Ings Thomas C, Schikora Juliette, Chittka Lars
Department of Biological Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS, UK.
Oecologia. 2005 Jul;144(3):508-16. doi: 10.1007/s00442-005-0081-9. Epub 2005 Sep 16.
Worldwide trade in non-native bumblebees remains largely unrestricted despite well-documented cases where introductions of non-native bees have gone dramatically wrong. Within Europe, indiscriminate importation of non-native populations of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) for the pollination of glasshouse crops continues on a massive scale. However, no risk assessment has been conducted for these introductions, perhaps because B. terrestris is considered a native species, so shipping populations from one region to another has been implicitly assumed to present no risk. This view is clearly unjustified because Bombus terrestris populations differ significantly in their genetic makeup as demonstrated by strong differences in coat colour and behavioural traits. Therefore, for the first time we compare an important competitive trait, namely foraging performance, between commercially available B. terrestris populations in contrasting environments. We test whether commercially reared populations differ in their nectar foraging performance and whether this is influenced by both their source environment and the one they are introduced into. We do this by means of a reciprocal transplant experiment. Strong, consistent inter-population differences in performance occurred irrespective of test location: Canary Island bees (B. t. canariensis) were superior to Sardinian bees (B. t. sassaricus), which were generally superior to mainland European bees (B. t. terrestris). These inter-population differences in performance were largely explained by inter-population variation in forager size, with larger bees being superior foragers. However, even when body size was accounted for, "native" bees were not superior to transplanted non-native bees in all but one case. We conclude that non-native populations, especially those with large foragers, can be highly competitive foragers. This could lead to their establishment and displacement of native bees. Therefore, we recommend that unregulated movements of non-native B. terrestris populations within Europe should not be carried out without a full risk assessment.
尽管有大量记录表明引入非本地蜜蜂的情况出现了严重问题,但全球范围内非本地熊蜂的贸易在很大程度上仍未受到限制。在欧洲,为温室作物授粉而大规模、不加区分地进口非本地熊蜂(地熊蜂)种群的现象仍在持续。然而,对于这些引入行为尚未进行风险评估,这可能是因为地熊蜂被视为本地物种,所以人们一直默认将其种群从一个地区运输到另一个地区不存在风险。这种观点显然是不合理的,因为地熊蜂种群在基因构成上存在显著差异,这一点从其毛色和行为特征的强烈差异中就可以看出。因此,我们首次在对比环境中比较了市售的不同地熊蜂种群之间一项重要的竞争特性,即觅食能力。我们测试了商业养殖的种群在花蜜觅食能力上是否存在差异,以及这是否受到其来源环境和引入环境的影响。我们通过一项相互移植实验来进行此项研究。无论测试地点如何,种群之间在表现上都出现了强烈且一致的差异:加那利群岛的蜜蜂(地熊蜂加那利亚种)优于撒丁岛的蜜蜂(地熊蜂撒丁尼亚亚种),而撒丁岛的蜜蜂通常又优于欧洲大陆的蜜蜂(地熊蜂指名亚种)。这些种群之间在表现上的差异在很大程度上是由觅食者大小的种群间差异所导致的,体型较大的蜜蜂是更优秀的觅食者。然而,即便考虑了体型因素,除了一种情况外,“本地”蜜蜂在所有情况下都并不优于移植而来的非本地蜜蜂。我们得出结论,非本地种群,尤其是那些具有大型觅食者的种群,可能是极具竞争力的觅食者。这可能导致它们的建立并取代本地蜜蜂。因此,我们建议,在欧洲境内,未经全面风险评估,不应进行非本地地熊蜂种群的无管制迁移。