Study

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Provide nest boxes for bees (solitary bees or bumblebees)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

Action Link
Bee Conservation

Rear and manage populations of solitary bees

Action Link
Bee Conservation
  1. Provide nest boxes for bees (solitary bees or bumblebees)

    A replicated six-year trial at two experimental farms near Poznan, western Poland (Wójtowski et al. 1995) demonstrated that the red mason bee Osmia rufa readily nests in bundles of reed Phragmites australis stems 7-8 mm in diameter. Bundles of reed stems in roofed containers were set out in March from 1989 to 2004. In winter each year, occupied reed stems were collected and kept in refrigerators over winter. The following spring, overwintered reed stems were placed out in incubators along with new nest boxes. In the first year (1989), 1,750 red mason bee cocoons were introduced with the nest boxes at each site. The behaviour of emerging bees was observed. At one site the total number of emerging red mason bees increased from 1,453 in 1989 to 108,973 in 1994 (a 75-fold increase). At the other site the number of emerging red mason bees increased from 1,519 in 1989 to 13,413 in 1992, after which the population was resettled for other experiments.

     

  2. Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

    A six-year trial at two experimental farms near Poznan, western Poland demonstrated that the red mason bee Osmia rufa readily nests in bundles of reed stems 7-8 mm in diameter (Wojtowski et al. 1995).

  3. Rear and manage populations of solitary bees

    In a trial at two experimental farms near Poznan, western Poland from 1989 to 1994, the numbers of red mason bees Osmia rufa nesting in bundles of reed stem increased substantially year on year. Each winter, occupied reed stems were collected and healthy bee cocoons (not parasitized) were transferred to refrigerators and kept at 4°C over winter. These were placed out in incubators along with new nest boxes the following spring. At one site, the number of emerging bees increased from an originally introduced 1,453 bees in 1989 to 108,973 in 1994 (a 75-fold increase; Wójtowski et al. 1995). The number of emerging females each year was between 1.3 and 5.7 times the number of females the previous year. Based on these numbers, the density of red mason bees on the farm was estimated to have increased from 1 bee/ha to 1,353 female bees/ha or more over the six years. Bee numbers nesting at the second site followed a similar trajectory, but the experiment was ended after three years.

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust