Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Bee diversity and abundance in an urban setting

  • Désirée Tommasi (a1), Alice Miro (a1), Heather A. Higo (a1) and Mark L. Winston (a1)

We assessed bee diversity and abundance in urban areas of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, to determine how urban environments can support bees. Habitats examined were community and botanical gardens, urban wild areas, Naturescape flower beds and backyards, and traditional flower beds and backyards. A total of 56 bee species (Hymenoptera), including species of the genera Andrena Fabr. (Andrenidae), Bombus Latr. (Apidae), Osmia Panzer and Megachile Latr. (Megachilidae), and Halictus Latr. and Dialictus Pauly (Halictidae), were collected. Abundance exhibited strong seasonal variation. Wild bees were most abundant during late spring, whereas honey bees peaked at the end of the summer. The most abundant species seen was the managed honey bee Apis mellifera L. (Apidae), followed by wild Bombus flavifrons Cresson. Community and botanical gardens, and plants such as cotoneaster (Cotoneaster Medik. sp.) and blackberry (Rubus discolor Weihe & Nees) (Rosaceae), centaurea (Centaurea L. sp.; Asteraceae), buttercup (Ranunculus L. sp.; Ranunculaceae), and foxglove (Digitalis L. sp.; Scrophulariaceae), had the highest abundance of bees, while bee populations in wild areas were the most diverse. Weeds such as dandelions (Taraxacum officinale G.H. Weber ex Wiggers; Asteraceae) dominated these wild areas and had one of the highest diversities of bee visitors. Traditional flower beds with tulips (Tulipa L. sp.; Liliaceae) and petunias (Petunia Juss. sp.; Solanaceae) had relatively poor diversity and abundance of bees throughout the year. Our study suggests that urban areas have the potential to be important pollinator reservoirs, especially if both bloom and habitat heterogeneity are maintained and enhanced through sustainable urban planning.


Nous avons estimé la diversité et l'abondance d'abeilles dans différents biotopes urbains de la ville de Vancouver, Colombie-Britannique, Canada, afin de déterminer comment les environnements urbains peuvent supporter les abeilles. Les habitats examinés incluent les jardins potagers et botaniques, les environs urbains sauvages, les parterres et les arrière-cours dits Naturescape, et les parterres et les arrière-cours traditionnels. Nous avons ressemblé un total de 56 espèces d'abeilles (Hymenoptera) dont Andrena Fabr. (Andrenidae), Bombus Latr. (Apidae), Osmia Panzer et Megachile Latr. (Megachilidae), Halictus Latr. et Dialictus Pauly (Halictidae). L'abondance a présenté une forte variation saisonnière. Les abeilles féeriques étaient considérablement plus abondantes pendant la dernière moitié du printemps, tandis que les abeilles d'élevage étaient plus abondantes pendant la dernière moitié de l'été. L'espèce la plus abondante était l'abeille d'élevage, Apis mellifera L. (Apidae), suivie de l'espèce féerique Bombus flavifrons Cresson. Les jardins potagers et botaniques des plantes telles que Cotoneaster Medik sp. et Rubus discolor Wehie & Ness (Rosaceae), Centaurea L. sp. (Asteraceae), Ranunculus L. sp. (Ranunculaceae), et Digitalis L. sp. (Scrophulariaceae) ont présenté la plus élevée abondance d'abeilles alors que les environs urbains sauvages ont exhibé les plus diverses populations d'abeilles. « Mauvaise herbes », comme les Taraxacum officinale G.H. Weber ex Wiggers (Asteraceae), dominaient ces habitats et présentaient la diversité d'abeilles visiteuses las plus élevée. Les parterres traditionnels, avec fleures telles que les Tulipa L. sp. (Liliaceae) et les Petunia Juss. sp. (Solanaceae), présentaient une diversité d'abeilles relativement pauvre tout au cour de l'an. Notre étude suggère que les zones urbaines ont du potentiel comme important réservoir de pollinisation, surtout quand et l'hétérogénéité d'habitat et hétérogénéité de fleures sont maintenues et accrues à travers le développement urbain durable.

Corresponding author
1Corresponding author (e-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

S.K. Collinge 1998. Spatial arrangement of habitat patches and corridors: clues from ecological field experiments. Landscape and Urban Planning 42: 157–68

G.W. Frankie , R.W. Thorp , L.E. Newstrom-Lloyd , M.A. Rizzardi , J.F. Barthell , T.L. Griswold , J. Kim , S. Kappagoda 1998. Monitoring wild bees in modified wildland habitats: implications for bee ecology and conservation. Environmental Entomology 27(5): 1137–47

D. Goulson , W.O.H. Hughes , L.C. Derwent 2002. Colony growth of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, in improved and conventional agricultural and suburban habitats. Oecologia 130: 267–73

R.K. Lancaster , W.E. Rees 1979. Bird communities and the structure of urban habitats. Canadian Journal of Zoology 57(12): 2358–68

A.E. Magurran 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. 1st edition. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press

J.L. Osborne , I.H. Williams 2001. Site constancy of bumble bees in an experimentally patchy habitat. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 83: 129–41

N.E. Stork , D.S. Srivastava , A.D. Watt , T.B. Larsen 2003. Butterfly diversity and silvicultural practices in lowland rainforests of Cameroon. Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 387410

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Canadian Entomologist
  • ISSN: 0008-347X
  • EISSN: 1918-3240
  • URL: /core/journals/canadian-entomologist
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 46 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 379 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th August 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.