, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 504–513 | Cite as

The effect of proximity to a honeybee apiary on bumblebee colony fitness, development, and performance

  • Twfeik Elbgami
  • William E. Kunin
  • William O. H. Hughes
  • Jacobus C. Biesmeijer
Original article


Competition between managed honeybees and wild pollinators is thought to be a key factor in structuring foraging communities on flowers. The majority of studies have focused on impacts such as floral visitation rates and resource overlap. However, direct measurement of fitness is required to fully assess the impacts of competition. We compared in 2 years the weight and reproductive success of bumblebee colonies located at two sites that were either close to or far from a large honeybee apiary, and which were located in the same landscape and with access to similar floral resources. We found that bumblebee colonies located at the site near the honeybee apiary gained less weight, and produced fewer and smaller queens, in both years than colonies at the site far from the apiary. The ratio of queen weight/size was lower in the colonies near honeybees in 1 year, while males were smaller and offspring sex ratio more male biased in colonies close to honeybees than in those far from honeybees. Proximity to managed honeybee hives was therefore associated with significantly reduced fitness of bumblebee colonies, but studies from many more sites are needed to confirm the effect.


pollinator ecology competition bees Bombus terrestris Apis mellifera 



We are grateful to Holly Mottershead, Chris Wright and Martin Lappage for assistance with field work, and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. This research was funded by the Higher Education Ministry of Libya.

Supplementary material

13592_2013_265_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (156 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 155 kb)


  1. Beekman, M., Van Stratum, P. (1998) Bumblebee sex ratios: why do bumblebees produce so many males? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 1535–1543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beekman, M., Van Stratum, P., Lingeman, R. (1998) Diapause survival and post-diapause performance in bumblebee queens (Bombus terrestris). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 89, 207–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blanckenhorn, W.U. (2000) The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small? Q. Rev. Biol. 75, 385–407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Butz Huryn, V.M. (1997) Ecological impacts of introduced honey bees. Q. Rev. Biol. 72, 275–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cameron, S.A., Lozier, J.D., Strange, J.P., Koch, J.B., Cordes, N., Solter, L.F., Griswold, T.L. (2011) Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumblebees. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 662–667PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Colla, S.R., Packer, L. (2008) Evidence for decline in eastern North American bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae), with special focus on Bombus affinis Cresson. Biodivers. Conserv. 17, 1379–1391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corbet, S.A., Saville, N.M., Fussell, M., Prys-Jones, O.E., Unwin, D.M. (1995) The competition box: a graphical aid to forecasting pollinator performance. J. Appl. Ecol. 32, 707–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Couvillon, M.J., Dornhaus, A. (2009) Location, location, location: larvae position inside the nest is correlated with adult body size in worker bumble-bees (Bombus impatiens). Proc. Biol. Sci. B 276, 2411–2418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denno, R.F., Mcclure, M.S., Ott, J.R. (1995) Interspecific interactions in phytophagous insects: competition reexamined and resurrected. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 40, 297–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durrer, S., Schmid-Hempel, P. (1994) Shared use of flowers leads to horizontal pathogen transmission. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 258, 299–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fontaine, C., Dajoz, I., Meriguet, J., Loreau, M. (2006) Functional diversity of plant–pollinator interaction webs enhances the persistence of plant communities. PLoS Biol. 4, 129–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garibaldi, L.A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Kremen, C., Morales, J.M., Bommarco, R., et al. (2011) Stability of pollination services decreases with isolation from natural areas despite honey bee visits. Ecol. Lett. 14, 1062–1072CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Garibaldi, L.A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Winfree, R., Aizen, M.A., Bommarco, R., et al. (2013) Wild pollinators enhance fruit set of crops regardless of honey bee abundance. Science 339, 1608–1611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Genersch, E., Yue, C., Fries, I., De Miranda, J.R. (2006) Detection of deformed wing virus, a honey bee viral pathogen, in bumble bees (Bombus terrestris and Bombus pascuorum) with wing deformities. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 91, 61–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Ginsberg, H.S. (1983) Foraging ecology of bees in an old field. Ecology 64, 165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goulson, D. (2004) Keeping bees in their place: impacts of bees outside their native range. Bee World 85, 45–46Google Scholar
  17. Goulson, D., Sparrow, K. (2009) Evidence for competition between honeybees and bumblebees; effects on bumblebee worker size. J. Insect Conserv. 13, 177–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goulson, D., Hughes, W.O.H., Derwent, L.C., Stout, J.C. (2002a) Colony growth of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, in improved and conventional agricultural and suburban habitats. Oecologia 130, 267–273Google Scholar
  19. Goulson, D., Peat, J., Stout, J.C., Tucker, J., Darvill, B., Derwent, L.C., Hughes, W.O.H. (2002b) Can alloethism in workers of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, be explained in terms of foraging efficiency? Anim. Behav. 64, 123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Graystock, P., Yates, K., Evison, S.E.F., Darvill, B., Goulson, D., Hughes, W.O.H. (2013a) The Trojan hives: pollinator pathogens, imported and distributed in bumblebee colonies. J. Appl. Ecol. 50, 1207–1215Google Scholar
  21. Graystock, P., Yates, K., Darvill, B., Goulson, D., Hughes, W.O.H. (2013b) Emerging dangers: deadly effects of an emergent parasite in a new pollinator host. J. Invert. Pathol. 114, 114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gross, C.L. (1993) The breeding system and pollinators of Melastoma affine (Melastomataceae); a pioneer shrub in tropical Australia. Biotropica 25, 468–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holland, J., Guidat, F.S., Bourke, A.F.G. (2013) Queen control of a key life-history event in a eusocial insect. Biol. Lett. 9, 20130056CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Holm, S.N. (1972) Weight and life length of hibernating bumble bee queens (Hymenoptera: Bombidae) under controlled conditions. Insect Syst. Evol. 3, 313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Inoue, M.N. (2011) Size-dependent selection against small queens of the invasive bumblebee Bombus terrestris in Japan. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 138, 65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kosior, A., Celary, W., Olejniczak, P., Fijal, J., Król, W., Solarz, W., Plonka, P. (2007) The decline of the bumble bees and cuckoo bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Bombini) of Western and Central Europe. Oryx 41, 79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Oldroyd, B.P., Lawler, S.H., Crozier, R.H. (1994) Do feral honey bees (Apis mellifera) and regent parrots (Polytelis anthopeplus) compete for nest sites? Aust. J. Ecol. 19, 444–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Owen, R.E. (1988) Body size variation and optimal body size of bumble bee queens (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Can. Entomol. 120, 19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Paini, D.R. (2004) Impact of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on native bees: a review. Austral Ecol. 29, 399–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peat, J., Darvill, B., Ellis, J., Goulson, D. (2005a) Effects of climate on intra- and interspecific size variation in bumble-bees. Funct. Ecol. 19, 145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peat, J., Tucker, J., Goulson, D. (2005b) Does intraspecific size variation in bumblebees allow colonies to efficiently exploit different flowers? Ecol. Entomol. 30, 176–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roubik, D.W. (1983) Experimental community studies: time-series tests of competition between African and neotropical bees. Ecology 64, 971–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roubik, D.W., Wolda, H. (2001) Do competing honey bees matter? Dynamics and abundance of native bees before and after honey bee invasion. Popul. Ecol. 43, 53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schaffer, W.M., Zeh, D.W., Buchmann, S.L., Kleinhans, S., Schaffer, M.V., Antrim, J. (1983) Competition for nectar between introduced honey bees and native North American bees and ants. Ecology 64, 564–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spaethe, J., Weidenmüller, A. (2002) Size variation and foraging rate in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris). Insectes Soc. 49, 142–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sugden, E.A., Pyke, G.H. (1991) Effects of honey bees on colonies of Exoneura asimillima, an Australian native bee. Aust. J. Ecol. 16, 171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sugden, E.A., Thorp, R.W., Buchmann, S.L. (1996) Honey bee-native bee competition: focal point for environmental change and apicultural response in Australia. Bee World 77, 26–44Google Scholar
  38. Szabo, N.D., Colla, S.R., Wagner, D.L., Gall, L.F., Keer, J.T. (2012) Do pathogen spillover, pesticide use, or habitat loss explain recent North American bumblebee declines? Cons. Lett. 5, 232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomson, D. (2004) Competitive interactions between the invasive European honey bee and native bumble bees. Ecology 85, 458–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thomson, D.M. (2006) Detecting the effects of introduced species: a case study of competition between Apis and Bombus. Oikos 114, 407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thornhill, R., Alcock, J. (2000) The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard Univ. Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  42. Walther-Hellwig, K., Fokul, G., Frankl, R., Büchler, R., Ekschmitt, K., Wolters, V. (2006) Increased density of honeybee colonies affects foraging bumblebees. Apidologie 37, 517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wenner, A.M. (1992) Removal of feral honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies from Santa Cruz Island. In: Halverson, W.L., Maender, G.J. (eds.) Fourth California Islands Symposium: Update on the Status of Resources, pp. 351–365. Santa Barbara Mus. Nat. Hist, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  44. Westphal, C., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Tscharntke, T. (2006) Foraging trip duration of bumblebees in relation to landscape-wide resource availability. Ecol. Entomol. 31, 389–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Williams, P.H., Osborne, J.L. (2009) Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. Apidologie 40, 367–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilms, W., Wiechers, B. (1997) Floral resource partitioning between native Melipona bees and the introduced Africanized honey bee in the Brazilian Atlantic rain forest. Apidologie 28, 339–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA, DIB and Springer-Verlag France 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Twfeik Elbgami
    • 1
  • William E. Kunin
    • 1
  • William O. H. Hughes
    • 2
  • Jacobus C. Biesmeijer
    • 3
  1. 1.School of BiologyUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK
  2. 2.School of Life SciencesUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  3. 3.Naturalis Biodiversity CenterLeidenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations