Understanding the Impacts of the Beekeeping Buzz

As part of my campaign to promote pollinator friendly gardening, in my hometown Neilston, I got chatting with a lot of people.

My Plants for Pollinators stall at the Neilston Cattle Show

The reception I received was greater than I could ever have hoped for, with so many schools and nurseries already running projects to help raise awareness of the decline in bees. What amazed me the most, though, was the sheer number of people who had taken an interest in beekeeping. Many had already become certified beekeepers with their first hive. Hearing local people so passionate about the life of an insect made me so proud of my community.

It’s not just my community that has taken its hand to apiculture (beekeeping). Beekeeping has been on the rise for the past decade, particularly in the cities. Most people become beekeepers as a hobby, interested in reconnecting with nature within an urban environment. Recently, there has been a rise in people raising bees out of concern for the environment, as I found in my home town.

The issue, though, is that there are very few studies out there regarding the positive or negative impacts these introduced honeybee colonies can have on the environment.

One study has found that the introduction of honeybees has negatively impacted the survival rates of bumblebees, whilst another showed that honeybees had no significant effect on local flora or fauna. It’s difficult to assess the truth amidst conflicting reports – but there have been concerns raised that need definitive answers.

Wildflower populations have been shown to increase due to honeybees increasing pollination of the plants, however, pollination is not as simple as a single bee going from one flower to the other. Each species is better suited for the pollination of certain plants and are inefficient pollinators of others. When honeybees are the primary source of pollination in an environment, the plants that they prefer or are capable of pollinating are fertilised more often. This can result in alterations to floral diversity, which in turn may lead to a decline in the preferential food plant of other bee species.

Honeybees have also been shown to they can deplete a plant’s nectar source without providing any pollination. The competition for nectar in these plants has resulted in changes to the behaviour of fellow pollinators. In Australia, the honeybees out-compete the New Holland Honeyeater, resulting in the birds increasing their territories.

New Holland Honeyeater, Image by Louise Docker

This could result in them running out of resources, and ultimately, a decline in their population – though no significant declines have been documented so far. A recent study has emerged trying to measure the impact apiaries can have, but their result was highly variable and merely highlighted the need for further research on the impacts honeybees have on wild bee populations and other native fauna. It’s surprising that no study has focused on the impact apiaries can have on other insect pollinators such as hoverflies.

I find this topic particularly concerning, in part to the lack of research, but mostly due to the skewed opinion of the well-meaning public. Apiculture is an excellent hobby to get into, with many benefits for yourself and particularly for agricultural crops. It is irresponsible, however, to take up apiculture to benefit the bees, especially when there is so little evidence available. That’s why more research needs to be done into this topic so that we can have a clearer picture of the true impact beekeeping can have and so those who only wish to help aren’t mislead into doing the exact opposite.

Advertisements

Shropshire Entomology Day – 04/02/2018

Yesterday, me (@EntoAqib) and three fellow entomologists (@pseudoliam, @ento_the_wild and @Apis_linzi) began our journey to the Shropshire Entomology Day at the Field Studies Council centre at Preston Montford, bright and early *shudders*. Upon arrival we were greeted with tea and biscuits, alas, we felt alive once more. After signing in and a warm welcome from Sue Townsend (the FSC chair) we saddled up and waited patiently for the talks to begin.

Starting off was Peter Boardman, a dipterist with a particular fondness for craneflies. He gave us an overview of his past year working for Natural England. He began with tales of traversing the country, sampling at stunning SSSI’s (Sites of Special Scientific Interest); accompanied with pictures of beautiful critters. However, it’s not always sunny days spent sweep netting, there’s also an immense amount of post-fieldwork time and effort that goes into sorting, identifying and then recording specimens!

Next up, was Mike Shurmer, a micromoth super-fan and recorder. Turns out micromoths aren’t just boring brown things, they come in a bunch of different colours and patterns. They are the most diverse of UK Lepidoptera, trumping the substantially more popular butterflies and macro-moths, highlighting their importance and need for attention. Some notable records were mentioned, one of which was Crambus ulliginosellus:

Crambus uliginosellus

Crambus ulliginosellus © Jens Christian Schou

 

,this funky looking moth, with an equally funky name, was recorded in Shropshire recently for the first time in 50 years! The presentation ended with a challenge, so I’m going to re-present you guys with the same challenge:

Look out for these two micromoths:-

Twenty-plume moth

  • Keep a look out indoors, in wood stores, garden sheds and in garages.

Twenty-plume moth ©RodBaker

Ectodemia septembrella (slightly trickier)

  • Has leaf mining larvae (the larvae feed within the leaves).
  • Look out for feeding signs on Hypericum spp., commonly known as St. Johns Wort.

    42-Ectoedemia-septembrella-1JPEG

    Feeding signs of the leaf mining larvae of Ectodemia septembrella ©BarryDickerson

If you do find them (or any other micromoth) remember to submit a record on iRecord!

Third on the agenda was a short presentation by Keiron Brown about BioLinks, a project being ran by the FSC which aims to train individuals of varying expertise in the identification and recording of several invertebrate groups, including relatively overlooked ones.

IMG_20180205_025941[1]

Focus species groups of the BioLinks project ©HeatherCampbell

Following suit was a talk by Godfrey Blunt on the problems associated with mapping invertebrates. He began by highlighting the problems with current record mapping. Firstly, just because an organism was once there it doesn’t mean it’s still there now. Current mapping uses the botanists approach, but unlike plants, inverts can move. So, if something was found in a spot away from it’s range it doesn’t mean it’s expanding its natural range, it’s very likely that it’s just a chance recording. Therefore, it is important to note that record maps depict static resident population not mobile ones. He also stated that it shouldn’t just be about simply putting a blob on a map, we should be selective in the data we input (especially with old records), as too many inputs may make a map difficult to interpret. The other side of this problem coin is that not having enough records, which is just as bad. He offered an adequate manner (he stressed that this isn’t a solution) of addressing this problem by adopting the mapping approach used by ornithologists; using different sizes of dots and different shapes depending on the record. This provides a visual source of information which is clearer and substantially easier to interpret. Richard Burkmar gave a demonstration on how to use nifty QGIS to produce a base map with the necessary information and then overlaid the records onto it, followed by a resounding “ooooo” from the audience at the pretty result.

Lawrence Bee followed up with a presentation on what went into the making of the British Spiders Field Guide which he co-authored. It’s a handy dandy book jam-packed with lots of info and tons of gorgeous photographs of spiders. I just couldn’t resist grabbing myself a copy!

 

Lunch break!

With our stomachs full, we were ready for another round of talks. It was time for a talk which I was really looking forward to- rearing bushcrickets in captivity! Jon Delf talked through several aspects of rearing: starting a culture, suitable housing, feeding requirements, mating and how to treat their eggs. Everything you need to know to rear bushcrickets in the comfort of your own home.

Next up was fellow entomologist and @EntoMasters student, Liam Andrews. His talk was titled: “Pseudoscorpions of Shropshire”. He started off by informing the crowd about this understudied group with an overview. There’s only 27 species in the UK, but about 3500 worldwide (probably substantially more). He then went on to talk about their physiology and behaviour. Pseudoscorpions display phoretic behaviour- they hitch a ride on other organisms such as flies and beetles to disperse. Their physiology is pretty awesome, these little predators are armed with venomous pedipalps (but some don’t have any venom) and chelicerae which they use to subdue their prey. The chelicerae are also tipped with silk producing structures called the galea. The audience was also informed on how to sample for them. A Tullgren funnel can be used, however these aren’t readily accessible, but you can make your own (pic below)! Sieving compost heaps and leaf litter may also expose these elusive critters, as well as scouring under rocks and logs. The informative presentation came to a close with a run through all the species recorded within Shropshire.

 

Viv Marsh then delivered a talk on siting and managing artificial bee hotels, with a focus on Osmia bicornis, a stingless bee species which is an effective pollinator. The last presentation of the day was by dipterist Nigel Jones, on the insects which he found sweep netting a single ash tree in his back garden. His finds were very interesting to say the least, including a potentially new species to science! It’s incredible how a single tree can boast such diversity.

Aaaaand that’s a wrap! I’d like to thank the organisers and the speakers for such a fantastic day! Hopefully I can make it next year for another day full of ento-goodness.

Follow these folks on twitter:

FSC Centre Preston Montford: @PrestonMontford

FSC Preston Montford chair: @SueTownsend3

Peter Boardman: @pebo22 who runs the cranefly recording scheme @CRStipula

Keiron Brown: @KeironDBrown and the official BioLinks twitter account @FSCBioLinks

Mike Shurmer: @mike_shurmer

Liam Andrews: @pseudoliam who also runs @PseudoscorpUK

Lawrence Bee: @LawrenceBee

Richard Burkmar: @burkmarr

 

By Aqib Ali  (Twitter:@EntoAqib, Email: Aqib1996@hotmail.co.uk, Linkedin: Aqib Ali)

MSc Entomology Twitter: @EntoMasters

An Update (Part 1)

It has been a hot minute since we posted the last article which introduced us, so a little update about what us budding entomologists have been getting up to on the course so far and my thoughts on it seemed rather apt. I present to you part one of the overview/highlights of what we’ve done so far:

Module 1: Biology & Taxonomy of Insects

Following the introductory Research & Information Skills module, this was the first entomology module with two weeks of entomological goodness for the cohort to get stuck into, and boy, we weren’t left disappointed. The module started with a session on Orthoptera and a general run through of insect anatomy led by Dr. Andy Cherrill. This was followed by practical session which involved a delightful dissection of the desert locust (Schistocerca gregaria).

 

The next day we covered the order Thysanoptera (thrips) with Dr Tom Pope (@ipm_tom), followed by a zoom through the superorder Dictyoptera (comprising of the orders Mantodea (mantids) and Blattodea (cockroaches and termites)) with Dr. Rob Graham. With everyone on the course being from varied backgrounds and holding different levels of experience within different things, the session on insect pinning and curation was extremely useful for everyone. The cohort spent the afternoon pinning, micropinning and carding insects in a thrilling practical session led by PhD student Francisca Sconce (@FranciscaSconce).

received_10212882523289166[1]

Pinned 3rd instar desert locust nymph and carabid (specimens pinned and photographed by Linzi (@Apis_linzi)).

After a whizz through a lecture on sampling methods by Prof. Simon Leather (@EntoProf) we covered a range of methods, ranging from beating to sweep netting and from pitfall traps to malaise traps. The afternoon was spent in the great outdoors sweep netting and getting to use the Vortistm, a vacuum used to suck up and sample insects (and relatives).

20171004_145807[1]

Fellow entomologist Brinna (@BrinnaBarlow) trying her hand at sampling some insects using the Vortis suction sampler.

The first week of this module ended with a bang, with the first guest speaker from the Natural History Museum: hymenopterist Dr. Andy Polaszek (@AndyPolaszek)! In a blitz through the hyper diverse Hymenoptera, we covered several groups, focusing on their identification as well as some tidbits on their biology. We put what we learnt during the morning lecture to test in an intense identification practical.

 

 

 

Week two of the module started with an aphid-packed day on Hemiptera. The next day was Lepidoptera-filled. We had a practical session which involved taking morphometric measurments in waxmoths (Galleria mellonella) and dissecting out the females ovarioles to count the number of eggs.

20171010_150657[1]

A female wax moth (Galleria mellonella) dissected with ovarioles spread out, as part of the Lepidoptera class practical.

Speaker number two from NHM was THE fly girl herself, Dr. Erica McAllister (@flygirlNHM)! She vividly captured our interest and introduced us to the weird and wonderful world of flies. Leading on nicely from the zoom through Diptera, we had a session on Forensic Entomology, full of murder (not literally of course…that’d be bad) and maggots with one of the UK’s leading forensic entomologist’s Dr. Amoret Whitaker. The module ended with shimmer and shine a.k.a beetles, with coleopterist Dr. Max Barclay (@Coleopterist)!

 

This module was certainly a personal favourite of mine (so far), we covered SOOO MUCH in a relatively short space of time. With informative lectures from the university lecturers, plenty of hands on practicals, combined with several external speakers who are experts within their respective fields; I feel as though we thoroughly covered the major insect orders in a very engaging manner! A truly fantastic start to the course!

Make sure to check out the next post “An Update (Part 2)” on Saturday!

 

By Aqib Ali  (Twitter:@EntoAqib , Email: Aqib1996@hotmail.co.uk , Linkedin: Aqib Ali)

MSc Entomology Twitter: @EntoMasters

How do bumblebees fly?

Greetings readership,

The flight of the bumblebee is not only an excellent classical piece composed by Rimsky-Korsakov, but also the subject of another ‘fact’ about insects, which usually goes something like: “According to the laws of physics, bumblebees shouldn’t be able to fly.” or a phrase of similar meaning. Indeed, the violation of the observably consistent Newtonian Laws of Motion by bumblebees and only bumblebees is not a very strong position to hold and might suggest the advocate of this belief should more fully examine how bumblebees generate lift. I shall try to provide such an examination. But first, let us delve into insect flight more generally!

udt6zji

A bumblebee ‘defying the laws of physics’

Continue reading