Native Buzz: Citizen scientists creating nesting habitat for
solitary
bees and wasps
Jason R. Graham(1), Qin Tan(1), Linda C. Jones(2), and James D.
Ellis(1)
(1)University of Florida, Entomology Nematology Department, PO Box
110620, Bldg. 970 Natural
Area Drive, Gainesville, FL 32611 (2)University of Florida, College
of Education, PO Box 117048, 2423 Norman Hall, Gainesville,
FL
32611
Abstract A citizen science project was developed to encourage
homeowners and others to build
and monitor artificial nesting habitats for solitary bees and
wasps. Social media applications were
used to recruit participants and provide forums for social
discussion and participation. Between
April 2012 and July 2014, 268 individuals and 19 groups registered
for the Native Buzz project at
www.ufnativebuzz.com for a total combined membership of 655
participants. Participants were
located in 30 counties in Florida as well as 38 other states and 10
additional countries. Participants
had designed, built and monitored 68 artificial nest sites by July
2014. During the two-year study
period, the sites collectively contained over 10,657 potential
nests constructed from a variety of
materials and established within a variety of ecosystems. Comments
solicited from participants
were used to identify future needs, motivating factors and
challenges associated with implementing
an ‘‘insect-oriented’’ citizen science project. Results of this
study indicate that technology-based
citizen science projects of this type can effectively recruit
non-scientist citizens to create artificial
nesting habitats for solitary bees and wasps and provide a useful
platform for helping
entomological researchers collect solitary bee and wasp nesting
data from a large geographic
range via data provided by volunteer citizen scientists.
Keywords Bee, wasp, solitary, citizen science, alternative
pollinators, social media, Native Buzz
Introduction
Until 2014, only four of Florida’s 67 counties had been
methodically surveyed
by trained entomologists to document their diversity of bees and
wasps:
Alachua County (Serrano 2006, Hall and Ascher 2010, Hall and Ascher
2011,
Graham 2014), Miami-Dade County (Graenicher 1930; Pascarella et al.
1999),
Highlands County (Krombein 1967, Deyrup et al. 2002), and Monroe
County
(Pascarella et al. 1999). Each of these survey projects was limited
by both
temporal and geographic ranges, within which it was logistically
feasible for a
single or small group of trained entomologists to conduct the
research. Florida
is a large and ecologically diverse state; thus monitoring each
county in Florida
continuously for a long-term study would be too time consuming and
costly for
any one researcher or small team of researchers to undertake.
However, by
using volunteers in a citizen science project, monitoring each
county
Corresponding author: Jason R. Graham,
[email protected]
204
concurrently and over many field seasons is possible and
cost-effective.
Through the University of Florida Native Buzz
Project, citizen participants
were invited to contribute to the research and conservation of
solitary bees and
wasps by creating habitat to encourage nesting, collecting data on
the diversity
and nesting preferences of solitary bees and wasps, and sharing the
data
collected with others.
Solitary bees and wasps. Many species of solitary bees and
wasps nest in
preexisting cavities in plant material such as hollow reeds, stems,
and branches
and in holes created by wood-boring insects and woodpeckers.
Solitary bees
and wasps will also nest in a variety of inexpensive and accessible
man-made
materials, making it easy and affordable to create artificial nest
sites. Examples
include drilling holes in wood, clay or blocks of cement or using
cylinders made
out of cut bamboo, paper tubes, or plastic straws. The main
requirement is
simply a tunnel or tube-like structure with an appropriately sized
length (,7–
20 cm) and entrance (,3–10 mm inside diameter). Since the earliest
accounts of
their use, artificial nest sites, or trap nests as they are
sometimes called, have
provided much of the known life history of tunnel-nesting, solitary
bees and
wasps (Krombein 1967).
Previous investigators using nesting sites have found that
tunnel-nesting,
solitary bees will first locate an appropriate cavity, collect
pollen and nectar to
provision the cavity, lay an egg on the pollen/nectar ball, and
then create a cell by
sealing off the egg with its provision. This process is continued
until the cavity is
filled with cells, at which point the parent bee seals the nest and
searches for
another cavity (Cane 2008). Artificial nest sites have been used to
show that
tunnel-nesting, solitary wasp species collect specific arthropod
prey such as
caterpillars, crickets, and spiders (O’Neill 2001). The wasps
paralyze their prey
by stinging it and then bring the paralyzed prey to preexisting
tunnels they have
selected for nests. Each parent wasp then lays an egg on the prey,
seals the cell
and continues the process much the same as solitary bees (O’Neill
2001).
Solitary bees and wasps are valuable natural resources due to
the
ecosystem services of pollination and biological control that they
provide,
respectively. Bees are important pollinators of a large variety of
wild and
cultivated flowering plants, including many plants/fruits eaten by
people. Most
solitary wasps also visit flowers for nectar and to hunt prey;
therefore, they
may contribute to the pollination of agricultural crops (Spradbery
1973,
O’Neill 2001). Solitary wasps also feed on, and thus help to
control,
herbivorous insect pests (Spradbery 1973, O’Neill 2001).
Furthermore, unlike
social bees and wasps, solitary bees and wasps are not aggressive
or defensive
of their nests. Thus, there is little-to-no threat of stings from
multiple guard
bees or wasps when studying solitary bees and wasps (Evans and
Eberhard
1970, O’Neill 2001). This makes solitary bees and wasps relatively
safe model
organisms for studying biology, plant/insect interactions, and
ecology (Spevak
2012) and makes them excellent candidates for insect-focused
citizen science
projects.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 205
Citizen science. Citizen science projects are research
collaborations in which
typically unpaid, volunteer participants, regardless of their lack
of previous
scientific training, are encouraged to assist in scientific
research as a crowd-
sourced research method (Irwin 1995). Since the early 1900s,
citizen science
projects have become increasingly respected in the scientific
community. A
single literature review in 2012 found that data collected by
citizen science
projects were used in over 300 peer-reviewed published manuscripts
(Catlin-
Groves 2012). Citizen science is a natural fit for studies with
important
conservation or education implications because the target audience
takes
ownership of the problem and becomes the voice of the project, thus
impacting
public opinion and ultimately public policy (Dickenson et al.
2012). As a
community-based monitoring program, citizen science is an excellent
tool for
detecting rare organisms, tracking non-native invasive insects, and
observing
population events (Hochachka et al. 2012).
There are many examples of biologically-oriented, citizen science
projects
that successfully facilitate the gathering of data via their
participants. The
Audubon Society uses a citizen science approach for their project
entitled
Christmas Bird Count, a project that began in 1900 and continues
today. This
project has resulted in one of the temporally longest ecological
datasets on
record for the field of ornithology (Greenwood 2007). Citizen
science projects
focused on monitoring populations of insects have proven successful
even in
underdeveloped countries using limited resources (Braschler 2009).
As an
example, developers of the Iimbovane Outreach
Project monitor ant diversity in
different biomes of the Western Cape Province, South Africa and the
project
is driven by 10th grade life science learners who collect the ants,
work with
the data and interact with educators and scientists to explain
patterns of
biodiversity (http://www0.sun.ac.za/Iimbovane/).
Citizen science projects have also helped in the discovery of rare
species. A
participant of The Lost Ladybug Project, a lady
beetle-themed citizen science
project, found a rare nine-spotted lady beetle (Coccinella
novemnotata)
representing the first specimen known to science from North America
in
10 years (Losey et al. 2007). Volunteers participating in
The Monarch Larva
Monitoring Project (1) established sites in natural areas
and reported the
number of eggs and larvae observed, the number of plants examined,
and the
stadium of larvae observed, (2) compared monarch density on
milkweed to
other nearby plants, (3) collected larvae to rear and estimate
parasitism rates,
and (4) collected weather data (Oberhauser and Prysby 2008).
UF Native Buzz . Several entomological researchers have
used artificial nest
sites to evaluate the biodiversity, population dynamics, and
habitat use of
wood-nesting bees and wasps (Tylianakis et al. 2005, Loyola and
Martins 2006,
Matos et al. 2013, among many others). These investigators have
found that
the diversity and nesting preferences of solitary bees and wasps
differ by
location, habitat and landscape context. The UF Native Buzz
Project was
created to combine the monitoring potential of artificial nest
sites with the
Graham et al. Native Buzz
206 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
citizen science approach for collecting solitary bee and wasp
nesting preference
and diversity data. This project, if run over multiple years and
across a large
geographic area, could provide valuable insights into the
population dynamic
trends of many species of solitary bees and wasps while
simultaneously
fostering de facto conservation efforts for these
beneficial insects.
Methods
Social media development. Initially, a Facebook page was
developed for the project in
September 2011 and managed several times weekly
(www.Facebook.com/NBNSProject) to
generate public interest, recruit participants and facilitate
online conversation. Next, a Twitter
page was created and linked directly to the Facebook page whereby
each Facebook status update
was automatically tweeted and no further maintenance was required
(https://twitter.com/
ufnativebuzz). A Pinterest board was also developed
(http://pinterest.com/buzzn/wwwufnative-
buzzcom/) to provide additional ideas for nesting sites and
materials. As interesting nest site
photos, instructions or articles were discovered, they were shared
with all project participants via
Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest in order to inspire participants
and provide concrete examples of
the many creative ways they could create their own nesting habitat
for solitary bees and wasps. The
Facebook page was also used as an open forum, allowing participants
to post related photos,
articles, links, questions, opinions and experiences.
Website development. In January 2012, the design and
construction of a website began in order
to facilitate the training of participants, collection of data, and
house the citizen science project.
First, other citizen science website workflows were examined and
features that best suited the
current project’s goals and needs were identified. Ultimately, the
website and workflow were
modeled loosely after those used by both the Philly Tree Map
(http://www.phillytreemap.org/) and
School of Ants (http://schoolofants.org) citizen science
projects. Administrators and developers of
these citizen science projects were contacted for advice on how to
build a website utilizing these
features. The features utilized by Native Buzz are
compared to those utilized by other citizen science
websites in Table 1 (Prestopnik and Crowston 2012a).
The website was built using Microsoft Visual Studio and the SQL
(Structured Query
Language) Server. The website was then hosted on the
entomology.ifas.ufl.edu server with the
domain name www.ufnativebuzz.com. Graphics and photos were created
or modified using Adobe
Photoshop. The main features incorporated into the website design
included an interactive ‘‘Buzz
Map,’’ participation methods, participant forms, a variety of
participant resources, and photo
galleries. The website was launched and immediately began accepting
participants in April 2012.
Website components. The use of online maps as graphical
databases representing the
monitoring results of citizen science projects has been suggested
in order to help increase
participant engagement and retention and to facilitate the
participants’ views of themselves as an
important part of a much larger research team (Delaney et al.
2008). With this in mind, a ‘‘Buzz
Map’’ was designed using the Google Maps/Earth engine. Each nest
site is represented on the map
with a clickable point (for private sites, i.e., in residential
back yards) or pin (for sites in public
areas). When the pin or point is selected, a small window appears
with a photo of the site (if
uploaded by the user) and links to information about the bee(s) or
wasp(s) found utilizing that
particular nest site (see Figure 1). This map was embedded on the
home page of the website. As
participants registered, they had the option to have their nest
site and associated data added to the
map or opt out of this feature and have their nest site and
associated data hidden from the map.
In order to provide participants with the most helpful tools for
this particular type of citizen
science project, a ‘‘Resources’’ tab was created leading to four
pages: Building Plans, ID Guides,
Library, and Suppliers. The ‘‘Building Plans’’ page provided
downloadable (or uploadable) do-it-
yourself building plans for different nest site types. The ‘‘ID
Guides’’ page provided links to
Native Buzz Graham et al.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 207
websites offering taxonomic identification assistance as well as
virtual and printable keys and
guides. The ‘‘Library’’ page provided images of the covers of a
wide range of reading material
which, when selected, opened a link to a site where that material
could be purchased or downloaded
for free and the ‘‘Suppliers’’ page offered a list of commercial
suppliers of nest sites and nest site
materials.
Participant submissions. The Native Buzz
artificial nest sites were intended to be easy for
participants of all skill levels and ages to build with readily
available and inexpensive or repurposed
nesting materials. Participants were provided with examples of nest
site types, instructions for
designing and building their own nest sites, and the option of
purchasing the nest sites from
commercial suppliers. Participants were encouraged to create nest
sites with tubes or tunnels with
entrances of various sizes, including small (3.18 mm), medium (4.76
mm) and large (9.53 mm) inside
diameters (ID), and tube lengths or tunnel depths between 7.6 mm to
20.3 mm. Beyond these
parameters, nest site design was left up to the participants. The
intent was for the process to be fun
from the beginning and allow the constructed nest sites to become a
form of creative expression for
the participants.
Table 1. Website features utilized by 27 other citizen science
websites as evaluated by Prestopnik
and Crowston (2012a) compared to features utilized by the UF Native
Buzz website (www.
ufnativebuzz.com).
Education 18 Yes
Team/Staff Information 16 Yes
Email List 5 Yes (Admin Only)
Participant Scores and Stats 5 Yes
Photo/Image Gallery 5 Yes
Calendar 2 No
Page Translation 2 No
Graham et al. Native Buzz
208 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
Participants were asked to monitor their nest site(s) on a weekly
basis to avoid missing data. A
monitoring event consisted of looking at the tunnels and tubes to
see if any nests were sealed (i.e.,
sealed with a substance such as mud or leaves, thus indicating a
completed nest), checking to see if
existing, sealed nests had produced emerging adults, and then
recording this data. A printable Data
Monitoring Form was provided to assist in data collection.
When a new, sealed nest was detected,
participants were asked to complete certain fields on the form to
create a label and then place the
label inside a collection vial. They were then asked to collect
adult bees and wasps as they emerged
from their nests using the collection instructions provided.
When a bee or wasp emerged from a nest, participants then completed
the remainder of the
monitoring form and included information such as the date the nest
was sealed, the date an adult
insect emerged, the type of material in which the nest was built,
the type of material used to seal the
Figure 1. A screen shot of the interactive ‘‘Buzz Map’’ showing a
portion of the map with pins and
points representing public and private sites, respectively. When a
point or pin is selected, a window
appears showing data contributed by the site owner.
Native Buzz Graham et al.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 209
nest, the inside diameter of the nest entrance, height of the nest
from the ground, and the species
name.
Participants were encouraged to consult the resources from the ID
Guides resource page to
determine the bee/wasp species, submit a photo of the emerging
insect to www.bugguide.net or a
similar identification website, and/or send in photos or overnight
frozen preserved specimens for
identification..
Forms were used to facilitate the transfer of data when
participants: (1) joined the project
using the Become a Buzz Watcher form, (2) registered
their nest site via the Register the Site form,
(3) uploaded data (Upload Data form), and (4) completed a
‘‘Questionnaire’’ to evaluate their use of
the website and supporting resources. The website was linked to a
database in such a way that an
administrator with limited coding knowledge could view and analyze
data through a password-
protected ‘‘Admin’’ panel on the website.
Launch and recruitment. In April 2012, the website and
citizen science project (www.
ufnativebuzz.com) was officially launched and recruitment began.
This launch was promoted
within Florida via presentations, workshops and other extension
activities. Promotion also
occurred via articles in local newspapers, online blogs, listservs,
newsletters, and features on local
television and radio stations. Contests were developed asking
participants to share their nest site
designs as a way to spread inspiration. Flyers were distributed at
local ‘‘nature’’ events and festivals
and sent to nest site suppliers, conservation groups and registered
project participants.
Support for the project was received from several external
organizations including Crown
Bees, Our Native Bees, the Xerces Society, Resonating Bodies, local
beekeeping clubs, gardening
clubs, and school groups. The support provided included donated
educational materials or nesting
materials, which were used as prizes to encourage recruitment and
participation, and sponsored
nest site building workshops and presentations.
Results
Three major outcomes were targeted for this project: (1)
determining the
distribution and number of nest sites created by participants; (2)
documenting
the types of participants, their motivations and their concerns;
and (3)
collecting data regarding the distribution, diversity, and nesting
preferences of
solitary bees and wasps.
Distribution and number of nest sites. By July 2014, project
participants
had designed, built and monitored 68 artificial nest sites. During
the two-year
study period, the sites collectively contained over 10,657
potential nests
constructed from a variety of materials and established within a
variety of
ecosystems. Select images of nest sites that were registered with
the website
and/or submitted via social media or email are provided to show the
variety of
nest site types (Figure 2).
For the 68 nest sites registered with the website, a variety of
nesting
materials were used including: (1) holes drilled in wood, (2)
hollow plant stems,
(3) ground nesting materials such as bare earth, piles of pebbles,
and holes
drilled in rock, clay, and (4) artificial materials such as metal
tubing, aquarium
tubing, paper, plastic, flower pots, and even an old CD tower.
Types of
habitats monitored by participants with registered nest sites
included golf
courses, city parks, coastal dunes, high desert, disturbed scrub,
xeric hardwood
pine, emergent wetlands, Northern Rocky Mountains, riparian forest,
agricul-
tural lands, fruit orchards, savannah, and coastal plains.
Graham et al. Native Buzz
210 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
Participant types, motivations and concerns. Between April
2012 and
July 2014, 268 individuals and 19 groups registered via the
Native Buzz website
for a combined membership of over 655 citizen science project
participants.
Participants were located in 30 Florida counties as well as 38
states and 10
Figure 2. A sample of the nest diversity provided by project
participants through both the
Facebook Page (www.facebook.com/nbnsproject) and the UF
Native Buzz website (www.
ufnativebuzz.com).
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 211
additional countries (Figures 3–5). More than half of the data
received were
from individual participants in Florida, which composed ,30%
of the
registered participant base.
Of the 170 participants who filled out the questionnaire, 34
participants
commented on the factors motivating them to participate in this
citizen science
project. Ten participants wanted to do something concrete to help
bees and
wasps. Nine participants wanted to use the project as a teaching
tool or an
opportunity for life-long learning. Another nine participants saw
the project as
a way to complement another related hobby such as gardening,
beekeeping
or agricultural production. Six participants viewed the project as
a fun or
interesting way to spend more time outside.
Participants were asked what resources they would like to have
available
on the website in the background section of the questionnaire. Of
the 170
people who completed a questionnaire, 76% were uncertain
about what
resources they wanted or left the answer blank. The resources that
the other 40
participants listed included: information about bees (6% of
all respondents),
Figure 3. Map showing the Florida county distribution of individual
participants registered at the
UF Native Buzz website (www.ufnativebuzz.com) as of
July 2014.
Graham et al. Native Buzz
212 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
information about insect identification (5%), links to similar
projects (2%),
building instructions (2%), photo guides (2%), region specific
information
(2%), video (1%), smart phone application (1%), links to supplies
(1%), access
to data (1%), and information about pollination (1%).
On the questionnaire, 170 participants were asked if they had any
concerns
when joining this project. Of the 69 participants who provided a
response to
this question, 79% had no concerns. For the other 21%, the
most common
concern (6% of all respondents) was time/lack of time, followed by
inability to
collect data (4%), and inability to identify insects (3%). Other
concerns
Figure 4. Map showing the national distribution of individual
participants registered at the UF
Native Buzz website (www.ufnativebuzz.com) as of July
2014.
Figure 5. Map showing the global distribution of individual
participants registered at the UF
Native Buzz website (www.ufnativebuzz.com) as of July
2014.
Native Buzz Graham et al.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 213
included lack of knowledge (2%), geographic constraints (2%),
privacy (1%),
aversion to killing insects (1%), no nesting (1%), lack of personal
commitment
(1%) and fear of stings (1%).
Distribution, diversity and nesting preferences of solitary
bees
and wasps. Insects found utilizing these nests included (1)
various bee species:
Megachile petulans, Megachile policaris, Megachile sculpturalis,
Xylopcopa spp.
Osmia cornuta; (2) multiple wasp species: Euodynerus
spp., Isodontia auripes,
Trypoxylon lactitarse; and (3) flies: Sarcophagidae. These insects
nested in bamboo,
Japanese knotweed, or holes drilled in wood with cavities having an
ID of 4.76 mm,
7.94 mm, 9.53 mm, or 11.1 mm.
Discussion
The large number of participants who registered with the website
and designed,
built and monitored artificial nest sites between April 2012 and
July 2014 is
promising. In addition, the large number of artificial nest sites
created by
project participants indicates that technology-based citizen
science projects
such as Native Buzz can lead to the successful
creation of artificial nesting
habitats for solitary bees and wasps and provide entomological
researchers
with a variety of useful data from monitoring of these nest
sites.
Positive impacts on solitary bees and wasps. The additional
nesting
habitat established as a result of this project has the potential
to impact solitary
bee and wasp conservation positively in several ways. First the
habitat itself is
important to solitary bees and wasps. The minimum habitat
requirements for
solitary bees and wasps include forage/prey, nest sites and nest
materials. Most
solitary bees have a relatively small forage range (between 150 m
and 1200 m)
in which to find all of these necessities (Gathmann and Tscharntke
2002).
Thus, nest site availability is likely a limiting factor for
solitary bees and wasps.
Citizen scientists could be contributing to the potential success
of these
beneficial insects simply by establishing artificial nest
sites.
Secondly, citizen science project participants who study beneficial
insect
habitats in their backyards are likely to share this experience
with their friends
and neighbors, who will then further spread the message of
conservation
(Oberhauser and Prysby 2008). Large or eye-catching nest sites in
public places
will likely attract even more attention and raise the curiosity of
others. The
hope is that this message will resonate beyond local participants
to the global
community, inspiring growers, natural resource managers, policy
makers,
educators, and others to design and build nest sites and contribute
to the
scientific knowledge of these beneficial insects.
Positive contributions to entomological research.
Documenting the
incredible variety of materials used by participants to create
their artificial
nest sites provides a great opportunity for researchers to study
which types of
artificial nest site materials are best suited for different
species of solitary bees
Graham et al. Native Buzz
214 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
and wasps. In addition, the wide variety of habitats and ecosystems
monitored
by participants with registered nest sites provides researchers
with opportu-
nities to determine the types of land-uses and habitats preferred
by different
types of solitary bees and wasps.
Positive impacts on participants. This type of citizen
science project has
the potential to increase participant knowledge regarding a variety
of content
topics, including solitary bee and wasp natural history,
pollination processes,
and biodiversity issues. Furthermore, the process of monitoring
nest sites
provides participants with opportunities to engage in authentic
learning
experiences that foster the development of key science process
skills including
observing, measuring, classifying, recording data, and making
inferences. Since
these experiences occur outdoors in backyards, parks, schoolyards
and
gardens, participants are also provided with opportunities for
direct, non-
destructive interactions with living organisms. Research has shown
that these
types of outdoor experiences with common wildlife species improve
wildlife-
related knowledge and attitudes (Howie 1974, Cronin-Jones 2000),
provide
mental and emotional health benefits and social benefits (Ungar et
al. 2005, Beard
and Wilson 2006), and yield beneficial physiological responses such
as reduced
blood pressure, reduced heart rate and increased cognition (Kellert
1993).
Additional learning opportunities exist. The relative docility of
solitary
bees and wasps offers an opportunity to replace irrational fears
and potential
phobias with an appreciation for the valuable ecosystem services
and intrinsic
value that these beneficial insects represent. This project offers
an excellent
opportunity to introduce the study of insects to participants in an
activity that
is as safe as gardening. The actions of designing, building,
monitoring and
maintaining an artificial nest habitat for solitary bees and wasps
provide
multiple opportunities for experiential learning and the cyclical
nature of
experiential learning can be reinforced through reevaluating the
nest site every
season and teaching others during the process (Beard and Wilson
2006,
Roberts 2006). Opportunities for discussing and reflecting on the
topics
associated with this project are provided through the Facebook
forum. Such
spontaneous discussions may lead to positive behavior changes or
practices of
participants even without direct, explicit instruction, such as
through a
reduction in pesticide use.
Future project recommendations. The UF Native Buzz
Citizen Scientist
project has developed a participant base through its website and
associated
Facebook page with local, national and international
representation. The
current level of participation indicates that the workflow of
registering the nest
site and uploading the data may need to be restructured in order to
maximize
the influx of data from registered participants. A more streamlined
website or a
smart phone application may be helpful. Alternatively, or in
conjunction,
participants may need additional rewards and satisfiers built into
the website in
order to encourage a more complete level of participation. This can
be
Native Buzz Graham et al.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 215
accomplished by providing a ‘‘gamification’’ of the tasks whereby
game theory
methods are introduced through adding levels, scores, badges, and
unlockable
content to motivate participants to progress through the steps of
participation
and reward them along the way (Prestopnik and Crowston
2012b).
It was somewhat of a surprise that 74% of participants
registered on the
website have earned a college degree and only 6% were under 18
years of age.
To reach a broader constituency, this project could be adapted and
tailored for
use with K-12 traditional and home school settings. Alternatively,
native bee
nest sites could be built in public places such as zoos, botanical
gardens, parks
and libraries. Educational programs then could be developed for
these nest
sites and kiosks could even be installed to allow visitors to input
data while
they observe the nest sites.
If successful over a large geographic range and as a long-term
monitoring
program, this project has the potential to lead to an increased
understanding of
the nest preferences and diversity of solitary bees and wasps in a
variety of
habitats and ecosystems. If maintained for several years, the
cumulative data
generated could provide insight into the response of solitary bee
and wasp
populations to environmental changes brought on by both natural
causes and
human intervention.
This citizen scientist project has the potential to be used as a
research tool
to address multiple issues related to solitary bees and wasps; for
instance, it
could act as a community-based monitoring system with the means to
track
non-native, invasive solitary bees, wasps and the pests and
parasites of both.
Furthermore, data collected on the population dynamics, dispersal
and life
histories of the solitary bees and wasps found could facilitate the
identification
of potentially managed crop pollinators or biological control
agents that could
be adapted to augment populations of other promising species (Batra
1998,
Bosch and Kemp 2002, Krunic and Stanisavljevic 2006). The resulting
data
could also be used to identify rare or declining populations that
could be
flagged for conservation management plans. Solitary bees and wasps
are
sensitive to environmental degradation and have been utilized as
biological
indicators whose overall health may represent the quality of the
environment in
which they live (Tylianakis et al. 2005, Loyola and Martins
2006).
This project provides a way for citizens to learn more about bees
and
wasps and be involved in conservation and ecological research.
Citizen science
provides a tool through which researchers can gather data from a
larger
geographic range and longer period of time than is possible via
traditional bee
and wasp survey projects. UF Native Buzz is still in
the early development
phase but seems a viable solution for solitary bee and wasp
research and
conservation efforts.
Acknowledgments We thank all of the citizen scientist
participants who shared their time, energy,
and feedback throughout this process. We thank the staff and
volunteers of the University of
Florida Honey Bee Research and Extension Laboratory, as well as
Steve Lasley, Jane Medley, Kay
Weigel, Jennifer L. Gillett-Kaufman, T. Grady Roberts, H. Glenn
Hall, Jaret C. Daniels, Rebecca
Graham et al. Native Buzz
216 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences
W. Baldwin and James Colee for their technical expertise, input,
and feedback. We thank Crown
Bees, Our Native Bees, the Xerces Society, Ethnobeeology,
Pollinator Plates, Resonating Bodies,
and the Campaign for Solitary Bees for their overall support in
promoting this project.
References
Batra SWT. 1998. Management of hornfaced bees for orchard
pollination. University of Idaho,
Moscow.
Beard C, Wilson JP. 2006. Experiential Learning: A Best Practice
Handbook for Educators and
Trainers. Kogan Page Limited, Philadelphia.
Bosch J, Kemp WP. 2002. Developing and establishing bee species as
crop pollinators: the example
of Osmia spp. (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) and fruit trees. Bulletin
of Entomological
Research 92:3–16.
resource-poor country. BioScience 59:103–104.
Cane JH. 2008. Bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Apiformes). Pp. 419–434
in In Capinera JL, ed.
Encyclopedia of Entomology, Volume 2. Springer Verlag,
Dordrecht.
Catlin-Groves CL. 2012. The citizen science landscape: from
volunteers to citizen sensors and
beyond. International Journal of Zoology 2012, 1–14.
Cronin-Jones LL. 2000. The effectiveness of schoolyards as sites
for elementary science instruction.
School Science and Mathematics 100:203–209.
Delaney DG, Sperling CD, Adams CS, Leung B. 2008. Marine invasive
species: validation of
citizen science and implications for national monitoring networks.
Biological Invasions
10:117–128.
Deyrup M, Edirisinghe J, Norden B. 2002. The diversity and floral
hosts of bees at the Archbold
Biological Station, Florida (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Insecta Mundi
16:87–120.
Dickenson JL, Shirk J, Bonter D, Bonney R, Crain RL, Martin J,
Phillips T, Purcell K. 2012. The
current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research
and public engagement.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10:291–297.
Evans HE, Eberhard MJW. 1970. The Wasps. The University of Michigan
Press. Ann Arbor.
Gathmann A, Tscharntke T. 2002. Foraging ranges of solitary bees.
Journal of Animal Ecology
71:757–764.
Graenicher S. 1930. Bee-fauna and vegetation of the Miami region of
Florida. Annals of the
Entomological Society of America 23:153–174.
Graham JR. 2014. Monitoring tunnel nesting, solitary bees and wasps
in North Central Florida
using artificial nesting habitats. PhD Dissertation. University of
Florida, Gainesville.
Greenwood JJD. 2007. Citizens, science and bird conservation.
Journal of Ornithology 148:S77–
S124.
Hall HG, Ascher JS. 2010. Surveys of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea:
Anthophilla) in natural areas
of Alachua County in North-Central Florida. Florida Entomologist
93:609–629.
Hall HG, Ascher JS. 2011. Surveys of wild bees (Hymenoptera:
Apoidea: Anthophilla) in organic
farms of Alachua County in North-Central Florida. Florida
Entomologist 94:539–552.
Hochachka WM, Fink D, Hutchinson RA, Sheldon D, Wong WK, Kelling S.
2012. Data-intensive
science applied to broad-scale citizen science. Trends in Ecology
and Evolution 27:130–137.
Howie TR. 1974. Indoor or outdoor environmental education? Journal
of Environmental
Education 21:32–36.
Irwin A. 1995. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and
Sustainable Development.
Routledge, London.
Kellert SR. 1993. The biological basis for human values of nature.
Pp. 42–67 in Kellert SR, Wilson
EO, eds. The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island Press, Washington,
DC.
Krombein KV. 1967. Trap-nesting Wasps and Bees: Life Histories,
Nests, and Associates.
Smithsonian Press, Washington.
Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences 217
Krunic M, Stanisavljevic L. 2006. Augmentation of managed
populations of Osmia cornuta and
O. rufa (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) in Southeastern Europe.
European Journal of
Entomology 103:695–697.
Losey JE, Perlman JE, Hoebeke ER. 2007. Citizen scientist
rediscovers rare nine-spotted lady
beetle, Coccinella novemnotata, in eastern North America.
Journal of Insect Conservation
11:415–417.
Loyola RD, Martins RP. 2006. Trap-nest occupation by solitary wasps
and bees (Hymenoptera:
Aculeata) in a forest urban remnant. Neotropical Entomology
35:41–48.
Matos MCB, Sousa-Souto L, Almeida RS, Teodoro AV. 2013. Contrasting
patterns of species
richness and composition of solitary wasps and bees (Insecta:
Hymenoptera) according to
land-use. Biotropica 45:73–79.
Oberhauser KS, Prysby MD. 2008. Citizen science: creating a
research army for conservation.
American Entomologist 54:103–105.
O’Neill KM. 2001. Solitary Wasps: Behavior and Natural History.
Cornell University Press,
Ithaca.
Pascerella JB, Waddington KD, Neal PR. 1999. The Bee Fauna
(Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of
Everglades National Park, Florida and adjacent areas: distribution,
phenology, and
biogeography. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society
72:32–45.
Prestopnik NR, Crowston K. 2012a. Citizen science system
assemblages: understanding the
technologies that support crowdsourced science. Pp. 168–176
in Proceedings of the 2012
iConference.
Prestopnik NR, Crowston K. 2012b. Purposeful gaming &
socio-computational systems: a citizen
science design case. Pp. 75–84 in Proceedings of the
17th ACM International Conference on
Supporting group work.
Roberts TG. 2006. A philosophical examination of experiential
learning theory for agricultural
educators. Journal of Agricultural Education 47:17–29.
Serrano D. 2006. Biology, ecology, behavior, parasitoids and
response to prescribed fire of cavity
nesting hymenoptera in North Central Florida. PhD Dissertation,
University of Florida,
Gainesville.
Spevak EM. 2012. A is for apiculture, B is for bee, C is for
colony-collapse disorder, P is for
pollinator parks: an A to Z overview of what insect
conservationists can learn from the bees.
Pp. 76–94 in Lemelin RH, ed. The Management of
Insects in Recreation and Tourism.
Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Spradbery JP. 1973. Wasps: An account of the biology and natural
history of solitary and social
wasps. University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Tylianakis JM, Klein AM, Tscharntke T. 2005. Spatiotemporal
variation in the diversity of
hymenoptera across a tropical habitat gradient. Ecology
86:3296–3302.
Ungar M, Dumond C, Mcdonald W. 2005. Risk, resilience and outdoor
programmes for at-risk
children. Journal of Social Work 5:319–338.
Submitted: July 11, 2014
Accepted: August 4, 2014
218 Florida Scientist 77(4) 2014 Florida Academy of
Sciences