Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 249

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Pollination efficiency of wild bees and hoverflies provided to oilseed rape

Open access
Jauker, Frank, Bondarenko, Birgit, Becker, Heiko C., Steffan‐Dewenter, Ingolf·2012·Agricultural and Forest Entomology

Abstract

Declining numbers in honeybees and various wild bee species pose a threat to global pollination services. The identification and quantification of the pollination service provided by different taxa within the pollinator guild is a prerequisite for the successful establishment of nature conservation and crop management regimes. Wild bees and hoverflies are considered to be valuable pollinators in agricultural and natural systems. Although some information on pollination efficiency of individual pollinator species is available, comparative studies of both taxa at different densities are rare. In the present study, the efficiency of the solitary mason bee Osmia rufa and two hoverfly species ( Eristalis tenax and Episyrphus balteatus ) as pollinators of oilseed rape Brassica napus was examined in a standardized caged plant breeding regime. Honeybee Apis mellifera colonies were used as a reference pollinator taxon. Yield parameters responded differently to pollinator density and identity. Fruit set and number of seeds per pod increased with increasing pollinator density, although these were stronger in the mason bee than the hoverfly treatment. Weight per 1000 seeds did not respond to any pollinator treatment, indicating that seed quality was not affected. Oilseed rape yield in the highest tested densities of both pollinator taxa resulted in yield values close to the efficiency of small honeybee colonies. Hoverflies required approximately five‐fold densities of the red mason bees to reach a similar fruit set and yield. Thus, mason bees are more efficient in plant breeding and managed pollination systems. Both natural pollinator taxa, however, are of potential value in open and closed crop production systems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1461-9563.2011.00541.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 249

Metadata

Authors
Jauker, F., Bondarenko, B., Becker, H. C., & Steffan‐Dewenter, I.
Venue
Agricultural and Forest Entomology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-07-15
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
81-87
ISSN
  • 1461-9555 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-9563
OpenAlex
W2063961502
Cited by
249
References
0
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pollination efficiency of wild bees and hoverflies provided to oilseed rape. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-9563.2011.00541.x
The paper
Jauker, F., Bondarenko, B., Becker, H. C., & Steffan‐Dewenter, I. (2012). Pollination efficiency of wild bees and hoverflies provided to oilseed rape. Agricultural and Forest Entomology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-9563.2011.00541.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.