Skip to main content

Flower traits associated with the visitation patterns of bees

Oecologia volume 193, pages 511–522 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Plant-pollinator interactions are partially driven by the expression of plant traits that signal and attract bees to the nutritional resources within flowers. Although multiple physical and chemical floral traits are known to influence the visitation patterns of bees, how distinct bee groups vary in their responses to floral traits has yet to be elucidated. In this study, we used a common garden experiment to test for morphological floral traits associated with pollen quantity at the plant species level, and examined how the visitation patterns of taxonomically and functionally distinct bee groups are related to flower trait characteristics of 39 wildflower species. We also determined how floral traits influence the structure of wild bee communities visiting plants and whether this varies among geographic localities. Our results suggest that floral area is the primary morphological floral trait related to bee visitation of several distinct bee groups, but that wild bee families and functionally distinct bee groups have unique responses to floral trait expression. The composition of the wild bee communities visiting different plants was most strongly associated with variability in floral area, flower height, and the quantity of pollen retained in flowers. Our results inform wildflower habitat management for bees by demonstrating that the visitation patterns of distinct bee taxa can be predicted by floral traits, and highlight that variability in these traits should be considered when selecting plants to support pollinators.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  • Abràmoff MD, Magelhaes PJ, Ram SJ (2004) Image processing with PhotoJ. Biophoton Int 2004(11):36–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartomeus I, Ascher JS, Gibbs J, Danforth BN, Wagner DL, Hedtke SM (2013) Historical changes in northeastern US bee pollinators related to shared ecological traits. PNAS 110(12):4656–4660

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer AA, Clayton MK, Brunet J (2017) Floral traits influencing plant attractiveness to three bee species: consequences for plant reproductive success. Am J Bot 104(5):772–781

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesmeijer JC, Roberts SP, Reemer M, Ohlemüller R, Edwards M, Peeters T et al (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science 313(5785):351–354

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blaauw BR, Isaacs R (2014) Flower plantings increase wild bee abundance and the pollination services provided to a pollination-dependent crop. J Appl Ecol 51(4):890–898

    Google Scholar 

  • Blüthgen N, Klein A (2011) Functional complementarity and specialisation: the role of biodiversity in plant pollinator interactions. Basic Appl Ecol 12:282–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch J, Retana J, Cerdá X (1997) Flowering phenology, floral traits and pollinator composition in a herbaceous Mediterranean plant community. Oecologia 109(4):583–591

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouseman JK, LaBerge WE (1978) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere. Part IX. Subgenus Melandrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc (1890–) 104(3/4):275–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Cnaani J, Thomson JD, Papaj DR (2006) flower choice and learning in foraging bumblebees: effects of variation in nectar volume and concentration. Ethology 112:278–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Coelho BWT (2004) A review of the bee genus Augochlorella (Hymenoptera: Halictidae: Augochlorini). Syst Entomol 29:282–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner JK, Rush S (1996) Effects of flower size and number on pollinator visitation to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum. Oecologia 105(4):509–516

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornhaus A, Klügl F, Oechslein C, Puppe F, Chittka L (2006) Benefits of recruitment in honey bees: effects of ecology and colony size in an individual-based model. Behav Ecol 17(3):336–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Droege S (2016) Nomada. Discover life https://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20q?search=Apoidea. 11 Nov 2016.

  • Eckhart VM (1991) The effects of floral display on pollinator visitation vary among populations of Phacelia linearis (Hydrophyllaceae). Evol Ecol 5(4):370–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA (1990) On the measurement and classification of colour in studies of animal colour patterns. Biol J Linn Soc 41(4):315–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler AK, Landis D (2007) Attractiveness of Michigan native plants to arthropod natural enemies and herbivores. Environ Entomol 36(4):751–765

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J (2011) Revision of the metallic Lasioglossum (Dialictus) of eastern North America (Hymenoptera: Halictidae: Halictini). Zootaxa 3073:1–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J, Packer L, Dumesh S, Danforth BN (2013) Revision and reclassification of Lasioglossum (Evylaeus), L. (Hemihalictus) and L. (Sphecodogastra) in eastern North America (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Halictidae). Zootaxa 3672:1–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J, Ascher JS, Rightmyer MG, Isaacs R (2017) The bees of Michigan (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila), with notes on distribution, taxonomy, pollination, and natural history. Zootaxa 4352(1):1–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenleaf SS, Williams NM, Winfree R, Kremen C (2007) Bee foraging ranges and their relationship to body size. Oecologia 153(3):589–596

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumbert A (2000) Color choices by bumble bees (Bombus terrestris): innate preferences and generalization after learning. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 48(1):36–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder LD (1985) Morphology as a predictor of flower choice by bumble bees. Ecology 66(1):198–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Hetherington-Rauth MC, Ramírez SR (2016) Evolution and diversity of floral scent chemistry in the euglossine bee-pollinated orchid genus Gongora. Ann Bot 118(1):135–148

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks DM, Ouvrard P, Baldock KCR, Baude M, Goddard A, Kunin WE et al (2016) Food for pollinators: quantifying the nectar and pollen resources of urban flower meadows. PLoS ONE 11(6):e0158117

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs R, Tuell J, Fiedler A, Gardiner M, Landis D (2009) Maximizing arthropod-mediated ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes: the role of native plants. Front Ecol Environ 7(4):196–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Junker RR, Parachnowitsch AL (2015) Working towards a holistic view on flower traits how floral scents mediate plant-animal interactions in concert with other floral characters. J Indian Inst Sci 95(1):43–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy CM, Lonsdorf E, Neel MC, Williams NM, Taylor H, Winfree R et al (2013) A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems. Ecol Lett 16:584–599

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoll EA (2000) Adobe photoshop V 6.0. Adobe Systems, San Jose, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Kriesell L, Hilpert A, Leonhardt SD (2017) Different but the same: bumblebee species collect pollen of different plant sources but similar amino acid profiles. Apidologie 48(1):102–116

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge WE (1967) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere. Part I. Callandrena (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). Bull Univ Nebraska State Mus 7:1–316

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge WE (1969) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere Part II. Plastandrena, Aporandrena, Charitandrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc 95:1–47

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge WE (1971) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere. Part IV. Scrapteropsis, Xiphandrena and Raphandrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc 97:441–520

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge WE (1980) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the western hemisphere. Part X. Subgenus Andrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc 106:395–525

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge WE (1989) A revision of the bees of the genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere. Part XIII. Subgenera Simandrena and Taeniandrena. Trans Am Entomol Soc 115:1–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin LL, Andrus R, Droege S (2016) Andrena. Discover life. https://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20q?search=Apoidea. Accessed 10 Nov 2016.

  • Leonard AS, Masek P (2014) Multisensory integration of colors and scents: Insights from bees and flowers. J Compar Physiol A 200(6):463–474

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leonhardt SD, Blüthgen N (2012) The same, but different: pollen foraging in honeybee and bumblebee colonies. Apidologie 43(4):449–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundin O, Ward KL, Williams NM (2019) Identifying native plants for coordinated habitat management of arthropod pollinators, herbivores and natural enemies. J Appl Ecol 56(3):665–676

    Google Scholar 

  • Makino TT, Ohashi K, Sakai S (2007) How do floral display size and the density of surrounding flowers influence the likelihood of bumble bee revisitation to a plant? Funct Ecol 21(1):87–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallinger RE, Prasifka JR (2017) Bee visitation rates to cultivated sunflowers increase with the amount and accessibility of nectar sugars. J Appl Entomol 141(7):561–573

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Michener CD (2000) The bees of the World. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Minckley RL, Roulston TH (2006) Incidental mutualisms and pollen specialization among bees. Plant-pollinator interactions: from specialization to generalization. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 69–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RJ, Karron JD, Holmquist KG, Bell JM (2004) The influence of Mimulus ringens floral display size on pollinator visitation patterns. Funct Ecol 18(1):116–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Muth F, Papaj DR, Leonard AS (2016) Bees remember flowers for more than one reason: pollen mediates associative learning. Anim Behav 111:93–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls E, Hempel de Ibarra N (2017) Assessment of pollen rewards by foraging bees. Funct Ecol 31(1):76–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolson SW (2011) Bee food: the chemistry and nutritional value of nectar, pollen and mixtures of the two. Afr Zool 46(2):197–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Öckinger E, Schweiger O, Crist TO, Debinski DM, Krauss J, Kuussaari M et al (2010) Life-history traits predict species responses to habitat area and isolation: a cross-continental synthesis. Ecol Lett 13(8):969–979

    Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’hara RB et al (2013) Package ‘vegan’. Commun Ecol Package Version 2(9):1–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Packer L, Genaro JA, Sheffield CS (2007) The bee genera of eastern Canada. Can J Arthropod Ident 3(3):1–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Pamminger T, Becker R, Himmelreich S, Schneider CW, Bergtold M (2019) The nectar report: quantitative review of nectar sugar concentrations offered by bee visited flowers in agricultural and non-agricultural landscapes. PeerJ 7:e6329

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pellmyr O (1988) Bumble bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) assess pollen availability in Anemonopsis macrophylla (Ranunculaceae) through floral shape. Ann Entomol Soc Am 81(5):792–797

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts S, Vulliamy B, Dafni A, Neeman G, Willmer PG (2003) Linking bees and flowers: how do floral communities structure pollinator communities? Ecology 84(10):2628–2642

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, Kunin WE (2010) Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 25(6):345–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Praz CJ, Müller A, Dorn S (2008) Specialized bees fail to develop on non-host pollen: do plants chemically protect their pollen. Ecology 89(3):795–804

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/

  • Raguso RA (2008) Wake up and smell the roses: the ecology and evolution of floral scent. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:549–569

    Google Scholar 

  • Reverté S, Retana J, Gómez JM, Bosch J (2016) Pollinators show flower colour preferences but flowers with similar colours do not attract similar pollinators. Ann Bot 118(2):249–257

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • La Rosa RJ, Conner JK (2017) Floral function: effects of traits on pollinators, male and female pollination success, and female fitness across three species of milkweeds (Asclepias). Am J Bot 104(1):150–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe L, Gibson D, Landis D, Gibbs J, Isaacs R (2018) A comparison of drought-tolerant prairie plants to support managed and wild bees in conservation programs. Environ Entomol 47(5):1128–1142

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell AL, Buchmann SL, Papaj DR (2017) How a generalist bee achieves high efficiency of pollen collection on diverse floral resources. Behav Ecol 28:991–1003

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiestl FP, Johnson SD (2013) Pollinator-mediated evolution of floral signals. Trends Ecol Evol 28(5):307–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva EM, Dean BB (2000) Effect of nectar composition and nectar concentration on honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) visitations to hybrid onion flowers. J Econ Entomol 93(4):1216–1221

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seeley TD, Camazine S, Sneyd J (1991) Collective decision-making in honey bees: how colonies choose among nectar sources. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 28(4):277–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Somme L, Vanderplanck M, Michez D, Lombaerde I, Moerman R, Wathelet B et al (2015) Pollen and nectar quality drive the major and minor floral choices of bumble bees. Apidologie 46(1):92–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Stang M, Klinkhamer PG, Waser NM, Stang I, van der Meijden E (2009) Size-specific interaction patterns and size matching in a plant–pollinator interaction web. Ann Bot 103(9):1459–1469

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Stephen WP (1954) A revision of the bee genus Colletes in America North of Mexico. Univ Kansas Sci Bull 36:149–527

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuell JK, Fiedler AK, Landis D, Isaacs R (2008) Visitation by wild and managed bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) to eastern US native plants for use in conservation programs. Environ Entomol 37(3):707–718

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban-Mead KR (2017) Predictability of bee community composition after floral removals differs by floral trait group. Biol Lett 13(11):20170515

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal C, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003) Mass flowering crops enhance pollinator densities at a landscape scale. Ecol Lett 6(11):961–965

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams NM, Crone EE, Tai HR, Minckley RL, Packer L, Potts SG (2010) Ecological and life-history traits predict bee species responses to environmental disturbances. Biol Conserv 143(10):2280–2291

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PH, Thorp RW, Richardson LL, Colla SR (2014) Bumble bees of North America: an identification guide. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaudo AD, Tooker JF, Grozinger CM, Patch HM (2015) Bee nutrition and floral resource restoration. Curr Opin Insect Sci 10:133–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaudo AD, Patch HM, Mortensen DA, Tooker JF, Grozinger CM (2016) Macronutrient ratios in pollen shape bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) foraging strategies and floral preferences. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(28):E4035–E4042

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vaudo AD, Farrell LM, Patch HM, Grozinger CM, Tooker JF (2018) Consistent pollen nutritional intake drives bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) colony growth and reproduction across different habitats. Ecol Evol 8(11):5765–5776

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Venjakob C, Klein A, Ebeling A, Tscharntke T, Scherber C (2016) Plant diversity increases spatio-temporal niche complementarity in plant-pollinator interactions. Ecol Evol 6(8):2249–2261

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the research technicians that helped collect data for this project, particularly Julia Perrone, Katie Manning, Nate Walton, Gabe King, Michael Killewald, Katie Boyd-Lee, and Marguerite Bolt. In addition, we thank the technical staff that helped maintain our research plots at the three research stations. All plant materials were provided by native plant producers including Wildtype Native Plant Nursery, Hidden Savannah Nursery, and Prairie Moon Nursery. This project was funded by MSU Project GREEEN (GR14-011) and USDA NC-SARE (NCR13-075). Support was also provided to CAB and DAL by the NSF-Long Term Ecological Research Program (DEB 1637653) at the Kellogg Biological Station, and for RI and DAL by Michigan State University AgBioResearch.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Christie A. Bahlai

    Present address: Department of Biological Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH, 44242, USA

  2. Jason Gibbs

    Present address: Department of Entomology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada

Affiliations

  1. Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Logan Rowe & Daniel Gibson

  2. Ecology, Evolutionary Biology, and Behavior Program, Michigan State University, 103 Giltner Hall, 293 Farm Lane, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Douglas A. Landis & Rufus Isaacs

Authors
  1. Logan Rowe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Gibson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christie A. Bahlai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jason Gibbs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Douglas A. Landis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rufus Isaacs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RI, DA, LR, and DG conceived and designed the experiments. LR and DG performed the experiments. CB provided expert statistical advice. JG and LR identified species used for analyses. LR performed statistical analyses and wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript and provided editorial advice.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Logan Rowe.

Additional information

Communicated by Diethart Matthies .

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 35 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rowe, L., Gibson, D., Bahlai, C.A. et al. Flower traits associated with the visitation patterns of bees. Oecologia 193, 511–522 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-020-04674-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-020-04674-0

Keywords

  • Bees
  • Traits
  • Flowers
  • Conservation
  • Plant–insect interactions