Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 11, pp 3083–3094 | Cite as

Orchard pollination in Capitol Reef National Park, Utah, USA. Honey bees or native bees?

  • Vincent J. Tepedino
  • Diane Gail Alston
  • Brosi A. Bradley
  • Trent R. Toler
  • Terry L. Griswold
Original Paper


Capitol Reef National Park in central Utah, USA surrounds 22 managed fruit orchards started over a century ago by Mormon pioneers. Honey bees are imported for pollination, although the area in which the Park is embedded has over 700 species of native bees, many of which are potential orchard pollinators. We studied the visitation of native bees to apple, pear, apricot, and sweet cherry over 2 years. Thirty species of bees visited the flowers but, except for pear flowers, most were uncommon compared to honey bees. Evidence that honey bees prevented native bees from foraging on orchard crop flowers was equivocal: generally, honey bee and native bee visitation rates to the flowers were not negatively correlated, nor were native bee visitation rates positively correlated with distance of orchards from honey bee hives. Conversely, competition was tentatively suggested by much larger numbers of honey bees than natives on the flowers of apples, apricots and cherry; and by the large increase of native bees on pears, where honey bee numbers were low. At least one-third of the native bee species visiting the flowers are potential pollinators, including cavity-nesting species such as Osmia lignaria propinqua, currently managed for small orchard pollination in the US, plus several fossorial species, including one rosaceous flower specialist (Andrena milwaukiensis). We suggest that gradual withdrawal of honey bees from the Park would help conserve native bee populations without decreasing orchard crop productivity, and would serve as a demonstration of the commercial value of native pollinators.


Apoidea bees biodiversity competition conservation orchard crops park pollination 



We received financial and logistic support from the National Park Service. Their Capitol Reef representatives, Tom and Debbie Clark, and Jeff Pace, were most supportive hosts. Tom Clark, in particular, helped at every stage of this research, including its conception. Jim Cane and a hardworking anonymous reviewer made many constructive comments. Mike Dlugos contributed to data collection in the first year of this study.


  1. Batra SWT (1995) Bees and pollination in our changing environment. Apidologie 26:361–370Google Scholar
  2. Blanche KR, Ludwig JA, Cunningham SA (2006) Proximity to rainforest enhances pollination and fruit set in orchards. J Appl Ecol 43:1182–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosch J, Kemp WP (2001) How to manage the blue orchard bee. USDA-SARE, Sustainable agriculture network, Handbook series, Book 5, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Bosch J, Kemp WP, Trostle G (2006) Bee population returns and cherry yields in an orchard pollinated with Osmia lignaria (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae). J Econ Entomol 99:408–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buchmann SL, Shipman CW (1996) Pollen harvest by Sonoran Desert honey bees: conservation implications for native bees and flowering plants. Desert Plants 12:3–11Google Scholar
  6. Butz Huryn VM (1997) Ecological impacts of introduced honey bees. Q Rev Biol 72:275–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cane JH, Payne JA (1993) Regional, annual, and seasonal variation in pollinator guilds: intrinsic traits of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) underlie their patterns of abundance at Vaccinium ashei (Ericaceae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 86:577–588Google Scholar
  8. Delaplane KS, Mayer DF (2000) Crop pollination by bees. CABI Publishing, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Forup ML, Memmott J (2005) The relationship between the abundances of bumblebees and honeybees in a native habitat. Ecol Entomol 30:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Free JB (1993) Insect pollination of crops, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilbert CA, McKoy KL (1997) Cultural landscape report: Fruita Rural Historic District, Capitol Reef National Park. Cultural Resources Selections, National Park Service, Intermountain Region, No. 8 (also available at Scholar
  12. Goodell K (2003) Food availability affects Osmia pumila (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) foraging, reproduction, and brood parasitism. Oecologia 134:518–527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenleaf SS, Kremen C (2006a) Wild bee species increase tomato production and respond differently to surrounding land use in northern California. Biol Conserv 133:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greenleaf SS, Kremen C (2006b) Wild bees enhance honey bees’ pollination of hybrid sunflower. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:13890–13895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heil KD, Porter JM, Fleming R, Romme WH (1993) Vascular flora and vegetation of Capitol Reef National Park, Utah. Technical report NPS/NAUCARE/NRTR-93/01. Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Denver COGoogle Scholar
  16. Kevan PG (1977) Blueberry crops in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick – Pesticides and crop reductions. Can J Agric Econ 25:61–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klein A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003) Fruit set of highland coffee depends on the diversity of pollinating bees. Proc Roy Soc London B 270:855–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol Lett 8:468–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kremen C, Williams NM, Thorp RW (2002) Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:16812–16816CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. LaBerge WE (1980) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the western hemisphere. Part X. Subgenus Andrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc 106:395–525Google Scholar
  21. Minckley RL, Cane JH, Kervin L, Yanega D (2003) Biological impediments to measures of competition among introduced honey bees and desert bees. J Kansas Entomol Soc 76:306–319Google Scholar
  22. Morandin LA, Winston ML (2005) Wild bee abundance and seed production in conventional, organic, and genetically modified canola. Ecol Appl 15:871–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Park Service. The National Park Service Organic Act. Scholar
  24. Paini DR (2004) Impact of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on native bees: a review. Austral Ecol 29:399–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Paini DR, Williams MR, Roberts JD (2005) No short-term impact of honey-bees on the reproductive success of an Australian native bee. Apidologie 36:613–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Parker FD, Batra SWT, Tepedino VJ (1987) New pollinators for our crops. Agric Zool Rev 2:279–304Google Scholar
  27. Potts SG, Vulliamy B, Roberts S, O’Toole C, Dafni A, Ne’eman G, Willmer P (2005) Role of nesting resources in organising diverse bee communities in a Mediterranean landscape. Ecol Entomol 30:78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rao NH, Katyal JC, Reddy MN (2004) Embedding the sustainability perspective into agricultural research: implications for research management. Outlook Agric 33:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ricketts TH (2004) Do tropical forest fragments enhance pollinator activity in nearby coffee crops? Conserv Biol 18:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Romme WH, Heil KD, Porter JM, Fleming R (1993) Plant communities of Capitol Reef National Park, Utah. Technical report NPS/NAUCARE/NRTR-93/02. Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Denver COGoogle Scholar
  31. SAS Institute (2003) Version 9.1.3. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  32. Schaffer WM, Zeh DW, Buchmann SL, Kleinhans S, Schaffer MV, Antrim J (1983) Competition for nectar between introduced honey bees and native North-American bees and ants. Ecology 64:564–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sugden EA, Thorp RW, Buchmann SL (1996) Honey bee-native bee competition: focal point for environmental change and apicultural response in Australia. Bee World 77:26–44Google Scholar
  34. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams NM, Minckley RL, Silveira FA (2001) Variation in native bee faunas and its implications for detecting community changes. Conserv Ecol 5(1):7. [online] URL Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent J. Tepedino
    • 1
  • Diane Gail Alston
    • 2
  • Brosi A. Bradley
    • 3
  • Trent R. Toler
    • 2
    • 4
  • Terry L. Griswold
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUSDA ARS, Bee Biology & Systematics Lab., Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  3. 3.Juniata CollegeHuntingdonUSA
  4. 4.HDR Engineering Inc.Salt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations