IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v14y2003i1p141-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consistent mixing of near and distant resources in foraging bouts by the solitary mason bee Osmia lignaria

Author

Listed:
  • Neal M. Williams
  • Vincent J. Tepedino

Abstract

Female bees are usually confronted with a choice among several flower species that differ in their location and abundance within the community, and in the efficiency with which their pollen and nectar can be harvested. We investigated the effects of distance and flower density of two flower species on pollen collection by providing nest locations for the mason bee Osmia lignaria in natural settings. Distance weakly affected pollen use; on average, bees nesting near a flower species tended to collect more of its pollen than did bees nesting at a greater distance. Flower density did not predictably impact pollen use, and use did not track changes in density during the season. Bees consistently mixed pollen from more distant species, despite substantial added foraging costs, and also mixed when one species was an order of magnitude less abundant than the other. Bees require nectar as well as pollen to feed their offspring, and our preliminary data suggest that the efficiencies of pollen and nectar collection are inversely related between the two flower species, which would favor visitation to both species. Bees appear to collect some pollen from the low-pollen, high-nectar plant while visiting it for nectar. Thus, a nectar-collecting constraint may favor collecting pollen from mixtures of species. Copyright 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Neal M. Williams & Vincent J. Tepedino, 2003. "Consistent mixing of near and distant resources in foraging bouts by the solitary mason bee Osmia lignaria," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(1), pages 141-149, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:1:p:141-149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:1:p:141-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.