Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-8c549 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T08:55:04.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Foraging patterns of managed honeybees and wild bee species in an arid African environment: ecology, biodiversity and competition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2007

Dino J. Martins
Dino J. Martins*
Affiliation:
PO Box 72461-00200, Nairobi, Kenya
*
*Email: dinom@elci.org
Get access

Abstract

Investigations into the potential impacts of selectively managing Apis mellifera on pollination ecology were carried out in several sites in Tsavo National Park of southern Kenya, a typical arid African environment. Temperature alone contributed significantly to the foraging patterns of both managed honeybees and wild bee species within the acacia–commiphora community. Honeybees, vulnerable to heat stress, foraged earlier in the day than wild bee species. Foraging patterns of the latter ranged from oligolectic to broadly non-specialized. Floral biology and adaptations were also considered in the analysis of divergent foraging trends. Observations suggest that honeybees potentially out-compete highly specialized wild bee species for scarce seasonal floral resources. No evidence was found of direct interaction on abundant seasonal floral resources such as the mass synchronous flowering of Acacia spp. at current managed honeybee densities. Investigation of visitors revealed a high diversity of potential insect pollinators, particularly high in wild bee species (Apoidea) diversity. Suggestions for the improved management of honeybees in arid African environments include shading of hives, providing access to water with protection from predators, and cultivation of indigenous, nectariferous plants close to hive colonies.

Keywords

ApoideaApis melliferainterspecific competitiondrylandswild beesacaciaaloesresource partitioning
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 2004 , pp. 105 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Buchmann, S. L. (1996) Competition between honeybees and native bees in the Sonoran Desert and global bee conservation issues, pp. 126–141. In The Conservation of Bees. The Linnean Society of London and the International Bee Research Association, London.Google Scholar
Dafni, A., Firmage, D. (2000) Pollen viability and longevity: practical, ecological and evolutionary implications. Plant Syst. Evol. 222, 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinrich, B. (1976) Resource partitioning amongst some eusocial insects: bumblebees. Ecology 57, 874–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kearns, C. A., Inouye, D. W. (1997) Pollinators, flowering plants, and conservation biology. Bioscience 47, 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, L. E. (1980) Floral behaviour in the genus Aloe. Cactus and Succulent Journal of Great Britain 42 (1) 3–4.Google Scholar
Roubik, D. W. (1992) Ecology and Natural History of Tropical Bees. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.Google Scholar
Stone, G., Willmer, P., Nee, S. (1996) Daily partitioning of pollinators in an African Acacia community. Proc. R. Soc. 263, 1389–1393.Google Scholar
Sugden, E. A. (1996) Towards an ecological perspective of beekeeping The Conservation of Bees pp. 154–161 In The Conservation of Bees. The Linnean Society of London and the International Bee Research Association, London.Google Scholar
Von Frisch, K. (1993) In The Dance Language and Orientation of Bees (Edited by Chadwick, L. E.). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar