Our IJviiii; Kcxoiirctw — Non-native Species 



451 



resources by honeybees to the exclusion of 

 some native bees and poUinators, there is a lit- 

 tle-appreciated yet unique ecological applica- 

 tion for using EHB colonies [A. mellifcni) as 

 short- and long-term local and regional moni- 

 toring devices of vegetation diversity, plant pro- 

 ductivity, flowering phenology, precipitation. 

 climate, and general ecosystem health. No 

 expensive equipment is required since the bees 

 do all the "fieldwork." In addition, floral 

 changes in landscapes can be determined from 

 the rich "fossilized" source of pollen dietary 

 information in old, dark brood combs or in 75- 

 to lOO-year-old "debris middens" in the 

 Sonoran Desert (Buchmann et al. 1992). 

 Long-term records (some spanning decades) for 

 certain beekeeping locations are invaluable aids 

 to beekeepers, ecologists, and resource man- 

 agers for ecological evaluation and monitoring. 



To validate any AHB range-expansion pre- 

 diction or to measure potential effects on native 

 pollinators or ecosystem components, we must 

 monitor the bees and evaluate habitats on 

 national and local scales. Information must be 

 collected, integrated, and shared by researchers, 

 individuals, and agencies. Public-and-private- 

 sector partnerships have been developed to 

 exchange AHB information and develop moni- 

 toring protocols. 



Researchers use geographic information sys- 

 tems (GIS) and global positioning systems 

 (GPS) technologies to track the locations of 

 known AHB and EHB colonies: delineate hon- 

 eybee habitat parameters such as preferred veg- 

 etation community, climatic zone, elevation, 

 and distance to water; investigate potential eco- 

 logical consequences to native bees and other 

 nectar-dependent species; monitor and detect 

 habitat productivity changes; and develop com- 

 puter models to illustrate and predict preferred 

 AHB habitats and potential ecological conse- 

 quences (Fig. 3). 



The Future 



Knowing how far north AHBs will spread is 

 critical in predicting their ecological effects. 

 There is general agreement that they have a cli- 

 matic limit, but precise limits of their U.S. range 

 expansion is disputed. Some researchers sug- 

 gest that AHBs will disperse almost as far north 

 as Canada; others propose that they will go no 

 farther than the U.S. southwestern and south- 

 eastern comers. In all likelihood, AHBs will 

 become established as a dominant ecosystem 

 forager in the southern third of the United 

 States, where EHB overwintering behavior is 

 less critical for survival. If conditions are favor- 

 able, however, the AHBs may expand into mar- 

 ginally productive or colder habitats in higher 



latitudes or elevations. 



While the ecological range limits and eco- 

 nomic consequences of non-native AHB migra- 

 tion into the United States are not precisely 

 known, researchers agree that honeybees are 

 economically important, and that sufficient bio- 

 logical information exists to develop adequate 

 inventory and monitoring programs. Added 

 benefits to honeybee monitoring programs are 

 also important because bee colonies can also 

 serve as excellent indicators of flowering plant 

 productivity, ecosystem stability, and relative 

 ecological health. 



References 



Brand. D,D. 1988. Tlie honeybee in New Spain and Mexico. 

 Journal of Cultural Geography 9:71-81. 



Brown. D.E.. C.H. Lowe, and C.P. Pase. 1979. A digitized 

 classification system for the biotic communities of North 

 America, with community (services I and association 

 examples for the Southwest. Journal of the Arizona 

 Nevada Academy of Science 14 (Supplement 1):1-16. 



Buchmann, S.L.. M.K. O'Rourke. CW. Shipman. S.C. 

 Thoenes. and J.O. Schmidt. 1992. Pollen harvest by hon- 

 eybees in Saguaro National Monument: potential effects 

 on plant reproduction. Pages 149-l,'i6 in C.P. Stone and 

 E.S. Bellantoni, eds. Proceedings of the Symposium on 

 Research in Saguaro National Monument. Tucson, AZ. 



Guzman-Novoa. E.. and R. Page. 1994. The impact of 

 Africanized bees on Mexican beekeeping, American Bee 

 Journal LM: 101- 106. 



Ken\ W.E. 1967. The history of the introduction of African 

 bees to Brazil. South African Bee Journal .19:.^-.'i. 



McKenna. W.R. 1992. Killer bees: what the allergist should 

 know. Pediatric Asthma. Allergy and Immiinology 

 6(4):19-26. 



Roubik. D.W. 1989. Ecology and natural history of tropical 

 bees. Cambridge University Press. England. .^14 pp. 



Schaffer. W.M.. D.W. Zeh. S.L. Buchmann, S. Kleinhaus. 

 M.V. Schaffer. and J. Antrim. 1983. Competition for nec- 

 tar between introduced honeybees and native North 

 American bees and ants. Ecology 64:564-577. 



Schmalzel, R.J. 1980. The diet breadth of Aris 

 (Hymenoptera: Apidae). M.S. thesis. University of 

 Arizona. Tucson. 79 pp. 



Schumacher, M.J., J.O. Schmidt. N.B. Egen. and K.A. 

 Dillion. 1992. Biochemical variability of venoms from 

 individual European and Africanized honeybees (Apis 

 mellifera). The Journal of Allergy and Clinical 

 Immunology 90:59-6.'i. 



Seeley, TD. 1985. Honeybee ecology: a study of adaptation 

 in social life. Monographs in Behavior and Ecology, 

 Princeton University Press, NJ. 201 pp. 



Southwick, E.E.. and L. Southwick, Jr. 1992. Economic 

 value of honeybees {Hymenoptera: Apidae) in the United 

 States. Journal of Economic Entomology 85(.^):621. 



Taylor. O.R. 1977. The past and possible future spread of 

 Africanized honeybees in the Americas. Bee World 

 58:l9-.^0. 



USDA. 1994. African honeybee fact sheet. U.S. Depailment 

 of Agriculture. 



Villanueva, R. 1984. Planlas de importancia apicola en el 

 ejido de Plan del Rio. Veracruz. Mexico. Biotica 

 9:279-.M0. 



Visscher, P.K.. and T.D. Seeley. 1982. Foraging strategy of 

 honeybee colonies in a temperate deciduous forest. 

 Ecology 63:1790-1801. 



Winston, M.L. 1987. The biology of the honeybee. Harvard 

 University Press, Cambridge, MA. 28 1 pp. 



For further information: 



Michael R. Kunzmann 



National Biological Service 



Cooperative Park Studies Unit 



University of Arizona 



125 Biological Sciences E., Bldg. 43 



Tucson. AZ 8.5721 



