The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Bee diversity and abundance in an urban setting
Abstract
We assessed bee diversity and abundance in urban areas of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, to determine how urban environments can support bees. Habitats examined were community and botanical gardens, urban wild areas, Naturescape flower beds and backyards, and traditional flower beds and backyards. A total of 56 bee species (Hymenoptera), including species of the genera Andrena Fabr. (Andrenidae), Bombus Latr. (Apidae), Osmia Panzer and Megachile Latr. (Megachilidae), and Halictus Latr. and Dialictus Pauly (Halictidae), were collected. Abundance exhibited strong seasonal variation. Wild bees were most abundant during late spring, whereas honey bees peaked at the end of the summer. The most abundant species seen was the managed honey bee Apis mellifera L. (Apidae), followed by wild Bombus flavifrons Cresson. Community and botanical gardens, and plants such as cotoneaster (Cotoneaster Medik. sp.) and blackberry (Rubus discolor Weihe & Nees) (Rosaceae), centaurea (Centaurea L. sp.; Asteraceae), buttercup (Ranunculus L. sp.; Ranunculaceae), and foxglove (Digitalis L. sp.; Scrophulariaceae), had the highest abundance of bees, while bee populations in wild areas were the most diverse. Weeds such as dandelions (Taraxacum officinale G.H. Weber ex Wiggers; Asteraceae) dominated these wild areas and had one of the highest diversities of bee visitors. Traditional flower beds with tulips (Tulipa L. sp.; Liliaceae) and petunias (Petunia Juss. sp.; Solanaceae) had relatively poor diversity and abundance of bees throughout the year. Our study suggests that urban areas have the potential to be important pollinator reservoirs, especially if both bloom and habitat heterogeneity are maintained and enhanced through sustainable urban planning.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning
Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019 · Cited by 1,871
Decline and conservation of bumble bees
Goulson, D., Lye, G. C., & Darvill, B. (2008) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093454 · Cited by 1,183
The city as a refuge for insect pollinators
Hall, D. M., Camilo, G. R., Tonietto, R. K., Ollerton, J., Ahrné, K., Arduser, M., Ascher, J. S., Baldock, K. C. R., Fowler, R., Frankie, G., et al. (2017) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12840 · Cited by 657
The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity-ecosystem services: Challenges and next steps
Lin, B. B., Philpott, S. M., & Jha, S. (2015) · Basic and Applied Ecology · doi:10.1016/j.baae.2015.01.005 · Cited by 488
How urbanization is driving pollinator diversity and pollination – A systematic review
Wenzel, A., Grass, I., Belavadi, V. V., & Tscharntke, T. (2020) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108321 · Cited by 485
Metadata
- Authors
- Tommasi, D., Miro, A., Higo, H. A., & Winston, M. L.
- Venue
- The Canadian Entomologist
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2004-12
- Volume
- 136
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 851-869
- ISSN
- 0008-347X (ISSN-L)
- 1918-3240
- OpenAlex
- W2140967696
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Bee diversity and abundance in an urban setting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4039/n04-010
- The paper
- Tommasi, D., Miro, A., Higo, H. A., & Winston, M. L. (2004). Bee diversity and abundance in an urban setting. The Canadian Entomologist. https://doi.org/10.4039/n04-010
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.