Erie National Wildlife Refuge

This is a summary of bee data from 5 sampling locations from Erie National Wildlife Refuge collected in August 2008. Each field was sampled with 5 fluorescent yellow, 5 fluorescent blue, and 5 white 3.25 ounce bowl traps.

A complete table of the data is available from Leo Shapiro (lshapiro@umd.edu), Sam Droege (sdroege@usgs.gov), or the refuge biologist.

Below is a table of the site numbers and a brief site description followed by a table of results.

Description	Site
ERIENWR Field 1 (Trial Run) ;Sugar Lake Division	5601
ERIENWR Field 2 (Site 1);Office driveway;Sugar Lake Division	5602
ERIENWR Field 3 (Site 2);Pools C D Dike;Sugar Lake Division	5603
ERIENWR Field 4 (Site 3);Service Rd near Pool C;Sugar Lake Division	5604
ERIENWR Field 5 (Site 4);Service Rd near Pool D;Sugar Lake Division	5605

Site Locations

Results

name	5601	5602	5603	5604	5605	Grand Total
Agapostemon virescens			1		1	2
Apis mellifera	2					2
Augochlorella aurata				4		4
Bombus fervidus			1		2	3
Bombus vagans		1		2		3
Calliopsis andreniformis	1					1
Ceratina dupla			1			1
Coelioxys sayi	1					1
Halictus confusus				1	2	3
Hoplitis spoliata				1		1
Hylaeus affinis/modestus			3	2	3	8
Lasioglossum albipenne				1		1
Lasioglossum leucozonium	11			1		12
Lasioglossum planatum	1	1		1	1	4
Lasioglossum rohweri	2		1	5	7	15
Lasioglossum species			1			1
Lasioglossum tegulare	1					1
Lasioglossum viridatum group		1				1
Megachile brevis					1	1
Melissodes druriella	2					2
Peponapis pruinosa	1					1
Grand Total	22	3	8	18	17	68

Note that field 5601 was a trial run and not part of the collection of the other 4 fields. Interestingly, this field has a bit of a different bee fauna than the cluster of sites for the main study, having a couple of the Eucerine species (P. pruinosa, and M. druriella) that did not show up in the other fields as well as 5 additional species that either did not show up at all in the other surveys or were at much lower numbers. So, your neighborhood appears to count when you are a bee.

Overall, a not unexpected group of bees from northwestern Pennslyvania. The one exceptional species is L. albipenne which is an uncommon and rarely seen sweat bee. Not much is know about it other than it seems to show up here and there. Numbers of bees are rather low compared to some of the other refuges, but, as always, there are always bees present.

Sam and Leo

To make a prairie it takes a clover

and one bee,--

One clover, and a bee,
And revery.

The revery alone will do
If bees are few.

- Emily Dickinson

Patuxent Wildlife Research Refuge

This is a summary of bee data from 5 sampling locations from Patuxent Wildlife Research Refuge collected in August 2008. Each field was sampled with 5 fluorescent yellow, 5 fluorescent blue, and 5 white 3.25 ounce bowl traps.

A complete table of the data is available from Leo Shapiro (lshapiro@umd.edu), Sam Droege (sdroege@usgs.gov), or the refuge biologist.

Below is a table of the site numbers and a brief site description followed by a table of results.

Site	Description
5620	PWRC Site 1: South Tract, by Hardy Spring Pond
5621	PWRC Site 2: Central Tract, right side of Cedar Lane by power lines
5622	PWRC Site 3: North Tract, by Telegraph Road
5623	PWRC Site 4: North Tract, Right side by Scout Site 1
5624	PWRC Site 5: North Tract, Wildlife loop by storage sheds

Site Locations

Results

name	5624	5621	5620	5622	5623	Grand Total
Agapostemon texanus	1					1
Agapostemon virescens		7		1		8
Augochlorella aurata	2	3		1	3	9
Ceratina calcarata				3		3
Ceratina dupla				2		2
Halictus ligatus/poeyi	6			3	2	11
Lassioglossum bruneri	1					1
Lassioglossum coreopsis	2			2	1	5
Lassioglossum nelumbonis			1			1
Lassioglossum pilosum					1	1
Lassioglossum tegulare				2	1	3
Lassioglossum versatum				13		13
Megachile brevis	1				1	2
Megachile mendica				1		1
Melissodes desponsa					2	2
Peponapis pruinosa					1	1
Calliopsis andreniformis				2		2
Grand Total	13	10	1	30	12	66

This list of species is largely an expected one for an interior Maryland upland set of fields. The Lasioglossum nelumbonis is an uncommonly encountered species and is thought to be associated with water lilies. Since this particular site is located next to a pond containing water lilies this would be in keeping. It does seem odd that this site only had this one species present, and one specimen at that, but it may be a reflection of its isolation from other fields, being surrounded by extensive woodlands. The remaining species are all regionally occurring species and together the 18 species makes for a reasonable species total. Overall a solid list, but nothing in particular stands out about this list of bees.

Because we have sampled at Patuxent for so many years, we have accumulated a long list of species as well as a number of state records and rare species. Such species are not found in the surrounding suburban communities, where we have also been sampling. So it is interesting to see that doing 5 fields for one day on the refuge, while demonstrating that bees are present and the list substantial, we found only a fraction of all the species we know to be present and none of the very rare ones. A more complete and extensive survey would be needed to do that.

Lasioglossum nelumbonis - Photo by John Pascarella

Eastern Shore of Virginia National Wildlife Refuge - Headquarters

This is a summary of bee data from 4 sampling locations from Eastern Shore of Virginia National Wildlife Refuge collected in early August 2008. Each field was sampled with 5 fluorescent yellow, 5 fluorescent blue, and 5 white 3.25 ounce bowl traps.

A complete table of the data is available from Leo Shapiro (lshapiro@umd.edu), Sam Droege (sdroege@usgs.gov), or the refuge biologist.

Below is a table of the site numbers and a brief site description followed by a table of results.

Description Number

ESVA Site 4 (Visitor Center)	5549
ESVA Site 1 (Maintenance)	5546
ESVA Site 2 (Housing)	5547
ESVA Site 3 (Seaside Rd)	5548

Results

name	5549	5546	5547	5548	Grand Total
Agapostemon virescens	32	2	7	14	55
Augochlorella aurata	96	5	12	171	284
Ceratina calcarata	2	2	11	1	16
Ceratina dupla	15	6	35	6	62
Halictus ligatis/poeyi	4		8	14	26
Lassioglossum bruneri	1	1	2	1	5
Lassioglossum coreopsis		1	1	1	3
Lassioglossum near planatum	1				1
Lassioglossum oblongum		1			1
Lassioglossum pectorale				2	2
Lassioglossum tegulare	3		7	6	16
Lassioglossum versatum	6				6
Lassioglossum versatumsensumitchell	4		1		5
Grand Total	164	18	84	216	482

Sampling Locations

This set of bowl surveys were placed on the lawns surrounding the visitor center and headquarters complex. Interestingly, despite being on what one would suppose to be less than prime real estate as compared to natural fields, there are huge numbers of bees captured here--on average 8 bees per bowl trap! Despite the large numbers, however, the diversity is low for such a populous catch. These species are associated with disturbed and lawn habitats throughout the region. In our studies of the Memorial Grounds in the center of Washington D.C., for example, we get approximately the same list. Another possible factor may be time of year: in this case the survey was made in early August, while the other samples from the study were from late August and September.

With the exception of the Ceratina species all the species are members of the family Halictidae. These species are all generalists and seem especially adept at colonizing and using the small often weedy flower resources in areas cut regularly. The Lasioglossum versatum and the L. versatumsensumitchell are 2 very similar species that have been shown to differ genetically, but separating the two species visually is a bit tricky. We have a feeling that most of these may be L. versatumsensumitchell rather than L. versatum, but aren't quite sure. Augochlorella aurata is perhaps the most common bee in the region and found in almost all open habitats. The Halictus species are likely to be H. poeyi, but the separation of these species hasn't been resolved.

Interestingly, while each of the sites had about the same species list, the number of bees captured in each field varied quite at bit. Little study has gone into explaining such differences and thus there is plenty of room for further study of even the most basic of factors affecting bee distributions.

Augochlorella aurata - Photo by John Pascarella