Apifloristic diversity in the eastern Mediterranean region: implications for biodiversity conservation and use
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2298/ABS230331018TKeywords:
Apiflora, plant conservation, endemic species, plant diversity, TürkiyeAbstract
Paper description:
- Honey plants around the world are well known. However, there is no information about the link between the apifloral diversity and endemism in the Eastern Mediterranean honeybee forests.
- 78 sample plots assigned to 10 honeybee forests scattered in different elevations and districts of Mersin were studied.
- A total of 511 plant species were identified, of which 334 were melliferous and 50 were endemic.
- Honeybee forests in the Eastern Mediterranean differed in terms of apifloral diversity and endemism, especially according to elevation and district criteria. Higher elevations showed a more diverse and more nectar-rich plant distribution.
Abstract: The ecological role of honeybees in the world and their value for sustainable agriculture and food industry are more important than ever. For this reason, we study the apiflora in the eastern Mediterranean region of Türkiye in the context of planning bee forests aimed at biodiversity conservation. The results show that honeybee forests are quite rich in both endemism and apifloristic diversity. A total of 511 plant taxa belonging to 264 genera and 59 families were identified, of which 335 (65%) taxa were evaluated as nectar (N) and/or pollen (P) bearing honey plants (45 N, 54 P, and 236 N&P). In terms of apiflora, the richest families are Fabaceae (n=76, 3 N, 73 N&P), Lamiaceae (n=57, 19 N, 38 N&P) and Asteraceae (n=44, 1 N, 10 P, 33 N&P). Nectariferous plants were more common at higher elevations, while polleniferous plants were more common at lower elevations. According to the Shannon-Wiener diversity index, the highest diversity values were found in honeybee forests at higher elevations and the lowest diversity values at lower elevations. Sorensen analysis also showed that floristic similarities among honeybee forests ranged from 1% to 42%. Cluster analysis supported these differences by dividing the forests into two separate groups.
Downloads
References
Fluri P, Frick R. Honeybee losses during mowing of flowering fields. Bee World. 2002;83(3):109-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.2002.11099550
Potts SG, Roberts SPM, Dean R, Marris G, Brown MA, Jones R, Neumann P, Settele J. Declines of managed honeybees and beekeepers in Europe. J Apic Res. 2010;49(1):15-22. https://doi.org/10.3896/IBRA.1.49.1.02
Cakmak I, Sevencakmak S. Beekeeping and recent colony losses in Turkey. Uludag Bee J. 2016;16(1):31-48.
Gray A, Adjlane N, Arab A, Ballis A, Brusbardis V, Charriere J-D, Robert Chlebo R, Coffey MF, Cornelissen B, Amaro da Costa C, Dahle B, Danihlík J, Drazic MM, Fedoriak M, Forsythe I, Gajda A, de Graaf DC, Gregorc A, Ilieva I, Johannesen J, Kauko L, Kristiansen P, Martikkala M, Martín-Hernandez R, Medina-Flores CA, Mutinelli F, Patalano S, Raudmets A, San Martin G, Soroker V, Stevanovic J, Uzunov A, Vejsnaes F, Williams A, Zammit-Mangion M, Brodschneider R. Honey bee colony winter loss rates for 35 countries participating in the COLOSS survey for winter 2018-2019, and the effects of a new queen on the risk of colony winter loss. J Apic Res. 2020;59(5):744-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2020.1797272
Karkar B, Sahin S, Gunes ME. Evaluation of antioxidant properties and determination of phenolic and carotenoid profiles of chestnut bee pollen collected from Turkey. J Apic Res. 2020;60(5):765-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2020.1844462
Hill DB, Webster TC. Apiculture and forestry (bees and trees). Agrofor Syst. 1995:29(3):313-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00704877
Sande SO, Crewe RM, Raina S, Nicolson SW, Gordon I. Proximity to a forest leads to higher honey yield: Another reason to conserve. Biol Conserv. 2009;142(11):2703-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.06.023
G.D.F. General Directory of Forestry. Honey forest action plan (2013-2017). Ankara: General Directorate of Forestry OGM Publications; 2013. 133 p.
Jaric S, Macukanovic-Jocic M, Mitrovic M, Pavlovic P. The melliferous potential of forest and meadow plant communities on Mount Tara (Serbia). Environ Entomol. 2013;42(4):724-32. https://doi.org/10.1603/en13031
Griazkin AV, Samsonova ID, Belyaeva NV, Belyaev VV, Gutal M, Feklistov PA. Potential of forest melliferous resources of northwest Russia. Hortic Int J. 2018;2(6):390-4. https://doi.org/10.15406/hij.2018.02.00082
Kohl PL, Rutschmann B. The neglected bee trees: European beech forests as a home for feral honey bee colonies. Peer J. 2018;6:e4602. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4602
Requier F, Paillet Y, Laroche F, Rutschmann B, Zhang J, Lombardi F, Svoboda M, Steffan-Dewenter I. Contribution of European forests to safeguard wild honeybee populations. Conserv Lett. 2020;13:e12693. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12693
G.D.F. General Directory of Forestry. Forest asset of Turkey. Ankara: General Directorate of Forestry, OGM Publications; 2020. 57 p.
Kaya Z, Raynal DJ. Biodiversity and conservation of Turkish forests. Biol Conserv. 2001;97(2):131-41.
Colak AH, Kırca S, Roth IR. Restoration and rehabilitation of deforested and degraded forest landscapes in Turkey. Ankara: Ministry of Environment and Forestry; 2010. 566 p.
Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015;42(5):533-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Mersin R.D.F. Hatice Bulut, Karabucak, Eskişehirtepe, Ardıçalan, Ağaçkese, Arpaalanı, Kavaközü, Şehit Piyade Teğmen Ahmet Tor. Kurucaoluk honey forests projects. Ankara: General Directorate of Forestry, Mersin Forest Regional Directorate, OGM Publications; 2013. Turkish.
Everest A, Rauss T. Investigations flora in Mersin: Kozlar highplateau of south Turkey. Pak J Biol Sci. 2004;7(5):802-11. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2004.802.811
Ture C, Bocuk H. Distribution patterns of threatened endemic plants in Turkey: A quantitative approach for conservation. J Nat Conserv. 2010;18(4):296-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2010.01.002
Yıldıztugay E, Kucukoduk M. The flora of Kaş plateau and its surroundings (Anamur-Mersin/Turkey). Biodivers Conserv. 2010;3(2):170-84.
Senkul C, Kaya S. Geographical distribution of endemic plants of Turkey. Türk Coğr Derg. 2017;69:109-20. Turkish. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.322515
Topal A, Palabas Uzun S, Uzun A. Geophyte plant richness in Mersin province. Turk J For Sci. 2022;6(1):229-54. Turkish. https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.1080329
Korkmaz A, Ozturk C. The structure, problems and solution proposals of beekeeping in Mersin province. Alatarım. 2003;2(2):53-8. Turkish.
Ozturk MZ, Cetinkaya G, Aydın S. Climate types of Turkey according to Köppen-Geiger climate classification. J Geog. 2017;35(1):17-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG295515
G.D.M. General directorate of meteorology of Turkey. [Internet]. 2022. [cited 2021 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.mgm.gov.tr
Eraslan I. Orman Amenajmanı. Istanbul: Istanbul University, Faculty of Forestry Publications; 1971;1945/169. 488 p. Turkish.
Davis PH. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Island. Vol.1-9. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1965-1985. 6454 p.
Davis PH, Mill RR, Tan K. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands. Vol. 10, Supplement 1. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1988. 590 p.
Guner A, Ozhatay N, Ekim T, Baser KHC. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands, Vol. XI, Supplement II. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 2000. 680 p.
Guner A, Aslan S, Ekim T, Vural M, Babac MT, editors. Plant List of Turkey (Vascular Plants). Istanbul: Nezahat Gokyigit Botanical Garden and Flora Research Association, 2012. 1290 p.
Ekim T, Koyuncu M, Vural M, Duman H, Aytac Z, Adıguzel N. Red data book of Turkish plants. Ankara: Barıscan Press, 2000. 246 p. Turkish.
I.U.C.N. Guidelines for using the IUCN red list categories and criteria. Version 15.1. [Internet]. 2022. 114 p. [cited 2022 Mar 15]. Available from: https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/redlistguidelines
Thiers B. Index herbariorum: A global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. [Internet]. New York: New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium. 2022. [cited 2022 Oct 10]. Available from: https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/
Allen-Wardell G, Bernhardt P, Bitner R, Burquez A, Buchmann S, Cane J, Cox PA, Dalton V, Feinsinger P, Ingram M, Inouye D, Jones CE, Kennedy K. The potential consequences of pollinator declines on the conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields. Conserv Biol. 1998;12(1):8-17. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.97154.x
Baydar H, Guler F. Pollen collecting activity, pollen preference and morphological and quality characteristics of different pollen types of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) in the natural flora of Antalya. Turk J Agric For. 1998;22(5):475-82. Turkish.
Karaca H, Koseoglu M, Boz O. Plants used by honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) as nectar and pollen sources in Aydın, Karpuzlu-Cine district. ADU Ziraat Fak Derg. 2006;3(1):21-6. Turkish.
Karaca A. In the district of Aydın some beneficial plants using by honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) and their characteristics. ADU Ziraat Fak Derg. 2008;5(2):39-66. Turkish.
Sorkun K. Turkey’s nectar plants, pollen and honeys. Ankara: Palme Press; 2008. 341 p. Turkish.
Sorkun K, Dogan C. A study on the flowering periods and distribution areas of nectar plants. Tekn Arıcılık. 1994;44:2-11. Turkish.
Kolaylı S, Aliyazıcıoglu R, Ulusoy E, Karaoglu S. Antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of selected Turkish honeys. J Biol Chem. 2008;36(2):163-72.
Ozhatay N, Kocyigit M, Bona M. Istanbul's honey plants “When there is a flower, there is honey". İstanbul: Turkmenler Press, BAL-DER Healthy living platform association with bee products; 2012. 264 p. Turkish.
Erbar C. Nectar secretion and nectaries in basal angiosperms, magnoliids and non-core eudicots and a comparison with core eudicots. Plant Divers Evol. 2014;131(2):63-143. https://doi.org/10.1127/1869-6155/2014/0131-0075
Bagella S, Satta A, Floris I, Caria MC, Rossetti I, Podani J. Effects of plant community composition and flowering phenology on honeybee foraging in Mediterranean sylvo-pastoral systems. Appl Veg Sci. 2013;16(4):689-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12023
Cocen E, Toprak OE, Atay S, Pala M, Murathan I. The blooming periods of dominant honey plant species on the floras of the villages in Gümüşhane central district. Gümüşhane Univ Fen Bilim Enst Derg. 2014;4(2):126-33. Turkish. https://doi.org/10.17714/gufbed.2014.04.010
Ozkan NG, Aksoy N, Degirmenci AS. Honey plants of Hasanlar dam (Düzce-Yığılca) and its surroundings. Orman Derg. 2016;12(2):44-65. Turkish.
Meurgey F. Bee species and their associated flowers in the French West Indies (Guadeloupe, Les Saintes, La Désirade, Marie Galante, St Barthelemy and Martinique) (Hymenoptera: Anthophila: Apoidea). Ann Soc Entomol Fr. 2016;52(4):209-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00379271.2016.1244490
Akunne CE, Akpan AU, Ononye BU. A Checklist of nectariferous and polleniferous plants of African honeybees (Apis mellifera adansonii L.) in Awka, Nigeria J Apic. 2016;31(4):379-87. https://doi.org/10.17519/apiculture.2016.11.31.4.379
Yıldız S, Fakir H. Potential plant species for honey production forests: Isparta Keçiborlu Güneykent honey production forest case. Bilge Int J Sci Tech Res. 2019;3(2):213-22.
McAleece N, Gage JDG, Lambshead PJD, Paterson GLJ. BioDiversity professional statistics analysis software. [Internet]. London: Jointly developed by the Scottish Association for Marine Science and the Natural History Museum; 1997. [cited 2022 Oct 11]. Available from: https://www.sams.ac.uk/science/outputs/
Sorensen TA. A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species content, and its application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. Biol Skr. 1948;5(4):1-34.
Fırat SU. Cluster Analysis: Comparison of European Countries in terms of Sectoral Structure of Employment. I.U. Sos Bil Derg. 1997;3(2):50-9. Turkish.
Bradbear N. Bees and their role in forest livelihoods: A guide to the services provided by bees and the sustainable harvesting, processing and marketing of their products. [Internet]. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Non-Wood Forest Products 19, 2009. [cited 2022 Oct 11]. Available from: http://www.fao.org/3/i0842e/i0842e00.pdf
Ozler H. Melissopalynological analysis of honey samples belonging to different districts of Sinop, Turkey. Mellifera. 2015;15(1):1-11.
El Abidi N, El Shatshat S. Qualitative criteria of the endemic Arbutus pavarii Pamp. Libyan honey. EPRA Int J Res Dev. 2017;2(1):132-5.
Gungor E, Sen G. Selecting suitable forest areas for honey production using the ahp: A case study in Turkey. Cerne. 2018;24(1):67-79. https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201824012511
Sıralı R, Deveci M. Investigation of the important bee (Apis mellifera L.) plants in Thrace region. Uludağ Arıcılık Derg. 2002;2(1):17-26. Turkish.
Deveci M, Sıralı R, Demirkol G. The Important nectarian and pollen plant species for honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) in province of Ordu rangelands. Türk Bil Der Derg. 2012;5(2):45-8. Turkish.
Karakose M, Polat R, Rahman MO, Cakılcıoglu U. Traditional honey production and bee flora of Espiye, Turkey. Bangladesh J Plant Taxon. 2018;25(1):79-91. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjpt.v25i1.37184
Onyango P, Nyunja R, Opande G, Sikolia SF. Inventory, reward value and diversity of Apis mellifera nectariferous and polleniferous forage in eastern Mau forest, Kenya. Int J Sci Res. 2019;9(2):55-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.9.02.2019.p8608
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Ali Topal, Alper Uzun, Osman Polat
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
