Geology topics

Megan Milbrath

Publications and source records attributed to Megan Milbrath.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies benefit from grassland/ pasture while bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) colonies in the same landscapes benefit from non-corn/soybean cropland

Agriculturally important commercially managed pollinators including honey bees ( Apis mellifera L., 1758) and bumble bees ( Bombus impatiens Cresson, 1863) rely on the surrounding landscape to fulfill their dietary needs. A previous study in Europe demonstrated that managed honey bee foragers and unmanaged native bumble bee foragers are associated with different land uses. However, it is unclear how response to land use compares between managed honey bees and a managed native bumble bee species in the United States, where honey bees are an imported species. Furthermore, to our knowledge, no such direct comparisons of bee responses to land use have been made at the colony level. To better understand how two different social bees respond to variation in land use, we monitored the weights of A . mellifera and B . impatiens colonies placed in 12 apiaries across a range of land use in Michigan, United States in 2017. Bombus impatiens colonies gained more weight and produced more drones when surrounded by diverse agricultural land (i.e., non-corn/soybean cropland such as tree fruits and grapes), while honey bee colonies gained more weight when surrounded by more grassland/pasture land. These findings add to our understanding of how different bee species respond to agricultural landscapes, highlighting the need for further species-specific land use studies to inform tailored land management.

Michigan↗

USGS2021

Honey bee foraged pollen reveals temporal changes in pollen protein content and changes in forager choice for abundant versus high protein flowers

Protein derived from pollen is an essential component of healthy bee diets. Protein content in honey bee foraged-pollen varies temporally and spatially, but the drivers underlying this variation remain poorly characterized. We assessed the temporal and spatial variation in honey bee collected pollen in 12 Michigan apiaries over 3 summers (2015–2017). We simultaneously monitored forage in flowering habitats (uncultivated floristically-rich areas and conservation program land) near these apiaries throughout the growing season. We used these data, along with data from the literature on plant pollen protein content, to determine if honey bees collected a greater proportion of pollen from plant species growing in higher abundance or from plant species that have higher protein content. Protein content in honey bee collected pollen decreased from July to September every year, and there were among-year differences in pollen protein, highlighting the temporal variation in protein collected by these insects. Pollen protein was spatially consistent and broad-scale land use categories were not correlated with pollen protein content. Rather, our findings suggest flowering habitats found across land use categories can support honey bee foraging, which may confound broader land use effects. In early July and in early September, colonies collected a greater proportion of pollen from plants that grew in greater abundance in flowering habitats, but from late July through August, a greater proportion of pollen was collected from high-protein taxa, regardless of abundance. This suggests different factors may influence pollen forager decision-making throughout the season as colony needs and/or available forage communities change. Insights into the role of plant abundance and protein content on foraging could deepen our understanding of honey bee foraging behavior and help to inform habitat restoration programs for improved honey bee nutrition outcomes.

Michigan↗

USGS2021

Farmland in U.S. Conservation Reserve Program has unique floral composition that promotes bee summer foraging

Bee conservation is a topic of global concern, particularly in agroecosystems where their contribution to crop pollination is highly valued. Over a decade ago, bees and other pollinators were made a priority of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), a U.S. federal program that pays land owners to establish a conservation cover, typically grassland, on environmentally sensitive farmland. Despite large financial investment in this program, few studies have measured the benefit of CRP to bees, particularly in complex agroecosystems with abundant alternative forage. To determine if CRP land seeded with pollinator-attractive native flowers and/or introduced legumes provides distinct floral composition that attracts more foraging bees than non-CRP habitats, we compared CRP land to paired non-CRP fields and roadsides at 31 sites in Michigan, U.S.A.. We found CRP land had unique floral species community composition, higher floral abundance, greater species richness, more native floral species, and greater inflorescence coverage. Greater inflorescence coverage on CRP land was associated with a greater abundance of both honey bees and wild bees than either non-CRP fields or roadsides, as was native flower abundance for wild bees. Showy native plant species were important forage resources on CRP land: Monarda fistulosa was the most foraged upon species by both honey bees and wild bees, and goldenrod species were important late-summer forage resources for honey bees. These findings demonstrate the benefit of managing CRP land with herbaceous seed mixes to create dense, showy, native plant communities that provide summer-long resources to both bee groups. Insights from this study could be used to enhance the composition of future conservation program investments and management of non-CRP land to benefit pollinators.

Michigan↗