Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 21, Issue 14, pp 3585–3595

Assessing declines of North American bumble bees (Bombus spp.) using museum specimens

  • Sheila R. Colla
  • Fawziah Gadallah
  • Leif Richardson
  • David Wagner
  • Lawrence Gall
Original Paper

Abstract

Bumble bees are an important group of wild pollinators in North America and considerable concern has been expressed over declines in their populations. However, before causes for declines can be assessed, it is essential that the geographical and chronological patterns of decline be discovered. Hitherto a lack of assessment of historical data has hindered our efforts to determine which species are most at risk. Here, the status of 21 North American bumble bee species (Hymenoptera: Apidae) occurring in the eastern nearctic biogeographic region is assessed using a specimen-level database from compiled museum and survey records dating back to the late nineteenth century from various institutional collections. Using a combination of measures, bumble bee declines were assessed over their entire native ranges. We report here that half of the selected fauna is in varying levels of decline (especially Bombus ashtoni, B. fervidus, and B. variabilis), with the remaining species exhibiting stable or increasing trends (e.g., B. bimaculatus, B. impatiens, and B. rufocinctus). Suggestions for prioritizing conservation efforts for this important group of pollinators are given.

Keywords

Pollinator decline Bumble bees Bombus Grid cell Museum data Insect collections 

References

  1. Aizen MA, Garibaldi LA, Cunningham SA, Klein AM (2009) How much does agriculture depend on pollinators? lessons from long-term trends in crop production. Ann Bot 103:1579–1588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beismeijer JC, Roberts SPM, Reemer M, Ohlemuller R, Edwards M, Peeters T, Schaffers AP, Potts SG, Kleukers R, Kleukers CD, Settele J, Kunin WE (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and Netherlands. Science 313:351–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berenbaum M, Bernhardt P, Buchmann S, Calderone N, Goldstein P, Inouye DW, Kevan P, Kremen C, Medellin RA, Ricketts T, Robinson GE, Snow AA, Swinton SM, Thein LB, Thomspson FC (2007) Status of pollinators in North America. National Academies Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. Cameron SA, Lozier JD, Strange JP, Koch JB, Cordes N, Solter LF, Griswold TL (2011) Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumble bees. Proc Nat Acad Sci. doi:10.1073/pnas.1014743108 Google Scholar
  5. Colla SR, Dumesh S (2010) Natural history notes for the bumble bees of southern Ontario. J Entomol Soc Ont 141:38–67Google Scholar
  6. Colla SR, 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. COSEWIC (2010) COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Rusty-patched bumble bee Bombus affinis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa. vi + 34 pp. Online www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm. Accessed 19 Apr 2011
  8. Dupont YL, Damgaard C, Simonsen V (2011) Quantitative historical change in bumblebee (Bombusspp.) assemblages of red clover fields. PLoS ONE 6:e25172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ESRI (2010). ArcGIS Desktop: Release 9.2. Redlands. Environmental Systems Research Institute, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Evans E, Thorp R, Jepsen S, Black SH (2008) Status review of three formerly common species of bumble bee in the subgenus Bombus. Produced by the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, Oregon. (Online) http://www.xerces.org/wpcontent/uploads/2009/03/xerces_2008_bombus_status_review.pdf. Accessed 19 Apr 2011
  11. Fitzpatrick U, Murray TE, Paxton RJ, Breen J, Cotton D, Santorum V, Brown MJF (2007) Rarity and decline in bumblebees—a test of causes and correlates in the Irish fauna. Biol Conserv 136:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giles V, Ascher JS (2006) A survey of bees of the Black Rock forest preserve, New York (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). J Hymenoptera Res 15:208–231Google Scholar
  13. Goulson D, Hanley ME, Darvill B, Ellis JS, Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in bumblebees. Biol Conserv 122:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grixti JC, Wong LT, Cameron SA, Favret C (2009) Decline of bumble bees (Bombus) in the North American Midwest. Biol Conserv 142:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinrich B (2004) Bumblebee economics. Harvard University Press, USA 245 ppGoogle Scholar
  16. IUCN, (2001) IUCN red list categories and criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge UK. ii + 30 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Kearns CA, Inouye DW (1997) Pollinators, flowering plants and conservation biology. Bioscience 47:297–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kosior A, Celary W, Solarz W, Rasmont P, Fijal J, Krol W, Witkowski Z, Iserbyt S (2008) Long-term changes in the species composition and distribution of Bombini (Apidae) in Cracow since the mid 1850s. Annales de la Societe Entomologique de France 44:393–407Google Scholar
  19. Laverty TM, Harder LD (1988) The bumble bees of eastern Canada. Canad Entomol 120:965–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maes D, Vareusal W, Jacobs I, Berwaerts K, VanDyck H (2012) Applying IUCN red list criteria at a small regional level: a test case with butterflies in Flanders (north Belgium). Biol Conserv 145:258–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Morandin LA, Winston ML, Franklin MT, Abbott VA (2005) Lethal and sub-lethal effects of spinosad on bumble bees (Bombus impatiens Cresson). Pest Manag Sci 61:619–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Otti O, Schmid-Hempel P (2008) A field experiment on the effect of Nosema bombi on colonies of Bombus terrestris. Ecol Entomol 33:577–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pyke GH, Ehrlich PR (2009) Biological collections and ecological/environmental research: a review, some observations and a look to the future. Biol Rev 85:247–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roubik DW, 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
  25. Ruz L (2002) Bee pollinators introduced to Chile: a Review. In: Kevan P, Imperatriz Fonseca VL (eds) Pollinating bees—the conservation link between agriculture and nature. Ministry of Environment, Brasília. pp. 155–167Google Scholar
  26. Sheffield CS, Kevan PG, Smith RF, Rigby SM, Rogers REL (2003) Bee species of Nova Scotia, Canada, with new records and notes on bionomics and floral relations (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). J Kansas Entomol Soc 76:357–384Google Scholar
  27. Stefanescu C, Carnicer J, Panuelas J (2011) Determinants of species richness in generalist and specialist Mediterranean butterflies: the negative synergistic forces of climate and habitat change. Ecography 34:353–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thorp RW (2005) Bombus franklini Frison 1921 Franklin’s Bumble Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Apinae: Bombini). In: Shepherd MD, Vaughan M, Black SH (eds) Red list of pollinator insects of North America CD-ROM Version 1. Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  29. Thorp RW, Shepherd MD (2005) Subgenus Bombus. Latreille, 1802 (Apidae: Apinae: Bombini). In Shepherd MD, Vaughan DM, Black SH (eds) Red list of pollinator insects of North America. CD-ROM Version 1. Portland, OR: The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. (Online) www.xerces.org/Pollinator_Red_List/Bees/Bombus_Bombus.pdf. Accessed March 2011
  30. Wagner DLR, Van Driesche G (2010) Threats posed to rare and endangered insects by invasions of non-native species. Annu Rev Entomol 55:547–568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Whitehorn PR, Tinsley MC, Brown MJF, Darvill B, Goulson D (2009) Impacts of inbreeding on bumblebee colony fitness under field conditions. BMC Evol Biol 9:152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Williams PH (1982) The distribution and decline of British bumble bees (Bombus Latr.). J Apic Res 21:236–245Google Scholar
  33. Williams PH (1989) Bumble bees—and their decline in Britain. Central Association of Bee-Keepers, IlfordGoogle Scholar
  34. Williams PH (1996) Mapping variations in the strength and breadth of biogeographic transition zones using species turnover. Proc R Soc Lond Biol Sci 263:579–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams PH (2005) Does specialization explain rarity and decline among British bumble bees? A response to Goulson et al. Conserv Biol 122:33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Williams PH, Osborne J (2009) Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. Apidologie 40:367–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Williams PH, Colla SR, Xie Z (2009) Bumblebee vulnerability: common correlates of winners and losers across three continents. Conserv Biol 23:931–940PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zayed A, Packer L (2005) Complementary sex determination substantially increases extinction proneness of haplodiploid populations. Proc Nat Acad Sci 102:10742–10746PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheila R. Colla
    • 1
  • Fawziah Gadallah
    • 2
  • Leif Richardson
    • 3
  • David Wagner
    • 4
  • Lawrence Gall
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of BiologyYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  2. 2.University of OttawaOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Dartmouth College Life Sciences CenterHanoverUSA
  4. 4.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  5. 5.Entomology DivisionPeabody Museum of Natural History, Yale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations