Pinelands Native Bees: GIS Senior ProjectBy: April Hamblin

Even though concern is spreading about worldwide pollinator decline, much is still unknown about native bee populations and their density, abundance, and diversity. The New Jersey Pine Barrens are a highly distinctive ecosystem whose native bees have not been thoroughly sampled. Fifteen transects were sampled using bee bowls in New Jersey Pinelands monthly from May to October, 2012. Study sites near Richard Stockton College had more diversity than sites at Parker Preserve, yet this did not necessarily mean that Stockton would have the greatest number of individuals. Although these data were about 3/4 of the collected results from the Native Pinelands Bees Senior Project, it is assumed that the patterns would continue to be the same for all data. These data were analyzed using ArcMap to propose more sample sites for future surveys. Because of their variability, future study sites were not proposed, yet these data suggest that more diverse, fragmented landscapes provide for a more diverse bee community.

Abstract

Study Sites

Introduction Results

Discussions and Conclusions

NAMS Environmental Sciences DepartmentThe Richard Stockton College of New Jersey

Instructor: Dr. Weihong FanSupporting Instructor: Dr. W.J. Cromartie

Fig. 2 shows that Richard Stockton College (RSC) and S. Vienna Ave. have 3% favorable soil conditions and 97% unfavorable soil conditions. The favorable soil is EvesBoro. There is only one for Atlantic County because Burlington County did not have any EvesBoro soil.

Richard Stockton College of New Jersey (RSC)-W of Observatory—scattered trees, thick grass- Hospital Field—scattered oaks, dry grass, lichens- Baptisia Site Zinckgraf farm—sparse pines, dry grass, lichens- Sand Road off Delaware Ave.—pine oak woodland- Parkway Ponds Borrow Pit—shallow borrow pit, meadow- Powerline R-O-W—mowed right of way

221 S. Vienna Ave.-Orchard—orchard and garden- Back Field—old field

Franklin Parker Preserve~5 km S. Chatsworth Ten Trunks Oaks—un-mowed dikes edge of former cranberry bog~5.5 km S. Chatsworth vic. Cedar Swamp Ten Trunks—sand path across restored cranberry bog~4.25 km S. Chatsworth Ten Trunks Red Pit—dry clearing~4.25 km S. Chatsworth Ten Trunks Bee Yard—wet clearing, dry sand road in pine woodland~3.2km SSW Chatsworth Middle Rd.—wet clearing, dry sand road in pine woodland~1.5 km SSW Chatsworth Sand SE End Airstrip—damp clearing and dry sand pitRingler Ave. Chatsworth—cripple wetland NW of road, sphagnum

The Pinelands were chosen because they are a rare ecosystem. Only 2% of the insects in the Pinelands are pollinators (McCormick, 1970), so regardless of the intensity of the decline of pollinators, if they decline whatsoever, it could cause drastic effects.

ReferencesAbrol, D. R. (2012). Pollination Biology: Biodiversity Conservation and Agricultural Production. Springer. London and NY. Pp 785.Aigner, P. (2001). Optimality modeling and fitness trade-offs: when should plants become specialists? Oikos. 95. 177-184. Ascher, J. et al. (2007). Impacts of logging on midsummer diversity of native bees (Apoidea) in a northern hardwood forest. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 80(4), 327-338.Batra, S. (1992). Bees and pollination. Pp 15-17 in Adams, J., Arnett, R., and Thomas, M., eds. Insect potppurri: Adventures in entomology. The Sandhill Crane Press. Gainseville. 15-17.Budny, R. V. et al. (2005, March). Testing simple indices of habitat proximity. The American Naturalist, 165(6).Cromartie, W.J. (2013). Personal Communication. Dafni, A. et al. (2003, October). Linking bees and flowers: How do floral communities structure pollinator communities? Ecology, 84(10), 2628-2642.Davis, C. et al. (2009). The lost micro-deserts of the Patuxent River: Using landscape history, insect and plant specimens, and field work to detect and define a unique community. Entomological Society Washington, 111(1), 132-144.Frohnapple, K. et al. (2010, Sept.). Floral and nesting resources, habitat structure, and fire influence bee distribution across an open-forest gradient. Enological Applications, 20(6), 1678-1692.Griswold, T., Kremen, C., & Winfree, R. (2007, February). Effect of human disturbance on bee communities in a forested ecosystem. Conservation Biology, 21(1), 213-223.McCormick, J. (1970, December). The Pine Barrens: A Preliminary Ecological Inventory. New Jersey State Museum. Trenton, NJ. Pp 85.

While these data are not able to provide exact areas where future students can sample to find a specific type of bee population, they are useful to show that more fragmented, diverse areas will provide for more a more diverse population of bees. It is important to remember that bees may have very specific habitat requirements to very general requirements, so it is difficult to narrow down to potential habitat. This may not mean that there is no relationship between bee populations and their environment, it suggests that the relationship is complex. Also, it is important to remember that this project used 3/4 of the results from the last project, assuming that the general spatial patterns would stay the same. More research needs to be conducted with native bee community structure, where GIS may be used as a tool, yet field work would be initially recommended to improve the current level of understanding of native bee populations.

Even though there was no direct correlation between any of the data layers used and the 1 km buffer around each study site, this does not mean that they are unrelated. Fires are still believed to positively relate to bee population, for they clear the canopy of a forest (Frohnapple, 2010; Griswold, Kremen, & Winfree, 2007). Although Parker Preserve has more favorable fire areas, these areas are mainly forest, which appears to cancel the benefits of the fire. This shows that land-use is also highly influences native bee populations; it is just not know to what extent yet. Due to the data presented, EvesBoro soil is not thought to have a relationship with the bee populations studied, even the rare species that nest in deep soils. The infertile Pinelands soils (Robichaud, 1980) increase areas for available nesting (Frohnapple, 2010). This suggests that the search for soils was too narrow for this project. Because RSC and S. Vienna Ave. had more diverse populations of bees, it is assumed that this area has more favorable habitat for the majority of the bees than Parker Preserve. By analyzing the final GIS maps below, the data suggests that bee populations diversity increases with a mosaic of smaller, diverse favorable areas instead of larger, more homogeneous favorable areas.

Fig. 1 shows that all of the study sites are located in Atlantic County and Burlington County within the Pinelands.

Parker Preserve Study Sites

Richard Stockton College and S. Vienna Ave. Study Sites

Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 show that RSC and S. Vienna Ave. have 29% favorable land-use conditions and 71% unfavorable land-use conditions, while Parker Preserve has 7% favorable land-use conditions and 93% unfavorable land-use conditions, respectively. The favorable land-use conditions are the following: residential areas (1110, 1120, 1130, 1140, 1150), cropland and pastureland (2100), orchards/vineyards/nurseries/horticultural areas (2200), specific types of bush/shrubland (4410, 4420, 4430, 4440), various wooded/bog wetlands (6210, 6231, 6232, 6233, 6234), and extracted mining areas (7300) .

Fig. 7 shows the favorable areas for bee habitat at the RSC and S. Vienna Ave. sites: 2% of only favorable soil, 22% of only favorable fire, 28% of only favorable land-use, 1% of multiple favorable areas (two or three layers), and 47% of unfavorable. These data show that RSC and S. Vienna Ave. have smaller polygons of favorable layers. The average polygon area is about 202,457 sq. ft.

MethodsArcMap was used to process and analyze the data involving the previously sampled areas to possibly propose new research areas for students who continue this bee research at Stockton. To do this, data were downloaded from the SSURGO database of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation and the NJDEP website. This data was then managed and interpreted with various GIS tools.

Study sites were encompassed by a 1 km buffer where three main layers were analyzed: fire description, land-use, and EvesBoro soil. Fire intensity was observed since bees are negatively related to canopy cover (Frohnapple, 2010; Griswold, Kremen, & Winfree, 2007). Favorable land-use types include residential areas, various types of agriculture, shrublands, and extracted mining areas (Cromartie, 2013; Griswold, Kremen, & Winfree, 2007). EvesBoro sand was linked to specific deep soil-nesting bees (Ascher, 2013; Cromartie, 2013; Davis et al., 2009).

Pollinators, mainly bees, provide food as security for the human race as well as other animals and are essential bio-indicators of an ecosystems functioning and diversity (Abrol, 2012). Native bees are known to pollinate native flora (Aigner, 2001), yet they are declining. There is not enough research conducted to understand exactly why or how to find a solution to help. Some reasons for the decline are believed to be excessive use of pesticides, habitat destruction due to certain types of land-use change (Batra, 1992), and competition from invasive species like honey bees (Thomson, 2004). More research is needed to help preserve ecosystems diversity and food by conserving native bee populations.

The objective of this research is to understand native bees in the Pinelands better and test if GIS can be used to predict favorable future sample sites. Other studies have tried to use GIS to assess bee habitat in the NJ Pinelands. They found it difficult to assess appropriate bee habitat spatially and concluded that simply using GIS with land-use maps was not successful (Budny, 2005; Griswold, Kremen, & Winfree, 2007). Although their research was unsuccessful, this project differs for there are multiple data layers being used, where as previous research simply used land-use change data.

Fig. 8 shows the favorable areas for bee habitat at the Parker Preserve sites: 0% of only favorable soil, 55% of only favorable fire, 6% of only favorable land-use, 1% of multiple favorable areas (two or three layers), and 38% of unfavorable. These data show that Parker Preserve have larger polygons of favorable layers. The average polygon area is about 1,012,626 sq. ft.

0 80 16040Miles

-

Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show that RSC and S. Vienna Ave. have 24% favorable fire conditions 76% unfavorable fire conditions, while Parker Preserve has 56% favorable fire conditions and 44% unfavorable fire conditions, respectively. The favorable fire conditions are very high and extreme. The bee points show higher diversity of study site in red (Over 2 species found per survey), medium in orange (1.5-2 species found per survey), and low in yellow (Less than 1.5 species found per survey). This shows that PSC and S. Vienna Ave. are more diverse than Parker Preserve.