Skip to main content
Log in

Do exotic bumblebees and honeybees compete with native flower-visiting insects in Tasmania?

  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Honeybees, Apis mellifera, have been introduced by man throughout the globe. More recently, other bee species including various bumblebees (Bombus spp.) have been introduced to several new regions. Here we examine the impacts of honeybees and the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, on native flower-visiting insects in Tasmania. To assess whether native insects have lower abundance or are excluded in areas that have been colonised by exotic bees, we quantified the abundance, diversity and floral preferences of flower-visiting insects at sites where bumblebees and honeybees were present, and compared them to sites where they were absent. This was achieved by hand searches at 67 sites, and by deploying sticky traps at 122 sites. Honeybees were by far the most abundant bee species overall, and dominated the bee fauna at most sites. There was considerable niche overlap between honeybees, bumblebees and native bees in terms of the flowers that they visited. Sites where bumblebees were established had similar species richness, diversity and abundance of native flower-visiting insects compared to sites where bumblebees were absent. In contrast, native bees were more than three times more abundant at the few sites where honeybees were absent, compared to those where they were present. Our results are suggestive of competition between honeybees and native bees, but exclusion experiments are needed to provide a definitive test.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aizen M.A. and Feinsinger P. 1994. Forest fragmentation, pollination, and plant reproduction in a Chaco dry forest, Argentina. Ecology 75: 330–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong J.A. 1979. Biotic pollination mechanisms in the Australian flora - a review. New Zealand J. Bot. 17: 467–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttermore R.E. 1997. Observations of successful Bombus terrestris (L.) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies in southern Tasmania. Aus. J. Entomol. 36: 251–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butz Huryn V.M.B. 1997. Ecological impacts of introduced honey bees. Quart. Rev. Biol. 72: 275–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cody M.L. 1968. Interspecific territoriality among hummingbird species. Condor 70: 270–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell R.K. and Futuyma D.J. 1971. On the measurement of niche breadth and overlap. Ecology 52: 567–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbet S.A., Saville N.M., Fussell M., Prys-Jones O.E. and Unwin D.M. 1995. The competition box: a graphical aid to forecasting pollinator performance. J. Appl. Ecol. 32: 707–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dafni A. and Shmida A. 1996. The possible ecological implications of the invasion of Bombus terrestris (L.) (Apidae) at Mt Carmel, Israel. In: Matheson A. (ed.), Conservation of Bees. Academic Press, London, pp. 183–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan B.J. 1980. Interactions between native and introduced bees in New Zealand. New Zealand J. Ecol. 3: 104–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinsinger P., Swarm L.A. and Wolfe J.A. 1985. Nectar-feeding birds on Trinidad and Tobago: comparison of diverse and depauperate guilds. Ecol. Monogr. 55: 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg H.S. 1983. Foraging ecology of bees in an old field. Ecology 64: 165–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham L. and Jones K.N. 1996. Resource partitioning and per-flower foraging efficiency in two bumble bee species. Am. Midl. Nat. 136: 401–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B. 1979. Bumblebee Economics. Harvard University Press, Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hingston A.B., Marsden-Smedley J., Driscoll D.A., Corbett S., Fenton J., Anderson R. et al. 2002. Extent of invasion of Tasmanian native vegetation by the exotic bumblebee Bombus terrestris (Apoidea: Apidae). Austral Ecol. 27: 162–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hingston A.B. and McQuillan P.B. 1998. Does the recently introduced bumblebee Bombus terrestris (Apidae) threaten Australian ecosystems. Aus. J. Ecol. 23: 539–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hingston A.B. and McQuillan P.B. 1999. Displacement of Tasmanian native megachilid bees by the recently introduced bumblebee Bombus terrestris (Linnaeus, 1758) (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Aus. J. Zool. 47: 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins I. 1914. History of the bumblebee in New Zealand: its introduction and results. New Zealand Department of Agriculture, Industry and Commerce 46: 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horskins K. and Turner V.B. 1999. Resource use and foraging patterns of honeybees, Apis mellifera, and native insects on flowers of Eucalyptus costata. Aus. J. Ecol. 24: 221–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inouye D.W. 1978. Resource partitioning in bumblebees: experimental studies of foraging behavior. Ecology 59: 672–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inouye D.W. 1980. The effects of proboscis and corolla tube lengths on patterns and rates of flower visitation by bumblebees. Oecologia 45: 197–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson W.D. 1999. Vegetation types. Vegetation of Tasmania. In: Reid J.B., Hill R.S., Brown M.J. and Hovenden M.J. (eds), Flora of Australia Supplementary Series No. 8. Australian Biological Resources Study, Tasmania, Australia, pp. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato M., Shibata A., Yasui T. and Nagamasu H. 1999. Impact of introduced honeybees, Apis mellifera, upon native bee communities in the Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands. Researches on Population Ecology 2: 217–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener C.D. 1965. A classification of the bees of the Australian and South Pacific regions. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 130: 1–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton D.C. 1990. Budgets for the use of floral resources in mallee heath. In: Noble J.C., Joss P.J. and Jones G.K. (eds), The Mallee Lands: A Conservation Perspective. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 189–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton D.C. 1993. Honeybees in the Australian Environment - does Apis mellifera disrupt or benefit the native biota. Bioscience 43: 95–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton D.C. 1996. Overview of feral and managed honeybees in Australia: distribution, abundance, extent of interactions with native biota, evidence of impacts and future research. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prys-Jones O.E. 1982. Ecological studies of foraging and life history in bumblebees. PhD Dissertation, University of Cambridge.

  • Pyke G.H. 1982. Local geographic distributions of bumblebees near Crested Butte, Colorado: competition and community structure. Ecology 63: 555–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranta E., Lundberg H. and Teräs I. 1980. Patterns of resource utilization in two Fennoscandian bumblebee communities. Oikos 36: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranta E. and Vepsäläinen K. 1981. Why are there so many species? Spatio-temporal heterogeneity and northern bumblebee communities. Oikos 36: 28–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roubik D.W. 1978. Competitive interactions between neotropical pollinators and Africanized honey bees. Science 201: 1030–1032.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roubik D.W. 1980. Foraging behavior of commercial Africanized honeybees and stingless bees. Ecology 61: 8336–8345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roubik D.W. 1991. Aspects of Africanized honey bee ecology in tropical America. In: Spivak M. (ed.), The “African” Honey Bee. Westview Press, pp. 259–281.

  • Roubik D.W., Moreno J.E., Vergara C. and Wittman D. 1986. Sporadic food competition with the African honey bee: projected impact on neotropical social species. J. Trop. Ecol. 2: 97–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer W.M., Jensen D.B., Hobbs D.E., Gurevitch J., Todd J.R. and Valentine Schaffer M. 1979. Competition, foraging energetics, and the cost of sociality in three species of bees. Ecology 60: 976–987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer W.M., Zeh D.W., Buchmann S.L., Kleinhans S., Valentine Schaffer M. and Antrim J. 1983. Competition for nectar between introduced honey bees and native North American bees and ants. Ecology 64: 564–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz M.P., Gross C.L. and Kukuk P.F. 1991. Assessment of competition between honeybees and native bees. July 1991 Progress Report to the World Wildlife Fund, Australia, Project P158.

  • Schwarz M.P., Gross C.L. and Kukuk P.F. 1992. Assessment of competition between honeybees and native bees. January 1992 Progress Report to the World Wildlife Fund, Australia, Project P158.

  • Semmens T.D., Turner E. and Buttermore R. 1993. Bombus terrestris (L) (Hymenoptera, Apidae) now established in Tasmania. J. Aus. Entomol. Soc. 32: 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout J.C. and Goulson D. 2000. Bumblebees in Tasmania: their distribution and potential impact on Australian flora and fauna. Bee World 81: 80–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout J.C., Kells A.R. and Goulson D. Pollination of the invasive exotic shrub Lupinus arboreus (Fabaceae) by introduced bees in Tasmania. Biological Conservation (in press).

  • Sugden E.A. and Pyke G.H. 1991. Effects of honey bees on colonies of Exoneura asimillima, an Australian native bee. Aus. J. Ecol. 16: 171–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden E.A., Thorp R.W. and Buchmann S.L. 1996. Honey bee native bee competition: Focal point for environmental change and apicultural response in Australia. Bee World 77: 26–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiebout H.M. 1993. Mechanisms of competition in tropical hummingbirds: metabolic costs for losers and winners. Ecology 74: 405–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker K. 1995. Revision of the Australian native bee subgenus Lasioglossum (Chilalictus) (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 55: 1–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenner A.M. and Thorp R.W. 1994. Removal of feral honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies from Santa Cruz Island. In: Halvorson W.L. and Maender G.J. (eds), The Fourth Californian Islands Symposium: Update on the Status of Resources. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, California, USA, pp. 513–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P.H. 1994. Phylogenetic relationships among bumble bees (Bombus Latr.): a reappraisal of morphological evidence. Systematic Entomology 19: 327–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wills R.T., Lyons M.N. and Bell D.T. 1990. The European Honeybee in Western Australian kwongan: foraging preferences and some implications for management. Proc. Ecol. Soc. Aus. 16: 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilms W. and Wiechers B. 1997. Floral resource partitioning between native Melipona bees and the introduced Africanized honey bee in the Brazilian Atlantic rain forest. Apidologie 28: 339–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolda H. and Roubik D.W. 1986. Nocturnal bee abundance and seasonal bee activity in a Panamanian forest. Ecology 67: 426–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler K.I. 1993. Leatherwood Nectar Resource Management Report. Forest and Forest Industry Council, Hobart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz M.P. and Hurst P.S. 1997. Effects of introduced honeybees on Australia's native bee fauna. Victorian Naturalist 114: 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roubik D.W. and Wolda H. 2001. Do competing honeybees matter? Dynamics and abundance of native bees before and after honeybee invasion. 43: 53–62.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Goulson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Goulson, D., Stout, J. & Kells, A. Do exotic bumblebees and honeybees compete with native flower-visiting insects in Tasmania?. Journal of Insect Conservation 6, 179–189 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023239221447

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023239221447

Navigation