Exclude introduced European earwigs from nest sites

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Study locations

Key messages

In California, USA, a replicated controlled trial showed that numbers of introduced European earwigs Forficula auricularia resting in solitary bee nest boxes can be reduced using a sticky barrier Tanglefoot. This treatment increased the use of the boxes by native bees.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

Thirty drilled pine wood solitary bee nest boxes were suspended from 15 valley oak trees Quercus lobata on the Cosumnes River Preserve, near Sacramento, Caifornia, USA, in 1990 (Barthell et al. 1998). The boxes each had twelve 10 cm-deep holes, 0.65 cm in diameter. Boxes were placed in pairs. One on each tree excluded crawling earwigs Forficula auricularia using the sticky barrier Tanglefoot. The treatment substantially reduced the number of earwigs found in the boxes and allowed a greater total number of bee cells (during the peak bee nesting week, there were 134 cells in boxes with Tanglefoot, 45 cells in untreated boxes). The majority of nesting bees in this study were native species of the leafcutter bee genera Megachile and Osmia although introduced species of Megachile were also present.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Barthell J.F., Gordon W.F. & Thorp R.W. (1998) Invader effects in a community of cavity nesting Megachilid bees (Hymenoptera: Megachildae). Environmental Entomology, 27, 240-247.

Please cite as:

Dicks, L.V., Showler, D.A. & Sutherland, W.J. (2010) Bee conservation: evidence for the effects of interventions. Pelagic Publishing, Exeter, UK

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bee Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Ensure commercial hives/nests are disease free Action Link	Awaiting assessment	2	Synopsis Link
Control deployment of hives/ nests Action Link	Awaiting assessment	0	Synopsis Link
Keep pure breeding populations of native honey bee subspecies Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link