Floral visitation patterns of bees during spring in Constantine, Algeria

Page created by Tracy Jensen
 
CONTINUE READING
Floral visitation patterns of bees during spring in Constantine, Algeria

K. Louadi*, K. Benachour & S. Berchi
Laboratoire de Biosystématique et Ecologie des Arthropodes, Département des Sciences de la Nature et de la Vie,
Université Mentouri, Constantine 25.000, Algeria

Although there have been studies on Algerian                    from 08:00 to 12:00 (GMT +1) from 26 February to
Hymenoptera by Saunders (1908), Alfken (1914),                  20 June 1996 and 1997 in fallow lands, grasslands
Morice (1916), Schulthess (1924), Roth (1923, 1924,             and along road verges. Small bees were captured
1930) and Benoist (1961), the bee fauna of some                 using a plastic aspirator 5 × 3 cm diameter contain-
regions of Algeria, North Africa, is little known.              ing filter paper moistened with 4–5 drops of ethyl
Relationships of plants and bees have been exam-                acetate (Guiglia 1972; Louadi & Doumandji 1998a;
ined extensively in habitats having very different              Louadi 1999). Large bees were netted. Samples of
flora to those found in Algeria (Batra 1977;                    plants visited by insects were collected and depos-
Michener 1979, 2000; Jacob-Remacle 1989;                        ited in the herbarium. Identification of plants was
Jennerstein et al. 1991; Dafni 1984, 1991, 1992;                done according to keys from Quezel & Santa (1962);
Petanidou 1993; Petanidou & Smets 1995). Louadi                 Polunin & Huxley (1965) and Beniston (1984). The
& Doumandji (1998a) examined only two species,                  software Microbanque fauna-flora (Rasmont et al.
Apis mellifera L. and Bombus ruderatus siculus Dalla            1995) was used to manage the converted data.
Torre in the Constantine area. The aim of this study              The food niche of bees was quantified by diversity
is to determine the floral choices of others species            indices (Louadi & Doumandji 1998a; Jacob-
of wild bees in natural habitats during spring.                 Remacle 1989). The floral visits were quantified by
  The Wilaya (Department) of Constantine                        Simpson’s concentration indices (Is) (1949). For
(2287 km2) is situated in the eastern part of Algeria           each taxon, the visits observed for each family or
(36°36’N 06°62’E, 660 m a.s.l.). Vegetation is                  plant species corresponded to the percentage of
composed of forest and scrub (9.2 %), steppe and                individuals of the taxon that visited this family or
brushwood (24.2 %) (Mebarki 1984), natural and                  these species of plants. Simpson’s index was
cultivated grasslands (2.5 %) fields of cereals and             calculated with regard to all floral visits made by
other crops (63.8 %). Orchards occupy only 0.3 %.               each bee species. Simpson’s index varies between
Beekeeping in the region is little developed. We                0 and 1, the closer to unity, the greater the
only noted 15 hives in an orchard at Hamma-                     specialization. It provides an evaluation of host
Bouziane (36E41’N 06E59’E, 460 m a.s.l.).                       plant selection.
                                                                             q
  The Constantine area has a Mediterranean
flora with a high number of flowering species                               ∑ n (n      i   i
                                                                                                − 1)
                                                                            i= 1
(Petanidou & Vokou 1990; Dafni & O’Toole 1994).                      Is =                              ,
                                                                                 N( N − 1)
There is a dominance of therophytes over perennial
plants. Many annual plants live three to four                   where ni = number of visits observed on the ith
months but some only live a few weeks (Beniston                 plant species, and N = total number of visits
1984). Their flowering cycle depends on the timing              observed on the whole of the q plant species.
and amount of rain (Mebarki 1984). Asteraceae is                  The width of the food niche is expressed by
the dominant family including Silybum marianum                  Shannon’s index (H’) (Daget 1976). (H’) will increase
L. (Greath), Scolymus hispanicus L., Senecio nebro-             proportionately with higher numbers of plants
densis L., Calendula arvensis L., C. suffruticosa Bat. B.       visited. It also increases if bees are distributed
and T. and Chrysanthemum palladium Poiret.                      evenly on the different plants.
Brassicaceae, namely Sinapis arvensis L. and Bras-                   H' = − ∑ p i ln p i ,
sica fruticulosa Cyr, Lamiaceae, Rosmarinus sp. and                              i= 1
Lamium sp. and Malvaceae (Malva sp. and Lavatera                where pi = the proportion of visits on the ith plant,
sp) are also common.                                            pi = ni /N, and ln = Neperian logarithm
  Bees visiting flowers were collected once per week              Bees from four families were collected: Andreni-
*To whom correspondence should be addressed.
                                                                dae (six taxa), Megachilidae (11 taxa) Apidae and
 E-mail: l_louadi @ hotmail.com                                 Halictidae (16 taxa each). We observed 15 families
                                                                                                African Entomology 15(1): 209–213 (2007)
210                                  African Entomology Vol. 15, No. 1, 2007

Table 1. Total number, floral visit rate and number of native plant-visitor species (all Apoidea, 1996–1997).

Plant families         Plant species visited              Total number of    % of floral visits    Number of visitor
                                                                visits                                species

Lamiaceae              Rosmarinus officinalis                 2087                 55.91                  22
Malvaceae              Malva sylvestris                         413                11.06                  21
                       Crepis vesicaria                         274                 7.34                   9
                       Carthamus sp.                            237                 6.35                  16
                       Calendula suffruticosa                   193                 5.17                  10
Asteraceae             Senecio nebrodensis                      136                 3.64                  13
                       Chrysanthemum paludosum                   32                 0.86                   9
                       Silybum marianum                          30                 0.80                   9
                       Scolymus hispanicus                       19                 0.51                   6
                       Anthemis chia                             12                 0.32                   2
Papaveraceae           Papaver rhoeas                           182                 4.88                  16
Boraginaceae           Borago officinalis                        44                 1.18                   5
Brassicaceae           Sinapis arvensis                          30                 0.80                   8
                       Brassica fruticulosa                       8                 0.21                   5
Convolvulaceae         Convolvulus tricolor                      24                 0.64                   3
Primulaceae            Anagallis monelli                          4                 0.11                   1
Fumariaceae            Fumaria officinalis                        3                 0.08                   2
                       Fumaria capreolata                         2                 0.05                   1
Resedaceae             Reseda alba                                2                 0.05                   2
Fabaceae               Hedysarum corronarium                      1                 0.03                   2
                       Total                                  3733                   100                 162

of the most abundant native plants in our region.           visited by all of Apoidea families. The full set of
Only 11 plant families were visited by all of the           observations are recorded in Tables 1 and 2.
bees (Table 1); the Lamiaceae (56 %) and the                   The long-tongued bees visited plants with deep
Asteraceae (25 %) accounted for 81 % of the visits.         corollas, such as Rosmarinus officinalis L. The
The Fumariaceae, Resedaceae and Fabaceae were               predominant plant family for the long-tongued
of little interest to Algerian bees. Bees never visited     bees such as Apidae and Megachilidae was the
the Euphorbiaceae.                                          Lamiaceae. The short-tongued bees, Andrenidae
  More than half of all bee species observed visited        and Halictidae, concentrated their visits on the
Asteraceae. Bees focussed on relatively few plants,         Asteraceae. These plants were characterized by
some of which were relatively common. Of the                flowers with particularly accessible nectar.
three species of the Lamiaceae family only one                 The quantification of the degree of feeding
species, Rosmarinus officinalis L, attracted the most       specialization of most observed wild bees was
bee species and the most visits. Many bee species           carried out using Simpson’s floral visit indices (Isf)
but fewer numbers of individuals also visited               for the plant families and (Isp) for the visited plant
Malva sylvestris L. (Malvaceae). Both these plant           species. Values calculated for these indices are
species are common throughout the Mediterranean             listed in Table 3 for 15 bee species. Eucera obliterata
region.                                                     Perez, 1896, was the species with the highest indi-
  Tables 1 and 2 show that of all plant families, the       ces (Isf). The other species showed some very ele-
Lamiaceae received the highest number of visits,            vated indices relative to the remainder of the
particularly from the Apidae and Megachilidae.              Apoidea. They concentrated their visits on only
The Andrenidae and the Halictidae especially                one or two families of plants: the Lamiaceae for
visited the Asteraceae. The Papaveraceae were               E. obliterata and the Asteraceae for Andrena albo-
Short communications                                                     211

Table 2. Analysis of visitation activity according to bee family.

Apoidea families                        Andrenidae        Megachilidae         Apidae            Halictidae           Apoidea

Number of visits                           143               659              2178                753                  3733
% of visits                                  3.83             17.65             58.34              20.17                100
Number of taxa                               6                11                16                 16                    49
Number of plant families visited             4                 7                 9                  6                    14
Number of plant species visited             10               12                 17                 13                    18

punctata Rossi, 1792, Andrena flavipes Panzer, 1798,           slightly lower than that one of Evylaeus mediterra-
and Anthophora plumipes Pallas, 1772. Species that             neum. It would seem to indicate that the Halictidae
presented a mid-level index were Eucera notata                 were more eclectic in their choices of plants than
Lepeletier, 1841, Eucera oraniensis Lepeletier, 1841,          the Andrenidae. The Apoidea Andrena florentina
and Evylaeus malachurum Kirby, 1802, showing a                 had the highest Isf/Isp ratio. This species visited
preference for several plant families, Lamiaceae,              several plants in its favourite family, Asteraceae.
Malvaceae and Papaveraceae for the first two;                  Osmia signata Erichson, 1835, possessed the lowest
Lamiaceae and Asteraceae for the third. Andrena                ratio; it was limited to some species therefore
florentina Magretti, 1883, Bombus terrestris L., 1758,         within the preferentially exploited families.
Evylaeus subhirtum Lepeletier, 1841, and Lasio-                   The feeding niche is expressed by Shannon’s
glossum clavipes Dour, 1872, had the same index.               index (H’). By analogy with the previous index, we
These bees visited several plant families as did               calculated H’f for plant families and H’p for plant
bees having the lowest indices between 0.3 and                 species to enable us to evaluate the feeding niche
0.4.                                                           and to distinguish whether the Apoidea species
   Concerning the indices of plant species visits              distributed themselves evenly on plant groups
(Isp), it appeared that species having the highest             and if the number of plants visited increased.
indices were those that had a high Isf index.                  Eucera obliterata presented the widest feeding
Species having the lowest index were Evylaeus                  niche and the lowest H’f. Andrena albopunctata,
mediterraneum Blüthgen, 1926, and Andrena                      Andrena flavipes, Anthophora plumipes and Andrena
florentina. The index of Andrena florentina was                florentina followed it. The twelve other Apoidea

Table 3. Floral visit indices (Is) and the feeding niche (H’) of 15 bee species. (Isp = Index of plant species visits; Isf =
Index of plant family visits; H’ = Shannon’s index; np = number of plant species visited; nf = number of plant families
visited)

                 Apoidea species                                 np     nf       H’p       H’f       I sp      I sf     Isf/Isp

Andrenidae       Andrena albopunctata Rossi, 1792                 3      2     0.773     0.378     0.747      0.861     1.153
                 Andrena florentina Magretti, 1883                6      3     2.368     0.97      0.145      0.467     3.221
                 Andrena flavipes Panzer, 1798                    6      3     0.968     0.48      0.708      0.846     1.195
Megachilidae     Osmia signata Erichson, 1835                    11      8     2.006     1.917     0.318      0.316     0.994
Halictidae       Lasioglossum clavipes Dour, 1872                10      6     2.019     1.338     0.374      0.46      1.23
                 Evylaeus malachurum Kirby, 1802                 10      7     2.01      1.17      0.417      0.61      1.463
                 Evylaeus mediterraneum Blüthgen, 1926            9      6     2.675     1.702     0.179      0.385     2.151
                 Evylaeus subhirtum Lepeletier, 1841              6      4     2.012     1.378     0.3        0.467     1.557
Apidae           Anthophora plumipes Pallas, 1772                 7      4     1.364     0.824     0.58       0.734     1.266
                 Eucera punctatissima Panzer, 1895                4      3     2.063     1.673     0.234      0.324     1.385
                 Eucera oraniensis Lepeletier, 1841              10      7     1.24      1.15      0.61       0.625     1.025
                 Eucera obliterata Perez, 1896                    2      2     0.709     0.098     0.974      0.974     1
                 Eucera notata Lepeletier, 1841                  15      8     1.216     1.115     0.649      0.65      1.002
                 Tetralonia alternans Brulé, 1832                 3      3     1.806     1.473     0.288      0.353     1.226
                 Bombus terrestris L., 1758                       8      4     2.016     1.241     0.338      0.467     1.382
212                               African Entomology Vol. 15, No. 1, 2007

had wide feeding niches. Evylaeus malachurum,          (Lamiaceae) and had little interest in the native
Eucera oraniensis and Eucera notata, had the           plants, possibly due to the ability of honeybees
narrowest feeding niche; Osmia signata had the         to communicate information about good food
largest.                                               resources. Nevertheless, Lamiaceae have by far
   Concerning plant species, the feeding niche         the most rewarding nectar with regard to volume
of Bombus terrestris was large. Andrena flavipes       and sugar content (Dafni 1991; Petanidou & Smets
presented an index closer than 1. Among the            1995). According to Dafni (1984, 1992), morphology
fifteen other Apoidea, Evylaeus mediterraneum and      of flowers, size and length, colour and odour of the
Andrena florentina showed the greatest feeding         aromatic plant can cause deception in foraging.
diversity. Eucera punctatissima Panzer, 1895, Lasio-     Jacob-Remacle (1989), studying Anthophora
glossum clavipes, Evylaeus subhirtum and Osmia         plumipes, found a family visitation index of 0.158.
signata also had large niches. The other Apoidea       In our case, the visitation index of this species was
had a narrower feeding niche (H’ 4 mm) may produce more nectar than shorter
species on this family while the Lamiaceae attracted   flowers (Petanidou & Smets 1995) and larger
13 species. In the present work 23 bee species were    flowers with more display may offer higher calo-
recorded visiting Lamiaceae. The results are not       rific reward per flower (Dafni 1991). The nectar
strictly comparable as both the plant and bee          sugar concentration preferred by large bees
species differed from those of our study with the      ranges from 20 to 50 % (Petanidou 1993).
exception of Anthophora plumipes (Apidae). Results       The wild bees did not visit the Euphorbia
could also depend on the time of flowering in the      helioscopia perhaps on account of its toxicity
year (Dafni 1991).                                     (Maurizio 1968; Louadi & Doumandji 1998a). The
   It also appeared that species where H’f indices     Halictidae and the Andrenidae especially observed
were higher or equal to 2 visited plants of several    had gathered on the Asteraceae. This family’s
different families. Those of which H’p
Short communications                                                   213

REFERENCES

ALFKEN, J.D. 1914. Beitrag zur kenntnis der bienen-              Publications Universitaires, Alger.
   fauna von Algerien. Mémoire de la Société Ento-            MICHENER, C.D. 1979. Biogeography of the bees.
   mologique de Belgique 22 (5–IV): 185–237.                     Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 66: 277–347.
BATRA, S.W.T. 1977. Bees of India (Apoidea), their behav-     MICHENER, C.D. 2000. The Bees of the World. The Johns
   ior, management and a key to the genera. Oriental             Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
   Insects 11(3): 289–324.                                    MORICE, F.D. 1916. List of some Hymenoptera from
BENISTON, M.T.W.S. 1984. Les fleurs d’Algérie. Edition           Algeria and the M’Zab country. Novitates Zoologicae
   Entreprise Nationale du Livre Alger, Alger.                   23: 241–248.
BENOIST, R. 1961. Hyménoptères Apides recueillis au           PETANIDOU, T. (1993). Bee pollination in phrygana –
   Hoggar par A. Giordani Soika. Bulletino del Museo             Facts and actions. In: Bruneau, E. (Ed.) Bees for Pollina-
   Civico di storia naturale Venezia 14: 43–53.                  tion – Proceedings of the Workshop of the Community
DAFNI, A. 1984. Mimicry and deception in pollination.            Programme of Research and Technological Development in
   Annal Review of Ecology and Systematics 15: 259–278.          the Field of Competitiveness of Agriculture and Manage-
DAFNI, A. 1991. Advertisement, flower longevity,                 ment of Agricultural Resources (1989–1993). 37–47. DG
   reward and nectar protection in Lamiaceae. Acta               VI, Brussels.
   Horticultura 288: 340–346.                                 PETANIDOU, T. & SMETS, E. 1995. The potential of
DAFNI, A. 1992. Pollination Ecology. A Practical Approach.       marginal lands for bees and apiculture: nectar
   Oxford University Press, New-York.                            secretion in mediterranean shrublands. Apidologie
DAFNI, A. & O’TOOLE, C. 1994. Pollination syndromes              26(1): 39–52.
   in the Mediterranean: generalizations and peculiari-       PETANIDOU, T. & VOKOU, D. 1990. Pollination and
   ties. In: Arianatsou, M. & Groves, R.H. (Eds) Plant–          pollen energetics in mediterranean ecosystems.
   Animal Interactions in Mediterranean-type Ecosystems.         American Journal of Botany 77: 986–992.
   125–135. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam.            PLATEAUX-QUENU, C. 1972. La biologie des abeilles
DAGET, J. 1976. Les modèles mathématiques en écologie.           primitives. Masson & Cie, Paris
   Masson & Cie, Paris.                                       POLUNIN, O. & HUXLEY, A. 1965. Fleurs du Bassin
GUIGLIA, D. 1972. Les guêpes sociales (Hymenoptera,              Méditerranéen. 2nd Edition. Edition Fernand Nathan,
   Vespidae) d’Europe occidentale et septentrionale. Masson      Paris.
   & Cie, Paris.                                              QUEZEL, P. & SANTA, S. 1962. Nouvelle flore de
HAGLER, J.R., COHEN, A.C. & LOPER, G.M. 1990.                    l’Algérie et des régions désertiques méridionales. Edi-
   Production and composition of onion nectar and                tion Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris
   honey bee (Hymenoptera, Apidae) foraging activity             1&2: 1–1770.
   in Arizona. Environmental Entomology 19(2): 327–331.       RASMONT, P. BARBIER,Y. & EMPAIN, A. 1995.
JACOB-REMACLE, A. 1989. Relation plantes-abeilles                Microbanque faune-flore Logiciel de banque de
   solitaires en milieu urbain: l’exemple de la ville de         données biogéographiques, logiciel MS-Dos version
   Liège. Comptes rendus du Symposium ‘Invertébrés’ de           3.0: i–xv, 1–200, 1–20, 1–3, 1–34, 1–14. Université de
   Belgique 387–394.                                             Mons Hainaut, Belgique.
JENNERSTEIN, Q., MORSE, D.H. & O’NEIL, P. 1991.               ROTH, P. 1923. Contribution à la connaissance des
   Movements of male and worker bumble bees on and               Hyménoptères Aculeata de l’Afrique du Nord. De-
   between flowers. Oikos 62(3): 319–324.                        scription de Bombex handirschella Ferton. Bulletin de la
LOUADI, K. 1999, Contribution à la connaissance des              Société d’Histoire Naturelle de l’Afrique du Nord
   genres Halictus et Lasioglossum de la région de               14(5):189–191.
   Constantine (Algérie) (Hymenoptera, Apoidea,               ROTH, P. 1924. Contribution à la connaissance des
   Halictidae). Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de          Hyménoptères culeata de l’Afrique du Nord. 2. Note.
   France 104(2): 141–144.                                       Bulletin de la Société d’Histoire Naturelle de l’Afrique du
LOUADI, K. & DOUMANDJI, S. 1998a. Diversité et                   Nord 15(3): 122–123.
   activité de butinage des abeilles (Hymenoptera,            ROTH, P. 1930. Hyménoptères recueillis au Sahara
   Apoidea) dans une pelouse à Thérophytes de                    central par la mission scientifique du Hoggar (1928).
   Constantine (Algérie). The Canadian Entomologist              Bulletin de la Société d’Histoire Naturelle de l’Afrique du
   130(5): 691–702.                                              Nord 21(6–7): 79–86.
LOUADI, K. & DOUMANDJI, S. 1998b. Note d’infor-               SAUNDERS, E. 1908. Hymenoptera Aculeata collected in
   mation sur l’activité des abeilles (domestiques et            Algeria. Part III – Anthophila. Transactions of the British
   sauvage) et l’influence des facteurs climatiques sur          Entomology Society 2: 177–273.
   les populations. Sciences et Technologie 9: 83–87.         SCHULTHESS, A. DE. 1924. Contribution à la connais-
MAURIZIO, A. 1968. Les plantes toxiques. Traité de               sance de la faune des Hyménoptères de l’Afrique du
   biologie de l’abeille 4: 279–284. Masson & Cie, Paris.        Nord. Bulletin de la Société d’Histoire Naturelle de
MEBARKI, A. 1984. Ressources en eau et aménagement               l’Afrique du Nord 15(6): 293–320.
   en Algérie. Le bassin de Kebir Rhumel. Office des          SIMPSON, E.H. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature
                                                                 163: 688.

                                                                                                 Accepted 12 March 2007
You can also read