A screening-level assessment of the pollinator-attractiveness of ornamental nursery stock using a honey bee foraging assay

Pesticide residues in honey bee (Apis mellifera) pollen collected in two ornamental plant nurseries in Connecticut: Implications for bee health and risk assessment

Honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are one of the most important managed pollinators of agricultural crops. While potential effects of agricultural pesticides on honey bee health have been investigated in some settings, risks to honey bees associated with exposures occurring in the plant nursery setting have received little attention. We sought to identify and quantify pesticide levels present in honey bee-collected pollen harvested in two ornamental plant nurseries (i.e., Nursery A and Nursery B) in Connecticut. From June to September 2018, pollen was collected weekly from 8 colonies using bottom-mounted pollen traps. Fifty-five unique pesticides (including related metabolites) were detected: 24 insecticides, 20 fungicides, and 11 herbicides. Some of the pesticide contaminants detected in the pollen had not been applied by the nurseries, indicating that the honey bee colonies did not exclusively forage on pollen at their respective nursery. The average number of pesticides per sample was similar at both nurseries (i.e., 12.9 at Nursery A and 14.2 at Nursery B). To estimate the potential risk posed to honey bees from these samples, we utilized the USEPA's BeeREX tool to calculate risk quotients (RQs) for each pesticide within each sample. The median aggregate RQ for nurse bees was 0.003 at both nurseries, well below the acute risk level of concern (LOC) of ≥0.4. We also calculated RQs for larvae due to their increased sensitivity to certain pesticides. In total, 6 samples had larval RQs above the LOC (0.45-2.51), resulting from the organophosphate insecticide diazinon. Since 2015, the frequency and amount of diazinon detected in pollen increased at one of our study locations, potentially due to pressure to reduce the use of neonicotinoid insecticides. Overall, these data highlight the importance of considering all life stages when estimating potential risk to honey bee colonies from pesticide exposure.

California Native Perennials Attract Greater Native Pollinator Abundance and Diversity Than Nonnative, Commercially Available Ornamentals in Southern California

While many factors have been implicated in global pollinator decline, habitat loss is a key driver of wild pollinator decline in both abundance and species richness. An increase in and diversification of pollinator habitat, even in urban settings, can assist in the conservation of pollinator populations. In Southern California, a highly fragmented and urbanized landscape with a rich yet threatened native pollinator fauna, the availability of food resources for native pollinators hinges largely upon the selection of ornamental plants grown in the urban landscape. To examine the pollinator attractiveness of ornamental plants in a Southern California context, we installed an experimental garden with common California native and nonnative ornamental perennials and observed floral visitation and visitor community composition for 3 yr. Our study demonstrates that while native pollinators visited common ornamental perennials native to California at a higher rate than they visited nonnative ornamentals, introduced honey bees showed no significant preference for either native or nonnative species. Native plants also received a greater diversity of visitor taxa, including a richer suite of native bees. Plant species differed dramatically in attractiveness, by as much as a factor of 12, even within the native status group. Our results suggest that including a data-driven selection of both native and non-native ornamental perennials in the urban landscape can diversify the assemblage of native pollinators, provide critical floral resources throughout the year, and reduce the impact of honey bee landscape foraging dominance by providing plants highly attractive to native pollinators and less so to honey bees.

Where Does Honey Bee (Apis mellifera L.) Pollen Come from? A Study of Pollen Collected from Colonies at Ornamental Plant Nurseries

Ornamental nursery plants are both a major agricultural industry in the U.S. and a major feature of the urban and suburban landscape. Interest in their relationship with pollinators is two-fold: the extent to which they provide a nutritional benefit to pollinators, and the extent to which they have the potential to harm pollinators by exposing them to pesticide residues in nectar and pollen. We identified plant genera as sources of trapped pollen collected by honey bee colonies located at commercial ornamental plant nurseries in Connecticut in 2015 and 2018 and quantified the percentage of pollen volume collected from each genus for each weekly sample over two seasons. Plant genera grown at these nurseries, particularly Rosa, Rhus, and Ilex, contributed substantially to pollen volume during weeks 23-27 of the year. Among the genera not grown in nurseries, Toxicodendron was also important during weeks 23 and 24, and Trifolium was important in both frequency and quantity throughout the season. Zea was a major component of pollen volume from weeks 28-36 in both sites, even though cropland was not over 11% of land cover at either site.

Pollinators and plant nurseries: how irrigation and pesticide treatment of native ornamental plants impact solitary bees

A key conservation goal in agroecosystems is to understand how management practices may affect beneficial species, such as pollinators. Currently, broad gaps exist in our knowledge as to how horticultural management practices, such as irrigation level, might influence bee reproduction, particularly for solitary bees. Despite the extensive use of ornamental plants by bees, especially little is known about how irrigation level may interact with insecticides, like water-soluble neonicotinoids, to influence floral rewards and bee reproduction. We designed a two-factor field cage experiment in which we reared Megachile rotundata (Fabricius) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) on containerized ornamental plants grown under two different irrigation levels and imidacloprid treatments (30% label rate dosage of a nursery formulation or an untreated control). Lower irrigation was associated with modest decreases in nectar volume and floral abundance in untreated plants, whereas irrigation did not affect plants treated with imidacloprid. Furthermore, higher irrigation decreased the amount of imidacloprid entering nectar. Imidacloprid application strongly reduced bee foraging activity and reproduction, and higher irrigation did not offset any negative effects on bees. Our study emphasizes the impact of a nursery neonicotinoid formulation on solitary bee foraging and reproduction, while highlighting interactions between irrigation level and neonicotinoid application in containerized plants themselves.

Shifts in honeybee foraging reveal historical changes in floral resources

Decreasing floral resources as a result of habitat loss is one of the key factors in the decline of pollinating insects worldwide. Understanding which plants pollinators use is vital to inform the provision of appropriate floral resources to help prevent pollinator loss. Using a globally important pollinator, the honeybee, we show how changes in agricultural intensification, crop use and the spread of invasive species, have altered the nectar and pollen sources available in the UK. Using DNA metabarcoding, we analysed 441 honey samples from 2017 and compared these to a nationwide survey of honey samples from 1952. We reveal that shifts in major plants foraged by honeybees are driven by changes in the availability of these plants within the landscape. Improved grasslands are the most widespread habitat type in the UK, and management changes within this habitat have the greatest potential to increase floral resource availability.