Search

Introduction: Urban forests provide necessary habitat for many forest-associated bee species amidst development and fragmentation. These forest fragments provide a variety of important floral and non-floral resources for bees that encompass a diversity of functional guilds characterized by size, diet breadth, nesting, sociality, origin, and seasonality. The relative importance of forest edge vs. interior habitats to these organisms is not well understood. Methods: Here, we compare bee communities between forest edge and interior locations at eight locations in Athens, GA, USA. We also explore the effects of stand structure, tree composition, ground cover type, and the presence of snags and downed wood on these organisms. Results: We found bee abundance and richness to be higher at the forest edge than interior with distinct community compositions at both locations. Canopy cover, invasive shrub cover, ground cover, and tree diversity influenced the observed community composition. We also determined that the most impactful functional traits influencing bee community structure in urban forest fragments were nesting substrate, origin (native or exotic to North America), sociality, and diet breadth. Discussion: Our findings will help establish the effects of local forest characteristics on the community composition, diversity, and abundance of wild bees and further our knowledge of the conservation value of urban forests for preserving wild bee communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Urban forests provide necessary habitat for many forest-associated bee species amidst development and fragmentation. These forest fragments provide a variety of important floral and non-floral resources for bees that encompass a diversity of functional guilds characterized by size, diet breadth, nesting, sociality, origin, and seasonality. The relative importance of forest edge vs. interior habitats to these organisms is not well understood. Methods: Here, we compare bee communities between forest edge and interior locations at eight locations in Athens, GA, USA. We also explore the effects of stand structure, tree composition, ground cover type, and the presence of snags and downed wood on these organisms. Results: We found bee abundance and richness to be higher at the forest edge than interior with distinct community compositions at both locations. Canopy cover, invasive shrub cover, ground cover, and tree diversity influenced the observed community composition. We also determined that the most impactful functional traits influencing bee community structure in urban forest fragments were nesting substrate, origin (native or exotic to North America), sociality, and diet breadth. Discussion: Our findings will help establish the effects of local forest characteristics on the community composition, diversity, and abundance of wild bees and further our knowledge of the conservation value of urban forests for preserving wild bee communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]