Skip to main content
Log in

Competition between hummingbirds and bumble bees for nectar in flowers of Impatiens biflora

  • Original Papers
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Using removal experiments and concurrent measurement of resource levels, evidence was obtained for exploitation competition between Ruby-throated hummingbirds and two bumble bee species (Bombus fervidus and B. vagans) foraging for nectar on Impatiens biflora.

When all three species were active, flower visitors showed a complex pattern of resource partitioning involving both diel and spatial changes. Hummingbirds foraged almost exclusively from the outermost exposed flowers on plants from which they drained nectar levels beyond the reach of bees over most of the day. In contrast the longtongued bee species (B. fervidus), and the shorter-tongued B. vagans, displayed a preference for the innermost flowers on plants which were protected from hummingbird visitation by surrounding vegetation. The two Bombus spp. began foraging at different times during the day: B. vagans were most active in early morning but were replaced by B. fervidus later in the day.

When hummingbirds were rare, only B. fervidus showed evidence of competitive release: an increase in the number of foragers and a broadening of flower choice to include more outer flowers. Workers of B. vagans showed a similar response to temporary removal of B. fervidus and also extended their foraging over the entire day. These responses were consistent with changes in the availability of nectar to different species.

Removal experiments demonstrated that individuals of one species can be largely excluded from access to nectar resources as a direct result of exploitation of nectar by foragers of other species with longer tongues. Thus in this system interspecific exploitation is an important mechanism involved in resource partitioning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brian AD (1957) Differences in the flowers visited by four species of bumble bee and their causes. J Anim Ecol 26:71–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter LF (1979) Competition between hummingbirds and insects for nectar. Amer Zoo 19:1105–1114

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter LF (1978) A spectrum of nectar-eater communities. Amer Zool 18:809–818

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesson J (1978) Measuring preference in selective predation. Ecology 59:211–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am Nat 122:661–696

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel WW (1978) Applied non-parametric statistics. Houghton Mitton Co, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinsinger P (1976) Organization of a tropical guild of nectarivorous birds. Ecol Monog 46:257–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill FB (1978) Proximate costs of competition for nectar. Amer Zool 18:753–763

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder LD (1982) Measurement and estimation of functional proboscis length in bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Can J Zoo 60:1073–1079

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1976a) Resource partitioning among some eusocial insects: bumblebees. Ecology 57:874–889

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1976b) The foraging specializations of individual bumblebees. Ecol Monogr 46:105–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1979) Bumblebee economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Inouye DW (1978) Resource partitioning in bumblebees: experimental studies of foraging behavior. Ecology 59:672–678

    Google Scholar 

  • Manley BFJ (1972) Tables for the analysis of selective predation experiments. Researches on Population Ecology, Kyoto 14:74–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse DH (1977) Resource partitioning in bumblebees: the role of behavioral factors. Science 197:678–680

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse DH (1982a) Behavior and Ecology of bumble bees. In: HR Herman (ed) Social Insects V 3, Academic Press, NY pp 245–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse DH (1982b) Foraging relationships within a guild of bumble bees. Insectes Sociaux 29:445–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Plowright RC, Laverty TM (1984) Ecology of bumble bees. Ann Rev Ent 29:175–199

    Google Scholar 

  • Rust RW (1979) Pollination of Impatiens capensis and Impatiens pallida (Balsaminaceae). Bull Torr Bot Club 104:361–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Rust RW (1979) Pollination of Impatiens capensis: pollinators and nectar robbers. J Kansas Ent Soc 52:297–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoener TW (1983) Field experiments on interspecific competition. Am Nat 122:240–285

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Laverty, T.M., Plowright, R.C. Competition between hummingbirds and bumble bees for nectar in flowers of Impatiens biflora . Oecologia 66, 25–32 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378548

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378548

Keywords

Navigation