Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Global invasion by Anthidium manicatum (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae): assessing potential distribution in North America and beyond

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The wool carder bee, Anthidium manicatum, is the most widely distributed unmanaged bee in the world. It was unintentionally introduced to North America in the late 1960s from Europe, and subsequently, into South America, New Zealand and the Canary Islands. We provide information on the local distribution, seasonal abundance and sex ratio of A. manicatum from samples collected in an intensive two-year survey across Utah, USA. Anthidium manicatum was detected in 10 of the 29 Utah counties, largely in urban and suburban settings. Combining presence-only and MaxEnt background data from literature, museum databases and new records from Utah, we constructed three species distribution models to examine the potential distribution of A. manicatum in its native Eurasian range as well as invaded ranges of North and South America. The A. manicatum model based on locality and background data from the species’ native range predicted 50% of the invasive records associated with high habitat suitability (HS ≥ 0.90). The invasive North American model predicted a much broader distribution of A. manicatum (214% increase); whereas, the South American model predicted a narrower distribution (88% decrease). The poor predictive power of the latter model in estimating suitable habitats in the invasive South American range of A. manicatum suggests that the bee may still be limited by the bioclimatic constraints associated with a novel environment. Estimates of niche similarity (D) between the native and invasive models find that the North America bioclimatic niche is more similar to the bioclimatic niche of the native model (D = 0.78), whereas the bioclimatic niche of the South America invasion is relatively dissimilar (D = 0.69). We discuss the naturalization of A. manicatum in North America, possibly through punctuated dispersal, the probability of suitable habitats across the globe and the synanthropy exhibited by this invasive species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ascher JS, Pickering J (2011) Discover life. http://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20m?kind= Anthidium + manicatum. Accessed 2 Mar 2010

  • Bartlett T (2011) BugGuide. http://www.bugguide.net/index.php?q=search&keys=anthidium+manicatumandsearch=Search. Accessed 2 Mar 2010

  • Broennimann O, Guisan A (2008) Predicting current and future biological invasions: both native and invaded ranges matter. Biol Invasions 4:585–589

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchmann SL, Nabhan GP (1996) The forgotten pollinators. Island Press, Washington DC, p 292

    Google Scholar 

  • Colautti RI, MacIsaac HJ (2004) A neutral terminology to define ‘invasive’ species. Divers Distrib 10:135–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colla SR, Otterstater MC, Gegear RJ, Thompson JD (2006) Plight of the bumble bee: pathogen spillover from commercial to wild populations. Biol Invasions 129:461–467

    Google Scholar 

  • Comba L, Corbet SA, Hunt L, Warren B (1999) Flowers, nectar and insect visits: evaluating British plant species for pollinator-friendly gardens. Ann Bot 83:369–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbet SA, Bee J, Dasmahapatra K, Gale S, Gorringe E, La Ferla B, Moorhouse T, Trevail A, Van Bergen Y, Vorontsova M (2001) Native or exotic? Double or single? Evaluating plants for pollinator-friendly gardens. Ann Bot 87:219–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Thompson K (2000) Eight ways to be a colonizer; two ways to be an invader: a proposed nomenclature scheme for invasion ecology. ESA Bull 81:226–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton JM, Peterson AT, Phillips SJ, Richardson K, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberon J, Williams S, Wisz MS, Zimmermann NE (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Phillips SJ, Hastie T, Dudik M, Chee YE, Yates CJ (2011) A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers Distrib 17:43–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (2008) ArcGIS 9.3. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 28:38–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick MC, Weltzin JF, Sanders NJ, Dunn RR (2007) The biogeography of prediction error: why does the introduced range of the fire ant over-predict its native range? Global Ecol Biogeogr 16:24–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs J, Sheffield CS (2009) Rapid range expansion of the wool-carder bee, Anthidium manicatum (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae), in North America. J Kans Entomol Soc 82:21–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goka K, Okabe K, Yoneda M, Niwa S (2001) Bumblebee commercialization will cause worldwide migration of parasitic mites. Mol Ecol 10:2095–2099

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez VH, Koch JB, Griswold T (2010) Anthidium vigintiduopunctatum Friese (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae): the ellusive “dwarf bee” of the Galápagos Archipelago? Biol Invasions 12(8):2381–2383. doi:10.1007/s10530-009-9651-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulson D (2003) Effects of introduced bees on native ecosystems. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulson D (2004) Keeping bees in their place: impacts of bees outside their native ranges. Bee World 85:45–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978. Available at http://www.worldclim.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoebeke ER, Wheeler AG (2005) First records of adventive Hymenoptera (Argidae, Megachilidae, Tenthredinidae, and Vespidae) from the Canadian maritimes and the US. Entomol News 116:159–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaycox ER (1967) An adventive Anthidium in New York State (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 40:124–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtak BH (1973) Aspects of the biology of the European bee Anthidium manicatum (Hymeoptera: Megachilidae) in New York state. MS thesis. Cornell University

  • Maier CT (2005) First records of alien insects in Connecticut (Orthoptera : Tettigoniidae; Coleoptera : Buprestidae, Chrysomelidae; Diptera : Rhagionidae, Tephritidae; Hymenoptera : Megachilidae). P Entomol Soc Wash 107:947–959

    Google Scholar 

  • Matteson KC, Ascher JS, Langellotto GS (2008) Bee richness and abundance in New York City urban gardens. Ann Entomol Soc Am 101:140–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller SR, Gaebel R, Mitchell RJ, Arduser M (2002) Occurrence of two species of old world bees, A. manicatum and A. oblongatum (Apoidea : Megachilidae), in Northern Ohio and Southern Michigan. Gt. Lakes Entomol 35:65–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller A, Topfl W, Amiet F (1996) Collection of extrafloral trichome secretions for nest wool impregnation in the solitary bee Anthidium manicatum. Naturwissenschaften 83:230–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Pechuman LL (1967) Observations on the behavior of the bee Anthidium manicatum (L.). J N Y Entomol S 75:68–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distribution. Ecol Model 190:231–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips SJ, Dudík M, Elith J, Graham CH, Lehmann A, Leathwick J, Ferrier S (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol Appl 19:181–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  • Rödder D, Lötters S (2009) Niche shift versus niche conservatism? Climatic characteristics of the native and invasive ranges of the Mediterranean house gecko (Hemidactylus turcicus). Glob Ecol Biogeogr 18:674–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roubik DW (1980) Foraging behavior of competing Africanized honeybees and stingless bees. Ecology 61:836–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Hempel P, Schmid-Hempel R, Brunner PC, Seeman OD, Allen GR (2007) Invasion success of the bumblebee, B. terrestris, despite a drastic genetic bottleneck. Heredity 99:414–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Severinghaus LL, Kurtak BH, Eickwort GC (1981) The reproductive behavior of Anthidium manicatum (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) and the significance of size for territorial males. Behav Ecol Sociobol 9:51–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith IP (1991) Anthidium manicatum (Hymenoptera, Megachilidae): an interesting new Canadian record. P Entomol Soc Ont 122:105–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Spatial Ecology LLC (2010) Geospatial modelling environment v0.4.0 Beta

  • Steiner FM, Schlick-Steiner BC, VanDerWal J, Reuther KD, Christian E, Stauffer C, Suarez AV, Williams SE, Crozier RH (2008) Combined modelling of distribution and niche in invasion biology: a case study of two invasive Tetramorium ant species. Divers Distrib 14:538–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonietto RK, Ascher JS (2008) Occurrence of the old world bee species Hylaeus hyalinatus, Anthidium manicatum, A. oblongatum, and M. sculpturalis, and the native species Coelioxys banksi, Lasioglossum michiganense, and L. zophops in Illinois (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Colletidae, Halictidae, Megachilidae). Gt. Lakes Entomol 4:200–203

    Google Scholar 

  • US NPID (2011) US National pollinating insects database. US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Pollinating Insects- Biology, Management, and Systematics Laboratory, Logan, Utah. Accessed 03 Jan 2011

  • Veloz SD (2009) Spatially autocorrelated sampling falsely inflates measures of accuracy for presence-only niche models. J Biogeogr 36:2290–2299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren DL, Glor RE, Turelli M (2008) Environmental niche equivalency versus conservatism: quantitative approaches to niche evolution. Evolution 62–11:2868–2883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz P, Szabados M, Pethig H, Plant J (1988) An extreme case of interspecific territoriality: male Anthidium manicatum (Hymenoptera, Megachilidae) wound and kill intruders. Ethology 78:159–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz P, Kopka S, Schmoll G (1992) Phenology of two territorial solitary bees: Anthidium manicatum and A. florentinum (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae). J Zool 228:641–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu YR (2005) Fauna Sinica. Insecta. Hymenoptera Megachilidae, vol 44. Science Press, Beijing, p 474

    Google Scholar 

  • Zavortink TJ, Shanks SS (2008) Anthidium manicatum (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) in California. Pan-Pac Entomol 84:238–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Daniel Downey, Clint Burfitt and the staff at the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food for providing us access to the trap by-catch and critical information on trap locations and trapping protocols. We thank Leah Lewis and Joyce Knoblett for assistance in sorting by-catch from JBT. We thank Harold Ikerd and Daniel Young for specimen preparation and curation. Molly Rightmyer and Samuel Rivera provided critical reviews on an earlier version of this manuscript. We thank Matthew Fitzpatrick for editorial assistance, Janani Kalidasan and an anonymous reviewer for providing invaluable suggestions that greatly improved our analysis and discussion.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. USDA-ARS Pollinating Insects - Biology, Management and Systematics Laboratory, Utah State University, 261 BNR, Logan, UT, 84322-5310, USA

    James P. Strange, Jonathan B. Koch, Victor H. Gonzalez & Terry Griswold

  2. Biology Department, Utah State University, 5305 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT, 84322-5305, USA

    Jonathan B. Koch & Lindsay Nemelka

Authors
  1. James P. Strange
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan B. Koch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Victor H. Gonzalez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lindsay Nemelka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Terry Griswold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James P. Strange.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 2.

Table 2 Background and locality online data source summary of A. manicatum
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Strange, J.P., Koch, J.B., Gonzalez, V.H. et al. Global invasion by Anthidium manicatum (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae): assessing potential distribution in North America and beyond. Biol Invasions 13, 2115–2133 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-0030-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-0030-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation