English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Wild bees can be essential pollinators in natural, agricultural, and urban systems, but populations of some species have declined. Efforts to assess the status of wild bees are hindered by uncertainty in common sampling methods, such as pan traps and aerial netting, which may or may not provide a valid index of abundance across species and habitats. Mark-recapture methods are a common and effective means of estimating population size, widely used in vertebrates but rarely applied to bees. Here we review existing mark-recapture studies of wild bees and present a new case study comparing mark-recapture population estimates to pan trap and net capture for four taxa in a wild bee community. Net, but not trap, capture was correlated with abundance estimates across sites and taxa. Logistical limitations ensure that mark-recapture studies will not fully replace other bee sampling methods, but they do provide a feasible way to monitor selected species and measure the performance of other sampling methods.

Estimating bee abundance: can mark-recapture methods validate common sampling protocols?