> However, due largely to climate change and intensive agriculture, there is a widespread decline in wild pollinators.
Source?
Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
91–100 of 111 posts
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#92Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow! Learned something new today. I've been misinformed into believe that mosquitoes are useless, and we should wipe them out.
They are useless and harmful, there are far better pollinators than mosquitos.
There are certain species that are only pollinated by mosquitoes. Orchids for example.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#94And check out the bee-fly too: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/bee-flies-cute-bee-mimic-with... Lots of pollinators out there.
To me, the most fascinating pollinator is the hummingbird hawk-moth (which, interestingly enough, is a daytime pollinator): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hummingbird_hawk-moth . There's not a lot of similarity in photos, but if you see one, its sound and the way it hovers around flowers is just like a miniature hummingbird.
We have hummingbird moths here in Texas. They're not afraid of humans, so I've seen them just a few feet from me several times. They look and act and fly just like hummingbirds -- you have to look closely to see that they're not birds, then you'll notice the antennae, and the lack of feathers, and the "beak" being flexible.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#95Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#96Bees also produce honey in the process, basically for free. Everything in real life is a balancing act!
Honeybees are actually not very good at pollinating plants; they take most of the pollen back to their hive instead of spreading it between plants. Furthermore, they often outcompete (non-honey producing) indigenous bees that are actually good at pollinating plants.
Bees do take most of the pollen back, but flowers don't need most of the pollen anyways. As with most species of sexually-reproducing lifeforms, the males produce much much more sperm than is actually needed for the reproductive act, and they do this precisely because so much sperm will be lost in the process. In other words: flowers account for the loss of pollen to pollinators. Flowers also make nectar to reward pollinators -- nectar production is otherwise pointless for flowers, and yet they put serious energetic effort into producing a pointless product.
You did imply something about honeybees being non-native in many areas, thus like invasive species. To be specific, honeybees have not been native to the Americas for millions of years.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#97So with all of this talk for years about colony collapse and food shortages yet moths were doing the bulk of the pollinating the whole time? Or am I missing something. Not that colony collapse doesn’t worry me, it does. But if I was being baselessly told to fear agriculture production issues, I am super mad.
Where I'm at colony collapse is not really a big deal. Beekeepers manage to keep the number of hives up, we're trying to get agribusiness to reduce the usage of pesticides, we have ways to deal with the varroa mites, etc.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#98Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
(This is a hobbyhorse of mine...) At least in North America, the "colony collapse" stuff was a livestock phenomenon more than it was a wildlife/ecology issue. Honey bees aren't native to the US; if you see a honey bee in your back yard, there's a pretty good chance that somebody owns it.
I have wild honey bees in my yard (New Mexico) and have seen them in other places. I believe they are Africanized but just looking I can't tell the difference. At any rate, in warm areas of the US there are many feral old world bees.
They're africanized if they are very aggressive.
Recently I saw a talk where the speaker said that if you find any africanized beehives in the wild, you should kill the hive because you don't want the africanized bees to spread. (Or if you have an africanized beehive, re-queen it.) I don't have any, and I'd be loathe to kill bees because I'm quite fond of them, but it's probably good advice.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#100So with all of this talk for years about colony collapse and food shortages yet moths were doing the bulk of the pollinating the whole time? Or am I missing something. Not that colony collapse doesn’t worry me, it does. But if I was being baselessly told to fear agriculture production issues, I am super mad.
Beekeeping is a business. Much beekeeping business lies in renting hives to farmers (meaning: driving them to far away farms where the bees are then allowed to pollinate for a few days, then on to the next far away farm). Hive renting is pretty stressful to beehives, and farmers tend to use a lot of pesticides. And guess what: pesticides are pretty indiscriminate, so they hurt bees too. So yeah, this particular business has colony collapse issues. Beekeepers who produce honey, queens, and hives mostly only have to deal with varroa mites and such predators.