The effect of repeated, lethal sampling on wild bee abundance and diversity
The effect of repeated, lethal sampling on wild bee abundance and diversity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/2041-210x.12375
复制
发表时间：
2015-09-01
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
Irwin, Rebecca E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gezon, Zachariah J.;Wyman, Eli S.;Irwin, Rebecca E.
1.蜜蜂传粉者为野生和农业植物提供了重要的生态系统服务，但据报道，由于人为变化，全球范围内的蜜蜂传粉者正在减少。关于蜜蜂数量和多样性的长期数据很少，强调需要使用可重复的方法进行额外的定量取样。最近，监测方案已开始使用一种标准化的方法，即结合使用盘式诱捕器和扫网，从而对蜜蜂进行致命抽样。这种标准化的方法可以在每个采样日从现场清除大量蜜蜂，这引起了人们对采样本身可能对蜜蜂种群产生负面影响的担忧。我们进行了一项实验，以评估在整个季节和多年中每两周进行一次的蜜蜂致死采样是否会影响蜜蜂的丰度和多样性。我们比较了2009年至2012年每两周取样一次的地点与以前未取样的类似地点之间的蜜蜂丰度、丰富度、均匀度和功能群组成。我们发现，标准化的方法采样蜜蜂，从132个形态种的标本，并没有影响蜜蜂群落的丰度，稀薄的丰富度，均匀度，或功能群组成。因此，我们的研究结果表明，我们采样的蜜蜂群落对这种采样努力是稳健的，尽管每个季节平均去除2862只蜜蜂。我们讨论了几种解释，为什么采样没有影响蜜蜂的丰度或社区结构，包括密度依赖的响应减少资源竞争。这些结果表明，蜜蜂监测方案采样每两周一次，锅陷阱和网不会影响蜜蜂群落结构。我们敦促监测蜜蜂的研究人员利用标准化的协议，以便可以在空间和时间上比较结果。
1. Bee pollinators provide a critical ecosystem service to wild and agricultural plants but are reported to be declining world-wide due to anthropogenic change. Long-term data on bee abundance and diversity are scarce, and the need for additional quantitative sampling using repeatable methods has been emphasized. Recently, monitoring programmes have begun using a standardized method that employs a combination of pan traps and sweep netting, resulting in lethal sampling of bees. This standardized method can remove a large number of bees from sites during each sampling day, raising concern that the sampling itself could have a negative effect on bee populations.2. We conducted an experiment to assess whether lethal sampling for bees using pan traps and netting affected bee abundance and diversity when done every two weeks throughout a season and over multiple years. We compared bee abundance, richness, evenness and functional group composition between sites that had been sampled every two weeks from 2009 to 2012 to similar sites not previously sampled.3. We found that the standardized method for sampling bees, with specimens from 132 morphospecies, did not affect bee communities in terms of abundance, rarefied richness, evenness, or functional group composition. Thus, our results indicate that the bee communities we sampled are robust to such sampling efforts, despite removing an average of 2862 bees per season.4. We discuss several explanations for why sampling did not affect bee abundance or community structure, including a density-dependent response to reduced competition for resources.5. These results suggest that bee monitoring programmes sampling once every two weeks with pan traps and netting will not affect bee community structure. We urge researchers monitoring bees to utilize standardized protocols so that results can be compared across space and time.