Best management practices for bee conservation in forest openings

Abstract Native bees are an ecologically diverse group of pollinators in global decline due at least in part to invasive species, pesticides, and habitat loss. Although guidelines exist for land managers to restore pollinator habitat, these “best management practices” (BMPs) include other pollinator taxa that may have different requirements than bees, do not give particular attention to rare bee species, or describe practices that are impractical for land managers. Using co‐production science, our team of land managers and researchers sampled bee communities in 100 wildlife openings on six National Forests (NF) within the Great Lakes Basin of the United States during 2017–2019. We found that bee communities responded to site factors and management practices, including prescribed fire, mechanical methods (e.g., felling, brushhogging, mowing), herbicides, and pollinator plantings. Bee abundance, diversity, and rarity were strongly related to soil properties, landscape context, and the plant community, including small‐statured woody species, which collectively informed our BMPs. For instance, mechanical treatments were most beneficial for openings with clayey or organic soils while prescribed fire was most effective in openings with well‐drained soils. Our BMPs highlight effects of treatment combinations, including negative effects on rare species when herbicides were combined with plantings and positive effects on abundance and rare species when prescribed fire was combined with mechanical treatments. Since our BMPs were generated in collaboration with land managers, they better conform to their needs and constraints, contributing to more effective native bee conservation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conservation Science and Practice
Published
2024-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13231
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Plant and animal studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.17

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Best management practices for bee conservation in forest openings

Aliza Fassler, Michael J. Cunningham‐Minnick, Joan Milam, David I. King
6 citations
Conservation Science and Practice
Plant and animal studies
6.17
article

Best management practices for bee conservation in forest openings

Aliza Fassler, Michael J. Cunningham‐Minnick, Joan Milam, David I. King
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Abstract Native bees are an ecologically diverse group of pollinators in global decline due at least in part to invasive species, pesticides, and habitat loss. Although guidelines exist for land managers to restore pollinator habitat, these “best management practices” (BMPs) include other pollinator taxa that may have different requirements than bees, do not give particular attention to rare bee species, or describe practices that are impractical for land managers. Using co‐production science, our team of land managers and researchers sampled bee communities in 100 wildlife openings on six National Forests (NF) within the Great Lakes Basin of the United States during 2017–2019. We found that bee communities responded to site factors and management practices, including prescribed fire, mechanical methods (e.g., felling, brushhogging, mowing), herbicides, and pollinator plantings. Bee abundance, diversity, and rarity were strongly related to soil properties, landscape context, and the plant community, including small‐statured woody species, which collectively informed our BMPs. For instance, mechanical treatments were most beneficial for openings with clayey or organic soils while prescribed fire was most effective in openings with well‐drained soils. Our BMPs highlight effects of treatment combinations, including negative effects on rare species when herbicides were combined with plantings and positive effects on abundance and rare species when prescribed fire was combined with mechanical treatments. Since our BMPs were generated in collaboration with land managers, they better conform to their needs and constraints, contributing to more effective native bee conservation.

Conservation Science and PracticeVol. 6(11)
University of Massachusetts Amherst (US), Northern Research Station (US), Hiram College (US)
U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Station
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Plant and animal studies
6.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.