Study

Invader effects in a community of cavity nesting Megachilid bees (Hymenoptera: Megachildae)

  • Published source details Barthell J.F., Gordon W.F. & Thorp R.W. (1998) Invader effects in a community of cavity nesting Megachilid bees (Hymenoptera: Megachildae). Environmental Entomology, 27, 240-247.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Exclude introduced European earwigs from nest sites

Action Link
Bee Conservation

Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

Action Link
Bee Conservation
  1. Exclude introduced European earwigs from nest sites

    Thirty drilled pine wood solitary bee nest boxes were suspended from 15 valley oak trees Quercus lobata on the Cosumnes River Preserve, near Sacramento, Caifornia, USA, in 1990 (Barthell et al. 1998). The boxes each had twelve 10 cm-deep holes, 0.65 cm in diameter. Boxes were placed in pairs. One on each tree excluded crawling earwigs Forficula auricularia using the sticky barrier Tanglefoot. The treatment substantially reduced the number of earwigs found in the boxes and allowed a greater total number of bee cells (during the peak bee nesting week, there were 134 cells in boxes with Tanglefoot, 45 cells in untreated boxes). The majority of nesting bees in this study were native species of the leafcutter bee genera Megachile and Osmia although introduced species of Megachile were also present.

  2. Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

    Thirty to 45 drilled pine wood solitary bee nest boxes were suspended from valley oak Quercus lobata trees on the Cosumnes River Preserve, California, USA in 1989 and 1990 (Barthell et al. 1998). The boxes each had twelve 10 cm deep holes, 0.5, 0.65 or 0.8 cm in diameter. In both years, the European earwig Forficula auricularia was the most common occupant (59-85% of all occupied nests), followed by two introduced leafcutter bee species Megachile rotundata and M. apicalis (19.6% of all occupied nests in 1989, 3.4% in 1990). Four native bee species also occupied the boxes, but in much lower numbers. Megachile angelarum was found in 3.2-3.8% of occupied nests. M. fidelis, M. gentilis and Osmia texana occupied less than 1% of occupied nest boxes in both years.

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust