Study

Preference for wooden and reed stem nest boxes in the red mason bee Osmia rufa near Swadzim, Poznan County, Poland

  • Published source details Wilkaniec Z. & Giejdasz K. (2003) Suitability of nesting substrates for the cavity-nesting bee Osmia rufa. Journal of Apicultural Research, 42, 29-31

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Provide nest boxes for bees (solitary bees or bumblebees)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

Action Link
Bee Conservation
  1. Provide nest boxes for bees (solitary bees or bumblebees)

    A replicated study in 2000 and 2001 at an agricultural experimental station in Poznan County, Poland (Wilkaniec & Gieidasz 2003) tested six different nesting materials for the red mason bee Osmia rufa and found all materials were used by female bees, but the highest production of bees per nest was from reed Phragmites australis stems (3.5 bees/nest in 1999) or wood (7.2 bees/nest in 2000). Nests in paper tubes were all parasitized. Nests in plastic were well occupied (80-100%) but had a low success rate (0.2-1.8 bees/nest), partly due to mould. For each trial, 150 nests of each of the following materials were tested: reed stems, plastic tubes, paper tubes (bundles), wood, cork (grooved boards joined together in blocks), and holes drilled into wood, lined with printer acetate.

     

  2. Provide artificial nest sites for solitary bees

    Six different nesting materials for the red mason bee Osmia rufa were tested at an agricultural experimental station in Poznan County, Poland, in 2000 and 2001 (Wilkaniec & Giejdasz 2003). For each trial, 150 nests of each of the following materials were tested: reed stems, plastic tubes, paper tubes (bundles), wood, cork (grooved boards joined together in blocks), and holes drilled into wood, lined with printer acetate. All materials were used by female bees, but the highest production of bees per nest was from reed stems (3.5 bees/nest in 1999) or wood (7.2 bees/nest in 2000). Nests in paper tubes were all parasitized. Nests in plastic were well occupied (80-100%) but had a low success rate (0.2-1.8 bees/nest), partly due to mould.

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust