradinus, tyleri)

Supraclypeal bump medially roughened by transverse striations or heavy pitting, with no central shiny area as a result (all except tyleri)

Female, A. coloradinus vs A. tyleri

A. coloradinus - With a much smaller medially smooth and shiny area in the center of the supraclypeus at the apex of the raised area, the remainder of the area appearing heavily marked by faint transverse striations which often intrude upon the medially unpitted area - Gena with coarser striations that extend along the eye up to the vertex - The appressed, white hair patches of T1 are usually longitudinally longer than latitudinally wide, never coming close to meeting medially on T1, and sometimes being entirely absent - In direct comparison, larger, and with wings nearly as brownish as those of A. splendens

A. tyleri - With a much larger medially smooth and shiny area of the supraclypeus, the remainder of the raised area of the supraclypeus appearing smooth or weakly roughened by faint bumpy patterning which does not intrude upon the medially unpitted area - Gena with finer striations that extend upward along the eye only slightly past halfway, if at all - The appressed, white hair patches of T1 are latitudinally wider than longitudinally long, nearly meeting in the center of T1 - In direct comparison, smaller, and with much lighter wings

Female, A. coloradinus vs A. virescens - CAREFUL, difficult to separate pair

A. coloradinus - Fine striations on gena, about 5-6 per 0.25mm, best viewed from below - Striations of the gena, specifically those along the outside of the eye, continuing to the top of the eye or very nearly so, WITHOUT a network of very strongly-defined, reticulations which form circular or oblong enclosures, BUT sometimes with irregularly roughened patterning near the top of the eye - The pitting at the middle of T2 near the base of the apically impressed rim is about equal in both pit size and pit density to the areas directly anterior and posterior, giving T2 an equally dulled appearance throughout - In direct comparison, usually LARGER, with only the smallest individuals equal in size to the average A. virescens

A. virescens - Coarse striations on gena, about 2-3 per 0.25 mm, best viewed from below - Striations of the gena, specifically those along the outside of the eye, most often only continuing along only 80-percent of the eye height at most, where the striations will usually either terminate abruptly or separate from the outside edge of the eye, in both cases giving way to a strongly-defined network of reticulations which form circular or oblong enclosures - The pitting at the middle of T2 near the base of the apically impressed rim is of greater size than the pits directly anterior and posterior, this also decreasing the pit density such that sometimes interpit spacing nears one pit diameter and the area becomes noticeably more shiny than elsewhere on T2, BUT be careful as sometimes this species appears to have very similar pitting to A. coloradinus - In direct comparison, usually SMALLER, with only the largest individuals near equal in size to the average A. coloradinus

Female, A. obliquus vs. A. sericeus - Difficult to separate pair

A. obliquus - SOME specimens with yellow basally and+or apically on the scape, when present the yellow is usually at least equal in length to the pedicel or nearly so - In direct comparison, pit density just before the apically impressed rim on T1 MOST OFTEN found to be higher than in A. sericeus such that interpit spacing does not exceed one pit diameter except at the farthest lateral sides - The distribution of A. obliquus is more southwestern than primarily eastern A. sericeus, however both species have been collected in TX and WY

A. sericeus - NO specimens with yellow on the scape, at most with the integument slightly paled such that it appears a lighter brown than the rest of the scape - In direct comparison, pit density just before the apically impressed rim on T1 MOST OFTEN found to be lower than in A. obliquus such that interpit spacing here will often exceed two pit diameters, CAREFUL as some specimens of A. sericeus have very low interpit spacing similar to A. obliquus - The distribution of A. sericeus is more eastern than primarily southwestern A. obliquus, however both species have been collected in TX and WY

New State Records - From the Museum of Comparative Zoology

Nomada vegana - Georgia
Nomada gracilis - Alaska
Nomada lehighensis - West Virginia
Nomada lehighensis - Newfoundland

Bombus Guide Additions from Michael Orr

PSITHYRUS Subgenus ONLY - Females, B. fernaldae vs other parasitic species

B. fernaldae - On the apex of S6, there is a long, ventrally-directed, bare of hairs, acutely shaped, curved projection or plate, that looks similar to the spike-like nail of a dog, having a length at least twice its minimum width when viewed head-on from the rear, often appearing as a heavily curved claw - When viewed in profile, the upper surface of T6 displays a clear oblique bend in the profile, that bend occurring about one third of the way from the tip

Other Psithyrus species - On S6, the projection is either unnoticeable or with its length only equal to its minimum width, often appearing as a small knob when not obscured by hair - When viewed in profile, the upper surface of T6 forms a smooth concave or convex curve or straight line

Colletes updates from Michael Orr

C. distinctus vs C. inaequalis vs C. thoracicus

C. distinctus - Cheek distinctly less broad than the width of the eye in profile - Scutum with intermixed black hairs medially among the off-white hairs - Scutellum has black hairs intermixed with the off-white hairs - Pits on T1 only very slightly larger than the pits of T2, if at all - The band of hair that lines the rim of the tergites clearly and densely present such that the integument beneath is most often completely obscured, on T1 the hair band ranges from complete to widely medially interrupted, always complete on T2-4 and with T5 highly variable

C. inaequalis - Cheek about as broad as the width of the eye in profile, often broader - Scutum with intermixed black hairs medially among the off-white hairs - Scutellum has black hairs intermixed with the off-white hairs - Pits on T1 very clearly larger than the pits of T2 - The band of hair that lines the rim of the tergites clearly and densely present such that the integument beneath is most often completely obscured, these hair bands usually narrowly medially interrupted or weakened on T1 and complete on T2-4, with T5 being highly variable in its completion

C. thoracicus - Cheek appearing to be slightly less broad than the width of the eye in profile, although sometimes appearing equally broad - Scutum with EXTREMELY FEW, if any, black hairs intermixed among the brownish-orangish hairs, which themselves obviously contrast in color when compared to the off-white hairs of the mesepisternum - Scutellum with EXTREMELY FEW, if any, black hairs intermixed among the brownish-orangish hairs - Pits on T1 clearly larger than the pits of T2, although the difference is not as large here as it is in C. inaequalis - The band of hair that lines the rim of the tergites considerably weaker than in either C. distinctus or C. inaequalis, often appearing completely absent or very nearly so

Nomada Female Guide

Red-haired Species - Species with upright bristles of red hair that stand above the normal white hairs, these hairs particularly prominent on the scape and labrum. All have very long and thin mandibles that stretch at least to and often surpass the edge of the hypostomal cavity. All spring species have no yellow marks on T1. Expect some specimens to lie inbetween the descriptions presented below

N. composita - Abdomen, T2 and T3, with small to very SMALL yellow patches - Head, cheek, carinate - Pseudopygidial area unique in that among the usually silvery hairs are longer white hairs that project slightly beyond the pseudopygidial area, these similar in thickness to those on the rest of the abdomen - Hind leg, tibia, usually with 2 setae

N. depressa - Season, mid to late spring - Abdomen, T2-T5, usually with strong yellow patches on the sides, but can be dots in some individuals or complete interrupted stripes - Head, cheek, USUALLY, but not always, strongly carinate - Antenna, color, red-brown - Hind leg, tibia, with 3-6 setae - In comparison, red hairs not as noticeable as in the other springs species, but a pseudopygidial patch that is half or more the longitudinal length of T5 is distinctive

N. inepta - Season, mid to late spring species - Abdomen, T2, with large yellow patches - T3, usually with NO yellow patches - T4, with LINEAR yellow patches -T5, with very LARGE yellow patches - Head, cheek, NOT carinate or with only a hint of an out-turn - Hind leg, tibia, with 2-5 setae

N. valida - Abdomen, with NO yellow markings - The tips of the psuedopygidial hairs are distinctly squared off at least along the rim - Setae on hind tibia 3-7 - Cheek rim not carinate - A rare northern species

N. vicina - Season, late summer to fall species - Abdomen, T1-T5, yellow markings on forming STIPES or broken stripes - Head, cheek, CARINATE - Antenna, color, dark BROWN-BLACK - Hind leg, tibia, with 3-4 setae - In comparison, red hairs not as noticeable as in the other species, so at times they may be missed

The Slideshow for Displaying Hand Sanitizer turned out to be very popular with 3800 views at this point in time.
http://www.slideshare.net/sdroege/how-preserve-insect-specimens-in-hand-sanitizer

Sam Droege sdroege@...
w 301-497-5840 h 301-390-7759 fax 301-497-5624
USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
BARC-EAST, BLDG 308, RM 124 10300 Balt. Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705
Http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov

Split the Lark

Split the Lark--and you'll find the Music--
Bulb after Bulb, in Silver rolled--
Scantily dealt to the Summer Morning
Saved for your Ear when Lutes be old.

Loose the Flood--you shall find it patent--
Gush after Gush, reserved for you--
Scarlet Experiment! Sceptic Thomas!
Now, do you doubt that your Bird was true?

- Emily Dickinson

P Bees are not optional.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1393 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 4:38 pm
Subject: Announcement: A non-profit is now selling unpainted and painted bee bowls sam_droege
Send Email

All:

Spring is here and that means time to start putting out bowl traps. In the past many of you have had problems obtaining the standard 3.25 ounce white bowls and florescent paints as recommended in the Handy Bee Manual. Well, I am happy to announce that you can now purchase both unpainted white 3.25 ounce white solo bowls and pre-painted (2 coats) florescent yellow and florescent blue (Guerra pigments as formulated in the Handy Bee Manual) bowls from New Horizons Supported Services. New Horizons is a non-profit devoted to empowering and supporting people with disabilities and we have been working with them over the past month to help them set up a bee bowl painting operation and they are ready and already have begun shipping out bowls to researchers and students of bees.

http://www.nhssi.org/

You can contact them directly through Cynthia Swift-King (Email: cking@..., Tel: 301 249 0206, Fax: 301 249 4512).

Currents rates are

$0.05 per bowl for unpainted bowls
$0.19 per bowl for painted bowls

Shipping costs are separate, with USPS, FedEx, and UPS options all available to all parts of the world.
Bowls usually ship out the next working day after receiving the order or they will let you know if their inventory is low.

They are also willing to paint other types of bowls or traps.

My interns and I have enjoyed working with the bowl painters at New Horizons who are exited to have something new in their current job line up and are also very intrigued by what bee people do with all these colored bowls they are painting.....

Thanks

sam

Each Small Gleam Was a Voice

Each small gleam was a voice,
A lantern voice --
In little songs of carmine, violet, green, gold.
A chorus of colours came over the water;
The wondrous leaf-shadow no longer wavered,
No pines crooned on the hills,
The blue night was elsewhere a silence,
When the chorus of colours came over the water,
Little songs of carmine, violet, green, gold.

Small glowing pebbles
Thrown on the dark plane of evening
Sing good ballads of God
And eternity, with soul's rest.
Little priests, little holy fathers,
None can doubt the truth of your hymning,
When the marvellous chorus comes over the water,
Songs of carmine, violet, green, gold.

- Stephen Crane

P Bees are not optional.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1394 From: "pollinator2001" <Pollinator@...>
Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 11:33 pm
Subject: "Wild Bee House" story on local TV pollinator2001
Send Email

We just got a brief clip on our wild bee house on Channel 13 in Florence.  We
dedicated the sanctuary last year on Earth Day.

You can see the clip at:  http://www2.scnow.com/community/news13/

The story isn't on the first screen, but you can find it by clicking the "2" for
the second set of video clips. After today, you'd probably have to use the
search function.

Very very brief, and of course they had to also include a shot of the honeybees,
but I thought it would be interesting.

Dave in SC

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1395 From: Alex Surcica <aps15@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 2:02 pm
Subject: Northeast Pollinator IPM Working Group aps15@...
Send Email

Good morning:

Please find attached the list with the first 15 members of the Northeast Pollinator IPM Working Group. Thank you to all those who submitted their letters of support! My next step is to develop a listserve for facilitating dialogue between members and setting up potential conference calls or meetings. If you are not yet a member of this Working Group but would like to participate in the discussion, email me your contact information and I will add your email address to the listserve. Also, if you know other NE-based researchers, growers, industry representatives, and extension specialists with expertise in pollinators or pollination that might be interested to collaborate in this project please send me their contact information.

Those who did not get the initial announcement about starting this Working group, please see below:

Dr. Christina Grozinger and I received funds from the Northeastern IPM Center to establish a NE Pollinator IPM Working Group. The goal is to establish a group of 10-15 researchers, growers, industry representatives, and extension specialists, who will discuss critical needs for promoting pollinator health and ecosystems services in the Northeast region. Those needs will then be communicated to the NE IPM Center and hopefully will be used to establish future priority areas for funding.

Please let me know if you would be interested in being part of this IPM Working Group. If you do, please send me a letter of support in the next day or two saying that you are willing to serve on the group.

Thank you for your interest and support,

Alex

Alex Surcic�, Ag. Eng. (M.S.)

Pennsylvania State University – Coop. Extension

181 Franklin Farm Lane, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania 17202

Phone: (717) 263-9226; Fax: (717) 263-9228; Email: Alex.Surcica@...

1 of 1 File(s)

NE Pollinator IPM Working Group.xlsx

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1396 From: T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 9:09 pm
Subject: id bee nest from photo thr8z@...
Send Email

Bee Nest Afficionados:

I received this photo today from someone who attended a bee talk I gave. The photo was taken in northern Virginia May 10, 2006 and the nest cells were between two pieces of siding. I presume the yellow is pollen and these are bee cells, but I've never seen a nest structure like this. The top is all mud.

Does this look familiar to anyone?

T'ai

T'ai Roulston

Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia

Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.

University of Virginia

tai.roulston@...

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1397 From: Eric Mader <eric@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: id bee nest from photo eric@...
Send Email

Hi T'ai,

This looks exactly like the nests my Osmia (both lignaria and cornifrons) commonly produce when tunnel-like cavities are not available. This is very very familiar!

Cheers!

-Eric

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:09 PM, T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...> wrote:

Bee Nest Afficionados:

I received this photo today from someone who attended a bee talk I gave. The photo was taken in northern Virginia May 10, 2006 and the nest cells were between two pieces of siding. I presume the yellow is pollen and these are bee cells, but I've never seen a nest structure like this. The top is all mud.

Does this look familiar to anyone?

T'ai

T'ai Roulston
Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia
Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.
University of Virginia
tai.roulston@...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Mader
Assistant Pollinator Program Director
The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
Assistant Professor of Extension
University of Minnesota, Department of Entomology

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
1971 – 2011: Forty Years of Conservation!

4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97215, USA
eric@...
Tel: (503) 232-6639
Toll free: 1-855-232-6639
Cell: (503) 989-3649
Skype: eric_mader_xerces_society
(日本語でどうぞ)

Find all the information you need to conserve pollinator habitat at: www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of invertebrates and their habitat.

To join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work, please visit www.xerces.org.

NEW BOOK NOW AVAILABLE:
Attracting Native Pollinators. Protecting North America’s Bees and Butterflies
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1398 From: "Dave Hunter" <dave@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 9:52 pm
Subject: RE: id bee nest from photo dave@...
Send Email

I agree with Eric. You’re probably looking at 3 different Osmia (same species) results.

However, what is interesting is that you have 3 different types of wall building. Complete mud encasement, reworking all walls (double walls) on the lower left, and mostly single walls on the right. Different mud in each case. …and different pollen source between lower left and right.

Dave Hunter

O. 425.949.7954

C. 206.851.1263

www.crownbees.com

Click below to hear the buzz!

From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Mader
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 1:27 PM
To: T'ai Roulston
Cc: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] id bee nest from photo

Hi T'ai,

This looks exactly like the nests my Osmia (both lignaria and cornifrons) commonly produce when tunnel-like cavities are not available. This is very very familiar!

Cheers!

-Eric

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:09 PM, T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...> wrote:

Bee Nest Afficionados:

Does this look familiar to anyone?

T'ai

Description: cid:4B396076-59C7-45B9-A691-FE65BBFD9235@Blandy

T'ai Roulston

Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia

Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.

University of Virginia

tai.roulston@...

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1399 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 9:54 pm
Subject: Comparison of Bowl Traps With and Without Baffles sam_droege
Send Email

All, we are wrapping up a number of student tests from last year....here is the result of one small study...

You can see the results of these another test at the blogspot:
http://glycolbee.blogspot.com/

Test = Paired comparisons of large 1 liter white soapy water traps with and without a clear Lucite baffle that projected above the traps by approximately 20cm

Date =Summer and Fall of 2010

Locations = Fields and Lawns in Prince George's County Maryland

Number of Tests = 22

Definition of Test = Paired traps (with and without baffles) spaced 5m apart

Summary = Don't put baffles in your bowl traps

Results

With Baffle Without Baffle

Mean: 0.86 1.91

Median: 0.5 2.0

SIGN TEST

r: 12 p(same): 0.03516

WILCOXON TEST

W: 94

z: 1.954 p(same): 0.050742

Monte Carlo p(same): 0.05453

Interpretation of Results: While numbers of bees in each traps was rather low (mid-summer is traditionally a low bee capture time here) the results clearly demonstrate that putting in a baffle decreases the overall catch of bees by about half.

Interestingly, we ran this experiment thinking the opposite...that baffles would increase the catch as bees as bees that passed low over the traps to investigate would run into the clear panels. However, it may be the case that these panels, as they sat in the sun, were obvious to bees and they steered clear of them. This does point out that bees are impacted by the architecture of a trap's design.

sam

Sam Droege sdroege@...
w 301-497-5840 h 301-390-7759 fax 301-497-5624
USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
BARC-EAST, BLDG 308, RM 124 10300 Balt. Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705
Http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov

The Early Morning

The moon on the one hand, the dawn on the other:
The moon is my sister, the dawn is my brother.
The moon on my left hand and the dawn on my right.
My brother, good morning: my sister good night.

- Hilaire Belloc.

P Bees are not optional.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1400 From: Jack Neff <jlnatctmi@...>
Date: Fri Mar 4, 2011 10:35 pm
Subject: Re: id bee nest from photo jlnatctmi
Send Email

Although they are not typical, Osmia lignaria occasionally make nests like that in larger cavities. They usually do a better job with cell symmetry than that though. The pale, dusty pollen could be oak or some other anemophilous thing.

best

Jack

John L. Neff
Central Texas Melittological Institute
7307 Running Rope
Austin,TX 78731 USA
512-345-7219

From: T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...>
To: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 3:09:15 PM
Subject: [beemonitoring] id bee nest from photo

Bee Nest Afficionados:

Does this look familiar to anyone?

T'ai

T'ai Roulston

Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia

Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.

University of Virginia

tai.roulston@...

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1401 From: Peter Bernhardt <bernhap2@...>
Date: Tue Mar 8, 2011 2:38 pm
Subject: Fwd: Home Cooking for Hummingbirds bernhap2@...
Send Email

Dear Colleagues:

Ah yes, attracting the "right (prettiest) pollinator" to your garden is now a big time advertisement in nursery catalogues. �This catalogue (e-version or paper) regularly features photos of hummingbirds at their flowers. �This is the first time they've contacted their customers with a hummingbird theme.

Peter�

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: High Country Gardens <newsletter@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:30 AM
Subject: Home Cooking for Hummingbirds
To: Peter Bernhardt <BERNHAP2@...>

Hummingbird favorites!

View this email in a browser window | View text version.

Invite hummingbirds to your outdoor spaces with these nectar rich Salvias and Agastaches

Gardening to attract hummingbirds is easy to do. By providing water, shelter and an assortment of colorful flowering plants, you will be rewarded with the company of these delightful gems. You will also help insure their future by replacing food plants and habitat lost to human activities like agriculture and urbanization. Read More

If you know what flowers hummingbirds are looking for, you're almost assured regular visits. Here are some tips:

1. Plant hummingbird plants throughout your landscape. Spread them out.

2. Plant in clusters -- red is a sure bet for attracting hummingbirds. Odd numbers rule!

3. Deadhead for more blooms to keep the flowers coming. Hummingbirds love the natural nectar.

4. DO NOT USE PESTICIDES around hummingbird plants. Killing garden pests will also eliminate the small insects hummingbirds rely upon for protein. In addition, hummers might directly ingest pesticides sprayed onto flowers, which could sicken or kill the birds.

When growing a lot of different Agastache varieties together in the same area, they will often reseed themselves. Usually these volunteer seedlings will be inferior to the parent plants and I recommend that they be weeded out on a regular basis to avoid crowding the original plants. Regular dead-heading (removing spent blooms) will also reduce reseeding.

�

Need Help? Talk to one of our product advocates - call 1-800-925-9387

Use our PLANT SEARCH to find the perfect plant for your garden.

This Waterwise Gardening Offer was sent to you as a member of our High Country Gardens� Waterwise Garden News. We will continue to bring you valuable offers on the products and services, as well as provide you with cutting-edge gardening information and ideas. To guarantee the arrival of our communication, please add our email address to your address book and mark us as an accepted sender. The address to add to your accepted incoming list is: newsletter@.... Please contact your internet company if you need more help on how to do this or you can click here to visit our page explaining the various methods of guaranteeing the arrival of communications.

Internet Offers are good for our High Country Gardens online catalog only, not our retail stores.
Visit Santa Fe Greenhouses and High Country Gardens Stores in Albuquerque.

For additional information: you can contact us via e-mail at plants@..., or write us at - 2904 Rufina Street, Santa Fe, NM 87507, or phone us at 1-800-925-9387.

Unsubscribe

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1402 From: Eric Mader <eric@...>
Date: Wed Mar 9, 2011 8:43 pm
Subject: Re: id bee nest from photo eric@...
Send Email

Hi Jil,

I think the color variation in the mud is just a matter of the
different patches of soil where the mother bee(s) collected mud
(variations in clay content, minerals, etc.). The yellow is obviously
pollen.

I am guessing that all of the cells were provisioned and capped, but
the open/empty ones on the bottom are the result of the photographer
lifting away the covering surface (maybe a stone or a brick, or
something), and probably dislodging the provisions (making them appear
empty).

T'ai can probably clarify the circumstances under which he found this.

Cheers!

-Eric

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:33 AM,  <Jil_Swearingen@...> wrote:
> Eric,
> Can you explain what I'm seeing here - the various colors of the cells and
> the full vs empty and the red-brick cells at the top? It's really
> fascinating and I'd like to understand what's going on here. You can reply
> to the whole group if you like...
> Thanks,
> Jil
>
>
>
>
>             Eric Mader
>             <eric@...>
>             Sent by:                                                   To
>             beemonitoring@yah         "T'ai Roulston"
>             oogroups.com              <thr8z@...>
>                                                                        cc
>                                       beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
>             03/04/2011 04:26                                      Subject
>             PM                        Re: [beemonitoring] id bee nest
>                                       from photo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi T'ai,
>
> This looks exactly like the nests my Osmia (both lignaria and cornifrons)
> commonly produce when tunnel-like cavities are not available. This is very
> very familiar!
>
> Cheers!
>
> -Eric
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:09 PM, T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...> wrote:
>      Bee Nest Afficionados:
>
>
>
>      I received this photo today from someone who attended a bee talk I
>      gave. The photo was taken in northern Virginia May 10, 2006 and the
>      nest cells were between two pieces of siding. I presume the yellow is
>      pollen and these are bee cells, but I've never seen a nest structure
>      like this. The top is all mud.
>
>      Does this look familiar to anyone?
>
>      T'ai
>
>
>      (Embedded image moved to file: pic16731.jpg)
>
>      T'ai Roulston
>      Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia
>      Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.
>      University of Virginia
>      tai.roulston@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Mader
> Assistant Pollinator Program Director     The Xerces Society for
> Invertebrate Conservation
> Assistant Professor of Extension     University of Minnesota, Department of
> Entomology
>
> The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
> 1971 - 2011: Forty Years of Conservation!
>
> 4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97215, USA
> eric@...
> Tel: (503) 232-6639
> Toll free: 1-855-232-6639
> Cell: (503) 989-3649
> Skype: eric_mader_xerces_society
> (���ܸ�Ǥɤ���)
>
> Find all the information you need to conserve pollinator habitat at:
> www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/
>
> The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international
> nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of
> invertebrates and their habitat.
>
> To join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work, please
> visit www.xerces.org.
>
> NEW BOOK NOW AVAILABLE:
> Attracting Native Pollinators. Protecting North America��s Bees and
> Butterflies
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>



--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Mader
Assistant Pollinator Program Director
     The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
Assistant Professor of Extension
     University of Minnesota, Department of Entomology

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
1971 - 2011: Forty Years of Conservation!

4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97215, USA
eric@...
Tel: (503) 232-6639
Toll free: 1-855-232-6639
Cell: (503) 989-3649
Skype: eric_mader_xerces_society
(���ܸ�Ǥɤ���)

Find all the information you need to conserve pollinator habitat at:
www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international
nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation
of invertebrates and their habitat.

To join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work,
please visit www.xerces.org.

NEW BOOK NOW AVAILABLE:
Attracting Native Pollinators. Protecting North America��s Bees and
Butterflies
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1403 From: Sandra_Lary@...
Date: Wed Mar 9, 2011 9:03 pm
Subject: Native bee article Sandra_Lary@...
Send Email

Interesting native bee article:

Sandra

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sandra J. Lary, Senior Fish & Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Ecological Services-Coastal Program
4R Fundy Rd, Falmouth ME 04105
207-781-8364, ext. 19

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1404 From: Peter Bernhardt <bernhap2@...>
Date: Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Pollinator] invasive bee in Oz bernhap2@...
Send Email

Dear David:

I'm sending this article to some Australian colleagues. �It will make them laugh. �The fact is that feral bees became a problem before the introduction of Asian Apis (cerana)? �Bombus is now widespread in Tasmania (introduced accidentally from New Zealand). �There are huge, feral populations of A. mellifera all over Australia proper. �My last trip to Western Australia came as a real shock as these feral colonies swarmed from August - October and we found swarms at several of our field sites. �You could hear them before you saw them. �One site at the edge of the Darling Ranges was regenerating following a bush fire and good old A. mellifera swarmed on burned, soot encrusted shrub stems only a few centimeters about the crust of the blackened soil. �Some people at the research lab at the Botanic Garden in Perth were complaining that the sheer number of A. mellifera depressed the visits of native pollinators (thynnid wasps, native bees, nectariferous birds) to native plants in bloom. You can't leave hives in national parks anymore but you can certainly leave your hives outside the park's perimeter, and the beekeepers do so, by the hundreds! �

No one will do anything about this problem, in large part, because honeybee products remain a major export and honeybees are essential to crop pollination within Australia as native bees and honeyeaters birds aren't terribly interested in Eurasian cultigens in bloom. �A quarter of a century ago a friend, who shall remain nameless, did serious research on the topic, published papers in reviewed journals and wrote some popular articles. �The local beekeepers became extremely hostile and I can't even mention what one many tried to do to him (I keep my promises). � ��

Trust me, if the Australian beekeepers want the Asian species eradicated the government will try to comply because, in large part, the commercial honeybee is the only bee most Australians know. �Thanks to a popular book on plant fossils "The Browning of Australia" many Australians believe the continent's flora evolved in the absence of native bees. �There's the apocryphal story about the Eurasian bugloss species (Echium vulgare) that has become a pest on sheep and cattle rangelands. �Ranchers call it Paterson's curse (after the jerk who introduced it). �Beekeepers call it Salvation Jane. �That weed still occurs extensively through eastern Australia.

Peter

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:25 PM, David Inouye <inouye@...> wrote:

http://www.ebionews.com/news-center/general-research/ecology/34339.html

Fears Asian bee is Australia's next cane toad
Friday, 04 March 2011 17:29

The aggressive and invasive Asian honey bee could become as bad a pest in Australia as the cane toad, a senator warned Wednesday, adding that the insect could threaten the country's food supply.

The cane toad, a prolific breeder which secretes a toxin that can kill pets and wildlife, has spread widely in tropical Australia since being introduced to kill beetles in the 1930s, devouring insects, bird's eggs and native species such as the quoll, a cat-like marsupial.

Greens Senator Christine Milne said the bee industry was at risk from an incursion of Apis cerana in the northeastern city of Cairns which was first detected in 2007.

"It is the 21st century equivalent of the cane toad and the bee keepers have been saying that for some time," Milne told reporters, describing the pest as "a cane toad with wings".

The Australian bee industry has urged the eradication of the Asian species, which undermines European honey bee populations by competing for food, robbing hives and transmitting disease and parasites.

The industry fears that if the Asian bee becomes established it will destroy European honey bee populations, which are kept in hives and transported around the country to pollinate crops.

Because the Asian bee cannot be kept in boxes, it is not suitable for such pollination techniques.

But government officials are likely to abandon an attempt to wipe out the Asian species at the end of April after saying it was "no longer technically feasible to achieve eradication".

Sustainability Minister Tony Burke said the decision by the Asian honey bee management group was based on scientific research.

"But (it) does not amount to a decision that there will not be continued engagement in other areas other than eradication in terms of control," he told parliament.

_______________________________________________
Pollinator mailing list
Pollinator@...
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/pollinator

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1405 From: Charley Eiseman <ceiseman@...>
Date: Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:36 am
Subject: Re: id bee nest from photo charleyeiseman
Send Email

Hi Eric (and other bee nest aficionados),

I'm curious to hear how you would rule out the possibility that the closed cells in the top row were made by spider wasps (Auplopus or Phanagenia)--if, for instance, they had not been found in association with these obviously pollen-filled cells. The examples of pompilid nests I have seen tend to have smoother walls and not be so neatly arranged, but I don't know if this is always the case. Is this very lumpy appearance, with each individual mud pellet visible, typical of Osmia nests?

Thanks,

Charley Eiseman

www.NorthernNaturalists.com

2011/3/9 Eric Mader <eric@...>

Hi Jil,

I think the color variation in the mud is just a matter of the
different patches of soil where the mother bee(s) collected mud
(variations in clay content, minerals, etc.). The yellow is obviously
pollen.

I am guessing that all of the cells were provisioned and capped, but
the open/empty ones on the bottom are the result of the photographer
lifting away the covering surface (maybe a stone or a brick, or
something), and probably dislodging the provisions (making them appear
empty).

T'ai can probably clarify the circumstances under which he found this.

Cheers!

-Eric

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:33 AM, <Jil_Swearingen@...> wrote:
> Eric,
> Can you explain what I'm seeing here - the various colors of the cells and
> the full vs empty and the red-brick cells at the top? It's really
> fascinating and I'd like to understand what's going on here. You can reply
> to the whole group if you like...
> Thanks,
> Jil
>
>
>
>
> Eric Mader
> <eric@...>
> Sent by: To
> beemonitoring@yah "T'ai Roulston"
> oogroups.com <thr8z@...>
> cc
> beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
> 03/04/2011 04:26 Subject
> PM Re: [beemonitoring] id bee nest
> from photo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Hi T'ai,
>
> This looks exactly like the nests my Osmia (both lignaria and cornifrons)
> commonly produce when tunnel-like cavities are not available. This is very
> very familiar!
>
> Cheers!
>
> -Eric
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:09 PM, T'ai Roulston <thr8z@...> wrote:
> Bee Nest Afficionados:
>
>
>
> I received this photo today from someone who attended a bee talk I
> gave. The photo was taken in northern Virginia May 10, 2006 and the
> nest cells were between two pieces of siding. I presume the yellow is
> pollen and these are bee cells, but I've never seen a nest structure
> like this. The top is all mud.
>
> Does this look familiar to anyone?
>
> T'ai
>
>
> (Embedded image moved to file: pic16731.jpg)

>
> T'ai Roulston
> Curator, State Arboretum of Virginia
> Research Assoc. Prof., Dept of Envi. Sci.
> University of Virginia
> tai.roulston@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Mader
> Assistant Pollinator Program Director The Xerces Society for
> Invertebrate Conservation
> Assistant Professor of Extension University of Minnesota, Department of
> Entomology
>
> The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
> 1971 - 2011: Forty Years of Conservation!
>
> 4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97215, USA
> eric@...
> Tel: (503) 232-6639
> Toll free: 1-855-232-6639
> Cell: (503) 989-3649
> Skype: eric_mader_xerces_society
> (��ܸ�Ǥɤ��)
>
> Find all the information you need to conserve pollinator habitat at:
> www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/
>
> The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international
> nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of
> invertebrates and their habitat.
>
> To join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work, please
> visit www.xerces.org.
>
> NEW BOOK NOW AVAILABLE:
> Attracting Native Pollinators. Protecting North America’s Bees and
> Butterflies
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

--
----------------------------------------------------------
Eric Mader
Assistant Pollinator Program Director
The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
Assistant Professor of Extension
University of Minnesota, Department of Entomology

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
1971 - 2011: Forty Years of Conservation!

4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97215, USA
eric@...
Tel: (503) 232-6639
Toll free: 1-855-232-6639
Cell: (503) 989-3649
Skype: eric_mader_xerces_society
(��ܸ�Ǥɤ��)

Find all the information you need to conserve pollinator habitat at:
www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international
nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation
of invertebrates and their habitat.

To join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work,
please visit www.xerces.org.

NEW BOOK NOW AVAILABLE:
Attracting Native Pollinators. Protecting North America’s Bees and Butterflies
----------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Messages in this Topic (18)

#1406 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:46 pm
Subject: List of Bee Related Resources from BIML lab sam_droege
Send Email

All:

It has been a while since I have put out a general listing of our major categories of resources for the study, monitoring, and identification of bees. Below is the most up to date version:

sam

Online Resources for those interested in Bee Identification and Monitoring Programs

A manual that covers mosts aspects of the monitoring, collection, identification, specimen processing, and curation of bee specimens:

http://pollinators.nbii.gov/documents/Handy%20Bee%20Manual.pdf

--------------------

Species lists, Identification Guides, and Maps for genera and species in North America are available at, everything East of the Mississippi is covered and guides are actively being extended to the West:

http://www.discoverlife.org/20/q?search=Apoidea

---------------------

A guide to the genera of the bees of Canada is available at:

http://www.biology.ualberta.ca/bsc/ejournal/pgs_03/pgs_03.html

---------------------

Mitchell’s 1960’s book on the bees of the Eastern United States is available as a series of pdf files at:

http://insectmuseum.org/easternBees.php

---------------------

A slightly out of date guide to the identification of the genera of ALL of North America is available at:

http://www.knoxcellars.com/Merchant5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=KCNP&Product_Code=BGNA&Category_Code=BL

---------------------

Online discussions and listserv for bee identification and monitoring is available at:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/beemonitoring/

---------------------

A set of YouTube videos that talk about monitoring of bees, agriculture, biology, and specimen preparation
http://www.youtube.com/user/swdroege

---------------------

A set of slideshows highlighting the identification of the genera of bees of Eastern North America is available at:

www.slideshare.net

(search on “Droege”) or http://www.slideshare.net/sdroege

---------------------
A collection of bee faunas for the world is being assembled at:

ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/er/md/laurel/Droege/Faunas/
If you have published or unpublished faunas that are not listed please send to sam at sdroege@...

---------------------
A pilot project report using permanent glycol traps is located at:

ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/er/md/laurel/Droege/Draft%20USFS%20Glycol%20Report%2022711.docx
and will be the model for a U.S. wide monitoring program.

--------------------
Sam Droege sdroege@...
w 301-497-5840 h 301-390-7759 fax 301-497-5624
USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
BARC-EAST, BLDG 308, RM 124 10300 Balt. Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705
Http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov

Willow Poem

It is a willow when summer is over,
a willow by the river
from which no leaf has fallen nor
bitten by the sun
turned orange or crimson.
The leaves cling and grow paler,
swing and grow paler
over the swirling waters of the river
as if loth to let go,
they are so cool, so drunk with
the swirl of the wind and of the river --
oblivious to winter,
the last to let go and fall
into the water and on the ground.

- William Carlos Williams

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#1407 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:10 pm
Subject: New List of Faunas available to downloading and a list of needed Faunas sam_droege
Send Email

All:

We have been gathering more faunal pdfs and adding them to the ftp site.

ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/er/md/laurel/Droege/Faunas/

You can see that list at the bottom of this page.

Additionally, we have identified a list of papers we would like to add to the site from a paper Neal Williams published, but have been unable to find (thank you Sarah Fisher for all the hard work).
Take a look at the list and if you have any of these papers in a pdf version we would love to add them to the archive. Again, even if not on the list we are interested in faunas from around the world.
Thank you.

Wish List

Michener, C. D. 1979. Biogeography of the bees. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 66:277-347.

Aguiar, C. M. L., and C. F. Martins. 1997. Abund�ncia relativa, diversidade e fenologia de abelhas (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) na caatinga, S�o Jo�o do Cariri, Para�ba, Brasil. Iheringia, s�rie Zoologia 83:151-163.
Archer, M. E. 1989. The wasps and bees (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) of Allerthorpe Common before and after coniferization. Naturalist 114:129-136.

Bortoli, C., and S. Laroca. 1990. Estudo biocen�tico em Apoidea (Hymenoptera) de uma �rea restrita em S�o Jos� dos Pinhais (PR, sul do Brasil), com notas comparativas. Dusenia 15:1-112.

Camargo, J. M. F., and M. Mazucato. 1984. Invent�rio da apifauna e flora ap�cola de Ribeir�o Preto, SP, Brasil. Dusenia 14:55-87.

Carvalho, A. M. C., and L. R. Bego. 1996. Studies on Apoidea fauna of cerrado vegetation at the Panga Ecological Reserve, Uberl�ndia, MG, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 40:147-156.

Cure, J. R., G. S. Bastos Fo., M. J. F. Oliveira, and F. A. Silveira. 1993. Levantamento de abelhas silvestres na Zona da Mata de Minas Gerais. I – Pastagem na regi�o de Vi�osa (Hymenoptera, Apoidea). Revista Ceres (Vi�osa) 40:131-161.

Cure, J. R., M. Thiengo, F. A. Silveira, and L. B. Rocha. 1992. Levantamento da fauna de abelhas silvestres na "Zona da Mata"de Minas Gerais. III. Mata secund�ria na regi�o de Vi�osa (Hymenoptera, Apoidea). Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 9:223-239.

Evans, F. C. 1986. Bee-flower interactions on an old field in southeastern Michigan. In G. K. Clambey and R. H. Pemble, editors. North American Prairie Conference, 1984. Center for Environmental Studies, Fargo, North Dakota/Moorhead, Minnesota, USA.

Frankie, G. W., S. B. Vinson, M. A. Rizzardi, T. L. Griswold, S. O’Keefe, and R. R. Snelling. 1997. Diversity and abundance of bees visiting a mass flowering tree species in disturbed seasonal dry forest, Costa Rica. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 70:281-296.

Fukuda, H., S. F. Sakagami, K. Yamauchi, and T. Matsumara. 1973. Biofaunistic survey of wild bees at Hama Koshimizu, eastern Hokkaido. Japanese Journal of Ecology 23:160-170.

Griswold, T., F. D. Parker, and V. J. Tepedino. 1997. The bees of the San Rafael Desert: implications for the bee fauna of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Pages 175-186 in L. M. Hill, editor. Proceedings of the Grande Staircase-Escalante National Monument Science Symposium. BLM/UT/GI-98/006+1220. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.

Kato, M. 1992. Endangered bee fauna and its floral hosts in the Ogasawara Islands. Japanese Journal of Entomology 60:487-494.

Osychnyuk, A. Z. 1967. Bee (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) pollinators of plants of montane and boreal meadows of the Ukranian Carpathians. Trudy Zoological Institute 38:366-380. [In Russian]

Rust, R. W. 1985. Bees of Anacapa Island, California (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). In A. S. Menke and D. S. Miller, editors. Entomology of the California Channel Islands: Proceedings of the 1st Symposium, San Diego, California, U.S.A., December 1981. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History: Santa Barbara, California, USA.

Sakagami, S. F., and H. Fukuda. 1973. Wild bee survey at the campus of Hokkaido University. Journal of the Faculty of Sciences Hokkaido University, Series VI, Zoology 19:190-250.

Sakagami, S. F., S. Laroca, and J. S. Moure. 1967. Wild bee biocenotics in S�o Jos� dos Pinhais (PR), South Brazil. Preliminary Report. Journal of the Faculty of Sciences Hokkaido University, Series VI, Zoology 16:253-291.

Silveira, F. A., and M. J. O. Campos. 1995. A melissofauna de Corumbatai (SP) e Paraopeba (MG) e uma an�lise da biogeografia das abelhas do cerrado brasileiro (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Revista Brasileira Entomologia 39:371-401.

Silveira, F. A., L. B. Rocha, J. R. Cure, and M. J. Oliveira. 1993. Abelhas silvestres (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) da Zona da Mata de Minas Gerais. II. Diversidade, abund�ncia e fontes de alimento em uma pastagem abandonada em Ponte Nova. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 37:595-610.

Uehira, T., Y. Akahira, and S. F. Sakagami. 1979. A wild bee survey in Kiritappu Highmoor, eastern Hokkaido. Low Temperature Science, Series B 37:47-57.

Usui, M., Y. Nishijima, H. Fukuda, and S. F. Sakagami. 1976. A wild bee survey in Obihiro, eastern Hokkaido. Research Bulletin of Obihiro University 10:225-251.
Orchid bee fauna (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Euglossina) of Atlantic Forest fragments inside an urban area in southeastern Brazil.
by Andr� Nem�sio, Fernando A Silveira

The montane bee fauna of north central Washington, USA, with floral associations
Joseph S. Wilson, Lindsey E. Wilson, Larry D. Loftis, Terry Griswold

Changes in the bee fauna (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of an old field site in southern Ontario, revisited after 34 years
JC GRIXTI… - Canadian entomologist, 2006 - cat.inist.fr

BEE-FAUNA AND VEGETATION OF THE MIAMI REGION OF FLORIDA

Author: GRAENICHER, S.

BEE-FAUNA AND VEGETATION OF WISCONSIN

Author: GRAENICHER, S.

Source: Annals of the Entomological Society of America, Volume 28, Number 2, June 1935 , pp. 285-310(26)

Publisher: Entomological Society of America

Synopsis of the bee fauna (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Russia and the neighbouring countries, with a list of oligolectic species
YA Pesenko - Changes in Fauna of wild bees in Europe, 1995

List of Faunas Ready for Download

Argentina Chaco 1994 Aizen 1994.pdf
Bahamas Bimini 1953 Krombein.pdf
Brazil Lapa 1993 Barbola.pdf
Canada Maritimes 2003 Javorek.pdf
Canada Nova Scotia 2003 Sheffield.pdf
Canada Nova Scotia Annapolis Valley Cavity Nesters 2008 Sheffield.pdf
Canada Nova Scotia Molecular Fauna 2009 Sheffield.pdf
Canada Ontario 2010 Colla.pdf
Cuba 2008 Genaro.pdf
Cuba Island of Pines 2004 Genaro.pdf
Czech Republic Birch Stand 2003 Kula.pdf
Czech Republic Spruce Stand 2003 Kula 1.pdf
Czech Republic Spruce Stand 2003 Kula 2.pdf
Hispanola 2007 Genaro.pdf
Trinidad Near 2004 Starr.doc
United Kingdom Yorkshire Crow Wood 1995 Archer.pdf
USA Alaska Interior 1989 Armbruster.pdf
USA Berkeley 2005 Frankie.pdf
USA California NW Coastal Osmia 1997 Barthell.pdf
USA Colorado Boulder County 2009 Kearns.pdf
USA Colorado Urban 2009 Kearns.pdf
USA Florida Alachua county 2010 Hall.pdf
USA Florida Everglades 1999 Pascarella.pdf
USA Illinois Carlinvile 2001 Marlin.pdf
USA Illinois Chicago 1933 Pearson.pdf
USA Illinois Chicago 2009 Tonietto.pdf
USA Kansas Lawrence 1983 Laroca.pdf
USA Louisiana Mississippi 2006 Bartholomew.pdf
USA Maine Schoodic Peninsula 2010 Droege.pdf
USA Maryland Anne Arundel Microdeserts 2009 Droege.pdf
USA Maryland Assateague Island National Seashore 2010 Orr.pdf
USA Maryland Plummers Island 1979 Krombein.pdf
USA Massachusetts Cranberry 1995 Mackenzie.pdf
USA Mississippi Lower 1947.pdf
USA New York Central 1983 Ginsberg.pdf
USA New York Central Blueberry 1996 Mackenzie.pdf
USA New York New York Urban 2008 Matteson.pdf
USA New York New York Suburban 2008 Fetridge.pdf
USA New York New York Urban 2008 Matteson.xlsx
USA Ohio kitty todd preserve 2011 Arduser.pdf
USA Pennsylvania 2010 Donovall.pdf
USA Puerto Rico 2008 Genaro.pdf
USA Virginia Great Galls 2009 Steury.pdf
USA Wisconsin Northeast 1911 Graenicher.pdf
USA Wyoming Laramie Basin 1981 Tepedino.pdf

Sam Droege sdroege@... w 301-497-5840 h 301-390-7759 fax 301-497-5624 USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center BARC-EAST, BLDG 308, RM 124 10300 Balt. Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705Http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov

"Literature and butterflies are the two sweetest passions known to man." -Vladimir Nabokov:

P Bees are not optional.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1408 From: Tim Hatten <timhatten@...>
Date: Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:11 pm
Subject: RE: List of Bee Related Resources from BIML lab timhatten@...
Send Email

Sam,

Thanks for this update. Lot’s of great stuff here and in your proceeding email concerning list of Faunas.

Tim

***********************

Timothy D. Hatten, Ph.D.

Entomologist, CEO

Invertebrate Ecology Inc.

121 W. Sweet Ave

Moscow, ID 83843

Office: 208-8828349

Cell: 208-310-6397

timhatten@...

www.invertebrateecology.com

From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sam Droege
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 6:47 AM
To: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [beemonitoring] List of Bee Related Resources from BIML lab

All:

It has been a while since I have put out a general listing of our major categories of resources for the study, monitoring, and identification of bees. Below is the most up to date version:

sam

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#1409 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 7:36 pm
Subject: BIML Update - Photos, state records, Megachile sam_droege
Send Email

3/13/2011

Photos

Tracy Zarrillo, Deana Crumbling, Denise Williams, Ellen Bulger, and Nancy Adamson are all adding photos to the DL website from their own picture taking and from cooperators from Bugguide. If you have pictures of bee species not found in Discoverlife or would like to illustrate any of the guides feel free to contact Sam Droege (sdroege@...). Thanks to everyone.

New State Records

Andrene rudbeckiae - Delaware, Heather Harmon
Osmia chalybea - Delaware, Heather Harmon, from coastal Fenwick Island

Megachile Females

M. brevis, M. pruina, M. texana

M. brevis - Sides of T3 and T4 usually without any stiff upright black hairs, but in the Deep South and Florida some may be present in M. brevis pseudobrevis, which is likely to become a full species in the future - T6 with almost no short, bright white, appressed hairs, the surface clearly visible throughout - S6 in Eastern populations with WHITE HAIRS throughout except for black hairs along the rim, the density of hairs lessens in the center of the segment but no clear bare patch is present - Mandible with only a partially complete cutting edge between the 2nd and 3rd tooth from the front, see illustrations on species page - In direct comparison clearly smaller - VERY COMMON AND WIDESPREAD

M. pruina - Sides of T2 - T4 with many, clearly visible, stiff upright black hairs- T6 with a nearly complete coat of short, bright WHITE, COMPLETELY APPRESSED hairs are regularly spaced and do not overlap one another that almost hide the surface - S6 with black hairs throughout but with most of the center of the segment clearly and obviously BARE OF ANY HAIRS - Mitchell mentions that the mandible has a complete cutting edge between the 2nd and 3rd tooth and while this is true in some individuals but many also have only a PARTIAL CUTTING TOOTH - Unique in having black hairs in the center of the cypeus, but these often wear away in older specimens - In direct comparison CLEARLY LARGER than the other two - RARE AND LARGELY SOUTHERN COASTAL

M. texana - Sides of T2 - T4 with many, clearly visible, stiff upright black hairs - T6 can have white hairs that are prone, but these are long, many overap one another and usually are restricted to the apical half or so of the segment - S6 with black hairs throughout except for black hairs along the rim, the density of hairs lessens in the center of the segment but no clear bare patch is present - Mandible with only a partially complete cutting edge between the 2nd and 3rd tooth from the front, see illustrations on species page - In direct comparison smaller than M. pruina but larger than M. texana - Widespread, regular, but spotty in occurrence

Hand sanitizer for display of specimens

We have continued to work on using hand sanitizer to display insects and have the following updates

1. Salt completely destroys the gel matrix

2. Cuvettes create fantastic holders for specimens and allow wonderful microscope views and photographs

3. Worms and isopods display nicely once they have been alcohol

sam

Sam Droege sdroege@... w 301-497-5840 h 301-390-7759 fax 301-497-5624 USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center BARC-EAST, BLDG 308, RM 124 10300 Balt. Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705Http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1410 From: Chanda Henne <csbutrfly12@...>
Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:38 pm
Subject: Plant skipping in a cropping system csbutrfly12
Send Email

Hi Everyone,

I recently started working on a project looking at pollinators of watermelons in the Rio Grande Valley, and was asked a question by a grower that I had no clue of the answer. He likes to spend time out in his fields at random times of the day just observing what goes on. While out in his fields he noticed that occasionally a plant would be skipped by bees. He wanted to know why this occurs. As the fields are all the same variety, the only thing I could think of was that maybe these plants had some type of genetic variation that the bees were able to detect. I was wondering if anyone had observed this phenomenon before, knows why this occurs, and/or has any suggestions on how to get to the bottom of this mystery.

Thanks,
Chanda

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1411 From: "Cowden, Nancy" <Cowden@...>
Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:47 pm
Subject: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system oc8393mu
Send Email

Chandra,

I’m not absolutely sure with watermelons, but many plants will alter the uv patterns flowers produce depending on the reproductive status of the individual flower. This could certainly be the case for watermelon. Also, recognize that individual watermelon flowers are either male or female – producing pollen or not. If a bee is specifically foraging for pollen but not nectar, it would visit male flowers but not females.

An example of a flower that sends a signal clear enough even for humans to detect is the change in the spot color on the banner petals of bluebonnets (some Lupinus sps.) – white prior to pollination, pink to purplish after pollination. The bees visiting bluebonnets will almost always skip over flowers with pink to purple spots.

Nancy

Nancy E. Cowden, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Biology

Curator of the Ramsey-Freer Herbarium

Assistant Director, Westover Honors Program

Lynchburg College

1501 Lakeside Drive

Lynchburg, Va. 24501

(434) 544-8371

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1412 From: Ronald Carroll <ronecology@...>
Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:08 pm
Subject: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system ronecology@...
Send Email

I don't have the answer but recently I have been thinking about yeast contamination degrading nectar. I wonder what the spatial and temporal pattern of yeast contamination is in crop fields and if bees can pick up cues on yeast contamination and avoid those flowers.

Ron Carroll
Odum School of Ecology
Univ. of Georgia

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1413 From: "Jaime A. Florez" <jaimef69@...>
Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:47 am
Subject: Re: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system jaimef69
Send Email

Hi Chanda,

As Nancy says - change of flower color - I have seen cotton flowers changing in the same way, from white to pink when pollination occurs (this is Gossypium hirsutum in Colombia; I don't know if the same happens in other cotton species around the world).

For other side, differences in water balance between plants (which could varies from plant to plant, mostly if soil preparation for the crop was not homogeneously done) could cause different nectar offer and density (sugar concentration). Parallel to this, the behavior of these 2 variables across the day (sun) will be different according the water availability for each specific plant/site. Certain bees have preferences related with these variables. They could detect this variations and choose plants according to their preferences. This is the first idea that came to my mind; I hope it helps.

Jaime A. Florez
PhD student
ARS - USDA Bee Lab
Dept. Biology & Ecology Center
Utah State Univesity
Logan, UT

ﻞΛψΩغ

--- El mar, 3/15/11, Cowden, Nancy <Cowden@...> escribió:

De: Cowden, Nancy <Cowden@...>
Asunto: [beemonitoring] Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system
A: "'beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com'" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
Fecha: martes, 15 de marzo de 2011, 02:47 pm

Chandra,
I’m not absolutely sure with watermelons, but many plants will alter the uv patterns flowers produce depending on the reproductive status of the individual flower. This could certainly be the case for watermelon. Also, recognize that individual watermelon flowers are either male or female – producing pollen or not. If a bee is specifically foraging for pollen but not nectar, it would visit male flowers but not females.
An example of a flower that sends a signal clear enough even for humans to detect is the change in the spot color on the banner petals of bluebonnets (some Lupinus sps.) – white prior to pollination, pink to purplish after pollination. The bees visiting bluebonnets will almost always skip over flowers with pink to purple spots.

Nancy

Nancy E. Cowden, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Biology
Curator of the Ramsey-Freer Herbarium
Assistant Director, Westover Honors Program
Lynchburg College
1501 Lakeside Drive
Lynchburg, Va. 24501
(434) 544-8371

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1414 From: "pollinator2001" <Pollinator@...>
Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:09 pm
Subject: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system pollinator2001
Send Email

--- In beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime A. Florez" <jaimef69@...> wrote:

> As Nancy says - change of flower color - I have seen cotton flowers changing
in the same way, from white to pink when pollination occurs (this is Gossypium
hirsutum in Colombia; I don't know if the same happens in other cotton species
around the world).



I would think this a fantastic opportunity for a research project. Does the
color change at deposition of pollen, at initiation of pollen tube growth, at
fertilization?  How many grains of pollen/pollen tubes/fertiizations would be
needed to trigger it?

(Pollination is not a binary event with a multiseeded fruit. It is progressive,
depending on the number of incipient seeds fertilized.)

A whole lot of questions come racing into my mind.

Alfalfa flowers change from purplish to grayish after tripping (generally
equivalent to pollination). An interesting story on the lack of understanding of
pollination needs comes to mind:

In the 1920s and 30s in the US state of Utah, farmers observing alfalfa color
change, thought this represented damage to the plants, when it really
represented pollination. Migratory beekeepers coming from California had begun
using Utah alfalfa fields as a honey crop. But the farmers were able to convince
the state legislature to pass a ban on migratory beekeepers coming into the
state.

California beekeeper, Harry Whitcombe, became convinced that alfalfa needed more
bees for pollination than would ever be placed by beekeepers for honey
production. Together with a scientist, George H. Vansell, at the University of
California, Davis, they tried to find farmers who were willing to pay a small
fee to beekeepers to stock extra bees on alfalfa seed fields.

No one was willing to do this, however one farmer, Stan Good of Woodland, agreed
to pay the beekeeper a percentage of any production above a figure that
represented an extraordinary crop - and the beekeeper decided to take the risk.
He stocked the bees as proposed - five hives per acre.

The seed yield was so heavy that the harvest machinery broke down and almost
caused a failure of the test. But the ag mechanics at Davis redesigned the
harvest machinery with heavier bearings, etc, and the harvest was gotten.

The average yield at that time was about 220 pounds per acre, and the test
produced alfalfa seed at very close to 1000 pounds per acre.

The yield was so phenominal that the beekeeper made a small fortune, the seed
grower was rueful that he could have had the services of the bees for a much
smaller fee, and the concept of "Saturation Pollination" was born.

Saturation Pollination is the practice of maintaining higher bee populations
than would be normally present for honey production, in order to make sure that
every blossom gets the optimal number of bee visits for complete fertilization
of all possible seeds.

Utah, by the way, lost its leading position as an alfalfa seed producer, never
to gain it back (though they rescinded the ban on beekeepers), and California
took over that lead.

Since then, it has been shown that honeybees are not the most efficient alfalfa
pollinators. But it is a clear example how the lack of understanding of
pollination has cost agriculture dearly.

Dave Green
Retired pollination contractor

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1415 From: Jack Neff <jlnatctmi@...>
Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:50 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system jlnatctmi
Send Email

The color change in Lupinus (at least texensis) is age related and occurs with or without pollination (Schaall and Leverich, 1980 Southwestern Naturalist 25:280-282). Similar age related color changes occurs in many other plants so one needs to be careful about using color changes as an indication of pollination. The presumed "point" of the color change is topotential pollinators about unrewarding flowers, not necessarily previously pollinated ones.

best

Jack

John L. Neff
Central Texas Melittological Institute
7307 Running Rope
Austin,TX 78731 USA
512-345-7219

From: "Cowden, Nancy" <Cowden@...>
To: "beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, March 15, 2011 2:47:29 PM
Subject: [beemonitoring] Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system

Chandra,

Nancy

Nancy E. Cowden, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Biology

Curator of the Ramsey-Freer Herbarium

Assistant Director, Westover Honors Program

Lynchburg College

1501 Lakeside Drive

Lynchburg, Va. 24501

(434) 544-8371

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1416 From: Chanda Henne <csbutrfly12@...>
Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:40 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system csbutrfly12
Send Email

Thank you everyone for your responses. I've never worked with crop pollination before, and really don't know much about watermelon other than it tastes good. I'll bring this information back to the grower, and we'll see what we can figure out.

Thanks,
Chanda

From: pollinator2001 <Pollinator@...>
To: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, March 16, 2011 9:09:42 AM
Subject: [beemonitoring] Re: Plant skipping in a cropping system

--- In beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime A. Florez" <jaimef69@...> wrote:

> As Nancy says - change of flower color - I have seen cotton flowers changing in the same way, from white to pink when pollination occurs (this is Gossypium hirsutum in Colombia; I don't know if the same happens in other cotton species around the world).

I would think this a fantastic opportunity for a research project. Does the color change at deposition of pollen, at initiation of pollen tube growth, at fertilization? How many grains of pollen/pollen tubes/fertiizations would be needed to trigger it?

(Pollination is not a binary event with a multiseeded fruit. It is progressive, depending on the number of incipient seeds fertilized.)

A whole lot of questions come racing into my mind.

Alfalfa flowers change from purplish to grayish after tripping (generally equivalent to pollination). An interesting story on the lack of understanding of pollination needs comes to mind:

In the 1920s and 30s in the US state of Utah, farmers observing alfalfa color change, thought this represented damage to the plants, when it really represented pollination. Migratory beekeepers coming from California had begun using Utah alfalfa fields as a honey crop. But the farmers were able to convince the state legislature to pass a ban on migratory beekeepers coming into the state.

California beekeeper, Harry Whitcombe, became convinced that alfalfa needed more bees for pollination than would ever be placed by beekeepers for honey production. Together with a scientist, George H. Vansell, at the University of California, Davis, they tried to find farmers who were willing to pay a small fee to beekeepers to stock extra bees on alfalfa seed fields.

No one was willing to do this, however one farmer, Stan Good of Woodland, agreed to pay the beekeeper a percentage of any production above a figure that represented an extraordinary crop - and the beekeeper decided to take the risk. He stocked the bees as proposed - five hives per acre.

The seed yield was so heavy that the harvest machinery broke down and almost caused a failure of the test. But the ag mechanics at Davis redesigned the harvest machinery with heavier bearings, etc, and the harvest was gotten.

The average yield at that time was about 220 pounds per acre, and the test produced alfalfa seed at very close to 1000 pounds per acre.

The yield was so phenominal that the beekeeper made a small fortune, the seed grower was rueful that he could have had the services of the bees for a much smaller fee, and the concept of "Saturation Pollination" was born.

Saturation Pollination is the practice of maintaining higher bee populations than would be normally present for honey production, in order to make sure that every blossom gets the optimal number of bee visits for complete fertilization of all possible seeds.

Utah, by the way, lost its leading position as an alfalfa seed producer, never to gain it back (though they rescinded the ban on beekeepers), and California took over that lead.

Since then, it has been shown that honeybees are not the most efficient alfalfa pollinators. But it is a clear example how the lack of understanding of pollination has cost agriculture dearly.

Dave Green
Retired pollination contractor

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#1417 From: "Eugene J. Scarpulla" <ejscarp@...>
Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:31 am
Subject: The Bees of the World (2nd ed.) - Charles D. Michener ejscarp@...
Send Email

The Johns Hopkins University Press is curently offering Charles D. Michener's The Bees of the World (2007 second edition) at a 58% discount, reduced from $182.00 to $76.44. The website is http://www.press.jhu.edu/ .

Gene

Gene Scarpulla
Millers Island, Maryland
Editor, The Maryland Entomologist & The Phaeton
ejscarp@...

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1418 From: Peter L Borst <peterlborst1@...>
Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:41 am
Subject: Coevolution peterlborst
Send Email

Hi all

I have been doing research with the idea of writing an article on
insect/flower coevolution. (I am a frequent contributor to the
American Bee Journal). While it is easy enough to demonstrate
correlations using "show and tell", getting good evidence has been
surprisingly difficult. In fact, the deeper I delve into this topic,
the more contradictory evidence I seem to encounter.

For example, the relationship between Peponapis and Cucurbits seemed
like an ideal candidate with explanatory power and yet the first in
depth article I read says:

> These results also question the idea of close coevolution between squash and
squash bees. It would appear that the bees are much more closely adapted to the
flowers than vice-versa (Hurd et al., 1971).

Can anyone point to clear evidence for or against coevolution of
pollinators and flowers?

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Peter Loring Borst
128 Lieb Road
Spencer, NY �14883

I take the trouble to protest against these assumptions, because they
are not merely harmless fancies, but theories that are apt to paralyse
action and encourage scientific indolence. -- James Crichton-Browne

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#1419 From: "nativebeesdotcom" <kimballclark@...>
Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:00 pm
Subject: Re: Coevolution nativebeesdo...
Send Email

Peter,

The work of Lars Chittka, a scientist from the UK, is a scientist worth
studying. Some of the most interesting research on coevolution of flowers and
pollinators comes from his work.

His quote below opposes your conclusion. This statement was in response to a
questions where a reporter asked him about his memorable moments in science:

"�I at first interpreted this to mean that this meant bee colour vision had
evolved for the efficient coding of flower colours. Unfortunately, phylogenetic
analyses later revealed that in fact it was the other way round � the kind of
colour vision that bees have is several hundred million years older than the
first flower. Flower colours had adapted to bee colour vision, not vice versa."

http://chittkalab.sbcs.qmul.ac.uk/2010/Chittka%202010%20Curr%20Biol%20Q&A.pdf

I have other articles that may assist. I would like to read your article when
you're finished. Call me, and we'll chat.

Sincerely,

Kimball Clark
www.NativeBees.com
Kaysville, UT
801-458-0282

info@...
twitter.com/nativebees
New website forthcoming

--- In beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com, Peter L Borst <peterlborst1@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I have been doing research with the idea of writing an article on
> insect/flower coevolution. (I am a frequent contributor to the
> American Bee Journal). While it is easy enough to demonstrate
> correlations using "show and tell", getting good evidence has been
> surprisingly difficult. In fact, the deeper I delve into this topic,
> the more contradictory evidence I seem to encounter.
>
> For example, the relationship between Peponapis and Cucurbits seemed
> like an ideal candidate with explanatory power and yet the first in
> depth article I read says:
>
> > These results also question the idea of close coevolution between squash and
squash bees. It would appear that the bees are much more closely adapted to the
flowers than vice-versa (Hurd et al., 1971).
>
> Can anyone point to clear evidence for or against coevolution of
> pollinators and flowers?
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Peter Loring Borst
> 128 Lieb Road
> Spencer, NY �14883
>
> I take the trouble to protest against these assumptions, because they
> are not merely harmless fancies, but theories that are apt to paralyse
> action and encourage scientific indolence. -- James Crichton-Browne
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#1420 From: Peter L Borst <peterlborst1@...>
Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:50 pm
Subject: Fwd: Coevolution peterlborst
Send Email

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Peter Bernhardt <bernhap2@...> wrote:
> Please explore the scientific literature thoroughly before you sit down and
write a popular piece. �We don't need yet another article that will make bee
keepers feel good about flooding the landscape with non-native domesticant.
�I've lived in Australia for close to a decade and I've seen where that logic
can lead.

I have accumulated 70 papers on the subject, including the special
issue of Philosophical Transactions B entitled� 'Darwin and the
evolution of flowers' edited by Peter R. Crane, et al. Your statements
are a bit presumptuous at best. �I said nothing about honey bees, so I
have no idea where you are coming from with your "non-native
domesticant" whatever that may mean. However, apropos of that, I would
offer:

> Negative effects of honey bees suggested by some authors (e.g., Robert- son et
al. 1989; Buchmann and Nabhan 1996; Sugden et al. 1996) have included
competition with native fauna for pollen, nectar, and nesting hollows; inferior
pollination of native plants; increased hybridization and physical damage of
plants; and exacerbation of exotic weed problems. Few of these effects, however,
are supported by experimental data. Many charges are undocumented, and some are
implausible or untrue.

> Conservation concerns regarding honey bees have recently become quite topical
(e.g., Buchmann and Nabham 1996; Matheson et al. 1996; Sugden et al. 1996). A
widely cited paper states that honey bees are poor pollinators because they do
not pollinate some plants as well as do other pollinators (Westercamp 1991).
Some have recommended that honey bees be excluded from conservation areas
intended for other native bees, even where honey bees are native. They leave the
impression that honey bees are particularly damaging, which sharply contrasts
with the evidence provided in this review.

> No evidence exists, however, to indicate that the introduction of honey bees
has caused decreased population size or extinction of any native biota, as has
been extensively predicted or surmised. No evidence exists to indicate drastic
effects by honey bees on native systems, or radical alteration of native
communities. Until data are available, characterization of the honey bee as a
serious conservation threat is unwarranted.

Ecological Impacts of Introduced Honey Bees
Vivian M. Butz Huryn

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1421 From: Sam Droege <sdroege@...>
Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 1:27 am
Subject: Imidocloprid and Pollinators - Short and Long-term Potential Impacts sam_droege
Send Email

All

Below is an article that seems to be making its way through the state agriculture agencies... and likely elsewhere. I found several of the statements in this article regarding this compound's retention in the soil, increased effectiveness over time, and the multiplying impacts of breakdown products to be interesting and a bit disturbing in the implications this has for pollinators if used widely to treat the many species of blooming woody plants.

This article was culled from our state's landscape and integrated pest management report which goes out to many growers and landscaping firms. I read it regularly and for many pests the state is now recommending this compound and despite this article's warnings about not using it on nectar producing trees, to date there has been no warnings of such limitations in their recommendations and I can't help but think that this must be used very widely as it has so many positive attributes to the grower/nurseryman/landscaper.

Part of the reason for this article appears to be the use of this pesticide in treating Emerald Ash Borers, and, as the article states, rates have to be higher and more often to be effective. Peter Borst recently summarized why this is unlikely to be true.

I sent Peter's summary around to the USDA ARS group and got no replies, an indication of perhaps how little is known or...that there is some reluctance in discussing the matter. Its not clear to me, sitting on the sidelines, what the real situation is, but thought I would post this to the group to at least give the topic a chance for more consideration.

Again, while not a toxicologist, it would appear to me that studying the impacts of this chemical on pollinators (wild and Apis) would be reasonably straightforward....and that a partnership between biologists who study pollination and a toxicology team would perhaps make sense.

As pesticides can be a contentious issue, I would suggest making extra efforts to keep the conversation close to what facts are known and would could be done by biologists and bee people. Thanks

Your Public Servant, Sam

The article follows.....

The Facts About Systemic Insecticides And Their Impact On The Environment And Bee
Pollinators
By: Richard S. Cowles, Ph.D., Connecticut Agric. Exp., Valley Lab, Windsor, CT, Richard.Cowles@...

Is imidacloprid safe to use for controlling insect pests feeding on urban trees? Are insecticides like imidacloprid
responsible for Colony Collapse Disorder of honey bees? This article will try to provide some guidance and
respond to these questions.

Neonicotinoid insecticides and arboriculture

Imidacloprid is one of a growing class of insecticides (neonicotinoids) that have, since the announcement of
their discovery in 1989, become mainstays in agricultural, pest control, and landscape pest management. Two
active ingredients of this class are commonly used in arboriculture: imidacloprid (CoreTect, Merit, or Xytect)
and dinotefuran (Safari and Transtect). One of the reasons this class of insecticides has become so important
is its selective mode of action: neonicotinoids target the same acetylcholine receptor on the insect nerve
cell as nicotine (the active ingredient of tobacco), but unlike nicotine, do not bind well to the nerve cells of
humans. Therefore, it is toxic to insects and relatively nontoxic to humans and animals, including birds. Other
favorable environmental characteristics are that neonicotinoids are readily excreted by vertebrates, that they
break down quickly upon exposure to sunlight, and that they bind tightly to organic matter in soil. Another, and
probably their most important practical feature, is that they are systemic (move throughout the plant). Systemic
neonicotinoids can be applied to trees using three different application methods; these include soil applications,
systemic basal bark sprays and trunk injections. Each of these methods have their pros and cons, however, soil
and basal bark sprays are commonly used because of they are non-invasive to the tree, quick, and operational
predictable.
4
When applied to the soil around the root system of a plant, the insecticide is absorbed by the roots and
transported in sap, where the insecticide can then reach every part of the plant. This is useful both for targeting
sap feeders (both xylem feeders like sharpshooters, and phloem feeders like aphids) and insects that feed in the
interior trunk and leaf tissues of trees, such as newly hatched emerald ash borer larvae or various leaf miners.
In contrast to broad spectrum foliar spray insecticides, systemic applications of neonicotinoids, either as soil
applications or basal bark sprays, are contained within the plant. This allows targeted control of the pest insects
rather than killing all insects, which could including beneficial predators or non-target insect species. Trials
with the neonicotinoid dinotefuran have shown that a systemic basal bark spray will provide control of armored
scale pests on Christmas trees while not impacting beneficial scale-consuming predatory beetles and parasitic
wasps.
Systemic insecticides have proven their usefulness in arboriculture. Trees that would otherwise be impossible
to spray because of their great height, extremely dense foliage, or location near sensitive ecological or
human activities can be protected with systemic insecticides. For example, hemlock woolly adelgid has been
controlled in hemlocks as tall as 140-feet on trees in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. It would be
extremely difficult to achieve this level of control with non systemic products. Furthermore, imidacloprid
was found at nearly uniform concentrations in branch samples from all levels of the crown in these large trees.
Sadly, these trees were only treated once (in 2002), and recently died because the treatment was not continued.
Research has shown that the effective dosage rates for imidacloprid are exponentially related to the diameter
of the tree trunk. As trees increase in size they require higher insecticide dosage rates to fully protect the
tree. This has been demonstrated in research trials using soil applied imidacloprid on hemlocks for control of
hemlock wooly adelgid and (Cowles, 2009) and on ash trees for control of emerald ash borer (Herms et al.,
2009). Exploring the relationship between minimum effective dosage and the size of trees for various insect
pests should be a fertile subject for further study. A deep understanding of the dose/tree size/pest relationships
can lead to optimized use of these insecticides in the environment and therefore reduce the risk of non-target
impacts.
Some target pests (aphids, true bugs, and adelgids) are extremely sensitive and require very low dosages. Soil
applications of imidacloprid result in more than one year of control, and low dosages are effective. Since the
peak concentration following a soil application can be as long as 18 months later,2 it is unlikely that a tree
would need to be retreated to manage these pests for at least 2 years. Because imidacloprid and its olefin
metabolite continue to be mobilized to new growth in successive years, you may observe the population
continuing to decrease over time, to the point where the population is locally exterminated. I treated tulip
poplars at my workplace in 1995 with imidacloprid, and they have not required subsequent treatment. The rule
of thumb for these sensitive pests is to not retreat until the pest population is observed to be increasing again.
Unfortunately, borers require a much higher dosage in tissues to be effective, and any borers living in a tree
jeopardizes the long-term health of the tree. Therefore, protection from tough-to-control borers warrants annual
insecticide applications and higher treatment dosages.
Non-target effects and Colony Collapse Disorder
Probably the first non-target impact observed with imidacloprid was spider mite outbreaks in treated crops (a
phenomenon repeatedly observed in trees). Three hypotheses may explain this phenomenon; each explanation
has some supporting data. The insecticide is not poisonous to the mite, but causes secondary poisoning of
predators that feed on the mites, the insecticide acts as a “fertility drug” to the mites, and the plant is so much
healthier, that the mites can develop much better. From my own research on eastern hemlocks, I have observed
a transient outbreak in spruce spider mites that affect foliage for one year, which is more than compensated
by the improved growth of the trees when no longer weakened by adelgids. These effects may be more
pronounced when excessive dosages of imidacloprid are used relative to the size of the tree. Ecological studies
of forest hemlocks treated with imidacloprid demonstrate that it can affect many components of the insect fauna
associated with these trees.3 Such an outcome should not be surprising – after all, these systemic insecticides
5
are used precisely because they are potent insecticides. Hemipteran predators (such as minute pirate bugs)
are certainly eliminated with the use of systemic neonicotinoid insecticides. These and other predatory bugs
commonly feed on the sap of their target prey’s host plant, and so are subjected to direct poisoning.
The other insects for which there is great concern regarding the potential for poisoning are pollinators. While
any insect feeding on pollen or nectar could be exposed to the systemic insecticide, Colony Collapse Disorder
(CCD) has focused concern on risk to honey bees. Although the symptoms of bee poisoning with this class of
insecticides eerily resembles CCD (foraging bees become disoriented and do not return to the colony), a review
of the incidence of CCD around the world points to three or four other factors being more likely explanations.
(1) CCD has not diminished in countries where neonicotinoid insecticide use was curtailed, CCD is not found
in Australia, where neonicotinoid insecticides are used, but where Varroa mite (a parasite and vector of bee
viruses) are absent, 96% of colonies with CCD have been found to harbor a complex of viruses, for which
Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus is most strongly implicated; and hive equipment from CCD colonies can be
disinfected through irradiation, which implicates involvement of a pathogen. For tree species such as Fraxinus
(ash trees) which are not pollinated by bees or that are not visited by pollinators, systemic treatments will have
little to no impact on pollinator species.
The evidence pointing to other factors as likely causes for CCD does not leave neonicotinoid insecticides off the
hook for their potential to poison bees. The facts below are things that practitioners should consider:
• Neonicotinoid insecticides used in arboriculture are highly toxic to bees when exposed to a direct spray
application. For example, imidacloprid and dinotefuran have acute LD50s for bees of 18 and 75 ng per
bee, respectively.
• Exposure of insects to low neonicotinoid concentrations (well below their acute LD50) can cause mal
adaptive and ultimately lethal behaviors.
• Imidacloprid is readily metabolized in trees to imidacloprid olefin,2 which is 10 – 16 times more toxic to
insects than the parent compound.
• Peak concentrations of imidacloprid are not reached in some trees until about 18 months after a soil
application, which means that trees treated every year could accumulate concentrations toxic to bees
over several years.
• Arboricultural use concentrates these insecticides compared with agricultural uses. For example, the
maximum dosage for treating two 32-inch dbh trees with some imidacloprid products is equivalent to
treating one acre of agricultural crops.
• Higher concentration in plant tissues may increase risk to pollinators.
Little is known about the actual concentrations of these insecticides in nectar or pollen from treated landscape
trees. At this point, arborists should mitigate these concerns by adjusting how they treat trees, how often trees
are treated, and by choosing the most appropriate product. Risk of bee poisoning integrates components of
intrinsic toxicity (just how much of the insecticide is required to cause adverse effects in bees), and their degree
of exposure to that poison.
Arborists can avoid exposing pollinators by avoiding treating tree species that are highly attractive to pollinators
(linden, tulip poplar, Korean Evodia and catalpa, for example) with systemic insecticides. If trees attractive to
pollinators do require treating with a systemic insecticide, dinotefuran applied immediately after bloom may be
safer to use than imidacloprid products. Whereas imidacloprid can be detected in hemlock foliage for about 8
years after soil injection, preliminary data from various tree species suggest that dinotefuran breaks down over
the course of one growing season. Therefore, if the pest actively feeds following bloom of a tree species, then
a dinotefuran application after bloom can quickly target that pest, and then residues should dissipate so that it is
not present in pollen or nectar at biologically relevant concentrations the next time that plant blooms.
6
Risk of soil applied neonicotinoids leaching into groundwater
Another concern with soil applied systemic insecticides is that they may pose a risk of leaching to groundwater
or to nearby ponds and streams. This is really a non-issue when using these products in most urban landscape
soils. Both imidacloprid and dinotefuran do bind to organic matter in the soil and most urban landscape soils
with mature trees have higher than 3% organic matter. Therefore, there will be little risk of leaching as long as
there is a fair degree of organic matter in the soil (2% or greater), the insecticide is not placed below the organic
horizon of soil (as might happen with a deep root feeder probe), and the insecticide is not applied in such
concentrated “spots” that the active ingredient will exceed the binding capacity of the soil. Therefore, I suggest
that practitioners use very shallow subsurface (2-4 inches) application of systemic insecticides, dispersed near
the trunk of the tree. For high dose applications, expanding the area of soil treated near the base of the trunk of
the tree may be important to guarantee that the binding capacity of the organic matter is not exceeded. A novel
application technique to consider for high volume treatments is to use a hose-end sprayer to disperse the active
ingredient around the base of the tree, which should then be incorporated with an additional light watering to
wash the residues from the soil surface. In all of my experiments, I was unable to cause imidacloprid to leach
more than a few inches through an organic soil layer found under forest hemlocks, even with a one inch per
day irrigation protocol adding water to soil columns. Dinotefuran has much lower organic matter binding than
imidacloprid, and so it does pose a greater risk for leaching (though this risk may not be great). However,
dinotefuran can be successfully applied as a basal bark spray. It is surprising how quickly this active ingredient
is absorbed through the bark and is then transported to the foliage. My trials in eastern hemlocks have
demonstrated this approach to be equivalent to soil injection of the same quantity of product, and in conditions
where the soil is dry, compacted, or excessively wet, a trunk spray could be more effective than soil injection.
While neonicotinoids should not be applied to trees growing directly in water or to areas where surface water is
present there is little risk of these products leaching into groundwater when applied correctly to the majority of
soil types across the United States.
Imidacloprid and dinotefuran are very effective tools for managing many insect pests of landscape and forest
trees. Choosing the right product for the job and applying the product carefully can protect both the trees that
your customers value and the environment.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

Yahoo! Groups

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...

Messages