Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1999. 44:183–206
Copyright c ? 1999 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved
THE ROLE OF STINGLESS BEES
IN CROP POLLINATION
Tim A. Heard
CSIRO Entomology, PMB 3 Indooroopilly 4068, Australia;
KEY WORDS:Apidae, Meliponini, floral biology, alternative pollinators, entomophily
Stingless bees (Apidae: Meliponini) are common visitors to flowering plants in
the tropics, but evidence for their importance and effectiveness as crop pollina-
tors is lacking for most plant species. They are known to visit the flowers of ∼90
crop species. They were confirmed to be effective and important pollinators of
9 species. They may make a contribution to the pollination of ∼60 other species,
but there is insufficient information to determine their overall effectiveness or
importance. They have been recorded from another 20 crops, but other evidence
suggests that they do not have an important role because these plants are pol-
linated by other means. The strengths and limitations of stingless bees as crop
pollinators are discussed. Aspects of their biology that impact on their potential
for crop pollination are reviewed, including generalized flower visiting behavior
of colonies, floral constancy of individual bees, flight range, and the importance
of natural vegetation for maintaining local populations.
found in tropical and many subtropical parts of the world. They are the major
visitors of many flowering plants in the tropics. They show a level of social
organization comparable to that of honey bees (131). Colonies are perennial
and usually consist of hundreds or thousands of workers (160).
The estimated several hundred species of stingless bees are arranged into
21 genera (79). The rank of the group has varied but recently has been placed
attribe(122). ThemostimportantgeneraareMeliponaandTrigona. Melipona
consists of ∼50 species, is confined to the neotropics, has more complex com-
grains by vibration of the pollen-bearing anthers of flowers that dehisce pollen
through pores) (24). Trigona is the largest and most widely distributed genus,
with ∼130 species in ∼10 subgenera, including the neotropical Trigona sensu
stricto and most of the Asian Meliponini.
It is often stated that stingless bees are important pollinators of crops in
tropical and subtropical parts of the world (29,37,77,78,158). The evidence
for these assertions has never been reviewed. Reviews on the role of non-Apis
bees in crop pollination mention stingless bees either briefly (19,93,97) or not
at all (121,147). Books on crop pollination by insects treat the topic in a little
more detail (37,77,125). This neglect probably reflects a lack of knowledge
rather than a lack of importance.
The use and management of non-Apis bees and other insects for crop polli-
nation is important because of the almost total reliance of world agriculture on
honey bees. In many locations and for many crops, the ability of honey bees to
pollinate is threatened or limited because of factors such as Africanization, dis-
eases and parasites, low efficiency on some crop species, climatic limitations,
and economic pressures (93).
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF STINGLESS
BEES FOR CROP POLLINATION
Many characteristics of stingless bees resemble those of honey bees. Some of
adaptability, which enable them to pollinate multiple plant species and adapt
to new ones (see below for references); (b) floral constancy: A worker on a
trip usually visits only one plant species (108); (c) domestication: Colonies
can be placed in hives, inspected, propagated, fed, requeened, controlled for
enemies, transported, and otherwise managed (91); (d) perennial colonies,
which allow workers to forage continuously within climatic constraints and
obviate the need to develop colonies each year; (e) large food reserves are
stored in nests: This has the obvious benefit of allowing colonies to survive
long periods of low food availability. Additionally, it means that workers will
of preferred flowers (129); (f) possibility of in-hive pollen transfer, decreasing
the need for bee movement between plants of self-incompatible species: This
has been found for honey bees (30) and is equally likely for stingless bees;
and provide information on the position of those floral resources, which allows
the rapid deployment of large numbers of foragers (88) relative to other bees
and insects in which each individual has to find the resource.
CROP POLLINATION BY STINGLESS BEES
Unlike honey bees, stingless bees have the following advantages: They are
generally less harmful to humans and domesticated animals; they are able to
forage effectively in glasshouses (63); propagation of colonies contributes to
preservation of biodiversity by conserving populations of species that may
able to abscond, as the old queen is flightless (57); and they are resistant to the
diseases and parasites of honey bees (31). Thus a honey bee epizootic that
disrupted pollination would not effect the stingless bees in that system.
Disadvantages of stingless bees for crop pollination include the following:
of availability of large numbers of hives; colony growth rates are low compared
nesting requirements; some species damage leaves in search of resin (25,158);
and some species are territorial and fight when placed in close proximity.
ASPECTS OF THE BIOLOGY OF STINGLESS
BEES RELEVANT TO POLLINATION
The biology of the stingless bees has been reviewed (78,124,130,160) but
never from the perspective of crop pollination. Aspects of the foraging biology
of stingless bees that are pertinent to this topic are reviewed here. Several other
relevant topics including foraging syndromes, navigation, forager recruitment,
response to weather, floral larceny, and diet and seasonal patterns of activity
are reviewed by Roubik (124).
Stingless bees are generalist flower visitors. All studied species visit a broad
range of plant species. For example, Hypotrigona pothieri used 54 species in
28 families (69), Melipona marginata used 173 species in 38 families (67), and
Melipona favosa visited 38 species in 26 families (34). The number of plant
species visited for nectar may be higher than the number visited for pollen
preferences (67,69,109,128). Stingless bees are adaptable, rapidly learning
to exploit the resources offered by introduced plants. For example, neotrop-
ical stingless bees heavily use the introduced Eucalyptus spp. (43,67). Few
generalizations can be made regarding the plant or flower type preferred by
stingless bees, but it has been suggested they prefer small flowers (161), dense
inflorescences (128), flowers with corolla tubes shorter than the bee’s tongues
(50), flowers with long corolla tubes that are wide enough for the bees to enter
(34), trees (67,109,110), and white or yellow flowers (27).
Floral constancy, in which a worker visits only one plant species on a single
trip, is typical of many polyphagous bees (33). In Brazil, 97% of the pollen
foragers of nine species of stingless bees visited only one floral resource on
each trip, as evidenced by the pure pollen loads in their corbiculae (108). Floral
constancy is associated with pollinator effectiveness, as collection and deposi-
tion of pollen from two or more species reduces the amount of pollen available
and contaminates stigmas with the wrong pollen. In addition to floral species
constancy, foragers normally show resource constancy to either nectar, pollen,
or resin within a single trip and usually between successive trips (58,141).
In addition to records of use of many plants by stingless bees, they have been
ples of these studies were conducted at the community and individual species
levels. Of 41 plant species investigated in the forest understory in Sarawak,
9 were pollinated by stingless bees (64). In the lowland neotropics, all of the
less bee species may have benefited directly from pollination services of these
bees (123). At the species level, stingless bees are the confirmed pollinators of
many plants on the basis of experimentation or observation. Trigona spp. were
intermedium growing in the understory of Malaysian rainforests (8). Another
sapindaceous rainforest understory tree in Costa Rica, Cupania guatemalensis,
is also pollinated by Trigona spp. (14). Trigona bees were shown to be ef-
fective pollinators of Spathiphyllum friedrichsthalii (83). Of the 13 Australian
epiphytic orchids whose pollinators are confirmed, 9 are pollinated by sting-
less bees (3). Partamona grandipennispollinates the monoecious herb Begonia
involucra in Costa Rica (5). Trigona spinipes pollinates Nymphaea ampla in
Brazil (103), and Trigona sp. pollinates Ondinea purpurea in Australia (133).
Illegitimate use of flowers by stingless bees in which they remove resources
habitats (124) and agroecosystems (4,132).
Although many species of stingless bees adapt to artificial nest sites, natural
vegetation can influence abundance of stingless bees. Abundance of Trigona
carbonaria in orchards of macadamia is correlated with extent of surrounding
natural eucalyptus vegetation (48). All surveyed chayote fields in Costa Rica
had Trigona bees present, except for two fields with no surrounding forest for
was found to decrease with distance from an adjoining forest (20). Stingless
bees were common visitors to flowers of cupua¸ cu growing near primary forest
in Amazonian Brazil but were absent in disturbed habitats, which suggests that
bee populations are dependent on the primary forest (153).
population size (141). The actual foraging distance also depends on the attrac-
and availability of alternative resources. Using a mark-release technique, the
maximum flight range of Cephalotrigona capitata and Melipona panamica in
tropicalforestwasestimatedtobe1.5and2.1km, respectively(127). Captured
da cultura do girassol (Helianthus an-
nuus L.) em Piracicaba, SP. Zootecnia
86. Nadel H, Pe˜ na JE. 1994. Identity, be-
havior, and efficacy of nitidulid beetles
(Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) pollinating
commercial Annona species in Florida.
Environ. Entomol. 23:878–86
87. Nelson BW, Absy ML, Barbosa EM,
Prance GT. 1985. Observations on
flower visitors to Bertholletia excelsa
H.B.K. and Couratari tenuicarpa A.C.
Sm. (Lecythidaceae). Acta Amazon.
88. Nieh JC, Roubik DW. 1995. A stingless
location without using a scent trail. Be-
hav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 37:63–70
89. Deleted in proof
90. Nogueira-Couto RH, Costa JA, Silveira
RCM, Couto LA. 1992. Poliniza¸ c˜ ao de
Crotalaria juncea por abelhas nativas.
91. Nogueira-Neto P. 1997. Vida e Criac ¸˜ ao
de Abelhas Ind´ ıgenas sem Ferr˜ ao. S˜ ao
Paulo: Ed. Nogueirapis
92. Nogueira-Neto P, Carvalho A, Antunes
H. 1959. Efeito da exclus˜ ao dos inse-
tos pollinizadores na produ¸ c˜ ao do caf´ e
bourbon. Bragantia 18:441–68
ARC. 1984. Contribui¸ c˜ ao ao estudo da
reprodu¸ c˜ ao e biologia floral de Jatropha
gossypifolia L. (Euphorbiaceae). Rev.
Brasil Biol. 44:159–67
94. O’Toole C. 1993. Diversity of native
bees and agroecosystems. In Hymenop-
tera and Biodiversity, ed. J LaSalle, ID
Gauld, pp. 169–96. Wallingford, UK:
95. Pande YD, Bandyopadhyay S. 1985.
The foraging behaviour of honey bees
on flowers of pigeon pea (Cajanus ca-
jan) in Agartala, Tripura. Indian Bee J.
96. Pandey RS, Yadava RPS. 1970. Polli-
nation of litchi (Litchi chinensis) by in-
(Apis spp.) in India. J. Apic. Res. 9:103–
97. Parker FD, Batra SWT, Tepedino VJ.
1987. New pollinators for our crops.
Agric. Zool. Rev. 2:279–304
98. Pereira-Noronha MR, Gottsberger I,
Gottsberger G. 1982. Biologia floral de
Stylosanthes (Fabaceae) no serrado de
Botacatu, estado de S˜ ao Paulo. Rev.
Brasil. Biol. 42:595–605
99. Peters C, Vasquez A. 1986. Estudios
ecol´ ogicos de camu-camu (Myrciaria
dubia) I. Producci´ on de frutas en pobla-
ciones naturales. Acta Amazon. 16–17:
100. Phoon A, Suhaimi A, Marshall A. 1984.
The pollination of some Malaysian
fruit trees. Simp. Biol. Kebangsaan,
1st, Kebangsaan, pp. 87–111. Selangor
101. Phoon ACG. 1985. Pollination and
fruit production of carambola, Aver-
rhoa carambola, in Malaysia. Proc. Int.
Conf. Apic. Trop. Climat., 3rd , Nairobi,
Kenya, London: Int. Bee Res. Inst.
102. Prance GT. 1985. The pollination of
Amazonian plants. In Key Environ-
ments: Amazonia, ed. GT Prance, TE
Lovejoy, pp. 166–91. Cambridge: Perg-
103. Prance GT, Anderson AB. 1976. Stud-
ies on the floral biology of neotropical
104. Purseglove J. 1968. Tropical Crops: Di-
cotyledons. London: Longman
105. Purseglove J. 1972. Tropical Crops Mo-
nocotyledons. London: Longman
106. Radford B, Nielsen R, Rhodes J. 1979.
Agents of pollination in sunflower crops
on the central Darling Downs, Queens-
land. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb.
107. Rama Devi K, Atluri JB, Subba Reddi
mauritiana (Rhamnaceae). Proc. Indian
Acad. Sci. Plant Sci. 99:223–39
108. Ramalho M, Giannini TC, Malagodi-
Pollen harvest by stingless bee foragers
(Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponinae).
109. Ramalho M, Imperatriz-Fonseca VL,
rino M. 1985. Exploitation of floral re-
sources by Plebeia remota Holmberg
(Apidae, Meliponinae). Apidologie 16:
110. Ramalho M, Kleinert-Giovannini A,
Imperatriz-Fonseca VL. 1989. Utiliza-
tion of floral resources by species of
Melipona (Apidae, Meliponinae): floral
preferences. Apidologie 20:185–95
111. Ram´ ırez BW, G´ omez PL. 1978. Pro-
duction of nectar and gums by flowers
of Monstera deliciosa (Araceae) and of
some species of Clusia (Guttiferae) col-
lected by New World Trigona bees. Bre-
112. Rao GM, Lazar M, Suryanarayana MC.
1981. Foraging behaviour of honeybees
Bee J. 43:97–100
113. Rao GM, Suryanarayana MC. 1989.
CROP POLLINATION BY STINGLESS BEES
Effect of honey bee pollination on seed
yield in onion (Allium cepa L.). Indian
Bee J. 51:9–11
114. Rao GM, Suryanarayana MC. 1990.
Studies on the foraging behaviour of
honey bees and its effect on the seed
yield in Niger. Indian Bee J. 52:31–33
115. Reddi CS, Reddi EUB, Reddi NS,
Reddi PS. 1983. Reproductive ecology
of Sapindus emarginatus Vahl (Sapin-
daceae). Proc. Indian Natl. Sci. Acad. B
ecology of Jatropha gossypiifolia (Eu-
phorbiaceae). Proc. Indian Acad. Sci.
Plant Sci. 92:215–31
117. Rego MMC, de Albuquerque PMC.
1989. Comportamento das abelhas vis-
itantes de murici, Byrsonima crassifo-
Para. Emilio Goeldi. Nova Ser. Zool.
118. Rehm S, Espig G. 1991. The Cultivated
Plants of the Tropics and Subtropics:
Cultivation, Economic Value, Utiliza-
tion. Weikersheim, Germany: Joseph
119. Richards AJ. 1990. Studies in Garcinia,
dioecious tropical forest trees: agamo-
spermy. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 103:233–50
120. Richards AJ. 1990. Studies in Garcinia,
dioecious tropical forest trees: the phe-
tion of G. hombroniana Pierre. Bot. J.
Linn. Soc. 103:251–61
121. Richards KW. 1993. Non-Apis bees
as crop pollinators. Rev. Suisse Zool.
122. Roig-Alsina A, Michener CD. 1993.
Studies of the phylogeny and classifi-
cation of long-tongued bees (Hymenop-
tera: Apoidea). Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull.
123. Roubik DW. 1979. Africanized honey
bees, stingless bees, and the structure
of tropical plant-pollinator communi-
ties. Proc. Int. Symp. Pollin. 4th, Mary-
land, Md. Agric. Exp. Stn. Spec. Misc.
124. Roubik DW. 1989. Ecology and Natu-
UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
125. Roubik DW. 1995. Pollination of Culti-
vated Plants in the Tropics. FAO Agric.
Serv. Bull. No. 118. Rome, Italy: Food
126. Roubik DW. 1998. Coffee pollination
in Central American highlands: African
bees and the reproduction of an autoga-
mous shrub. Ecol. Lett. In Press
127. Roubik DW, Aluja M. 1983. Flight
ranges of Melipona and Trigona in
tropical forest. J. Kans. Entomol. Soc.
128. Roubik DW, Moreno JE. 1990. Social
bees and palm trees: what do pollen di-
ets tell us? In Social Insects and the En-
Bangalore India, ed. GK Veeresh, B
Mallik, CA Viraktamath, pp. 427–28.
Leiden: EJ Brill
129. Roubik DW, Moreno JE, Vergara C,
Wittmann D. 1986. Sporadic food com-
J. Trop. Ecol. 2:97–111
130. Sakagami SF. 1982. Stingless bees. In
Social Insects, ed. HR Hermann, 3:361–
423. New York: Academic
131. Sakagami SF. 1971. Ethosoziologischer
vergleich zwischen honigbienen und
stachellosen bienen. Zeit. Tierpsychol.
132. Sazima I, Sazima M. 1989. Maman-
gavas e irapu´ as (Hymenoptera, Apoi-
dea): visitas,intera¸ c˜ aeseconseq¨ uˆ encias
para poliniza¸ c˜ ao do maracuj´ a (Passiflo-
raceae). Rev. Brasil. Entomol. 33:109–
133. Schneider E. 1983. Gross morphology
and floral biology of Ondinea purpurea
den Hartog. Aust. J. Bot. 31:371–82
134. Schremmer F. 1982. Bl¨ uhverhalten
und best¨ aubungsbiologie von Carlu-
dovica palmata (Cyclanthaceae)—ein
¨ okologisches paradoxon. Plant Syst.
135. Sedgley M, Griffin AR. 1989. Sexual
Reproduction of Tree Crops. London:
136. Shelar DG, Suryanarayana MC. 1981.
Bee J. 43:110–11
137. Sihag RC. 1985. Floral biology, melit-
tophily and pollination ecology of onion
crop. In Recent Advances in Pollen Re-
search, ed. TM Varghese, pp. 277–84.
New Delhi, India: Allied
138. Deleted in proof
139. Sim˜ ao S, Maranh˜ ao ZC. 1959. Os in-
setos como agentes polinizadores da
mangeira. An. Esc. Super. Agric. “Luis
De Queiroz” 16:299–304
140. Singh G. 1989. Insect pollinators of
141. Sommeijer MJ, de Rooy GA, Punt W,
de Bruijn LLM. 1983. A comparative
sources of various stingless bees (Hym.,
Meliponinae) and honeybees (Hym.,
Apinae) in Trinidad, West-Indies. Api-
142. Sosa-N´ ajera MS, Mart´ ınez-Hern´ andez
Aguilar JI. 1994. Nectaropolliniferous
sources used by Trigona (Tetragonisca)
angustula in Chiapas, southern Mexico.
143. Stone GN, Willmer PG. 1989. Pollina-
tion of cardamon in Papua New Guinea.
J. Apic. Res. 28:228–37
nition of the Stingless Bee Trigona
(Tetragonula) minangkabau (Apidae,
Meliponinae). J. Ethol. 11:141–47
145. Syed RA. 1979. Studies on oil palm pol-
lination by insects. Bull. Entomol. Res.
146. Tepedino VJ. 1981. The pollination effi-
on summer squash (Cucurbita pepo). J.
Kans. Entomol. Soc. 54:359–77
147. Torchio PF. 1987. Use of non-honey bee
tomol. Soc. Ont. 118:111–24
Berita Biol. 3:31–34
149. Urata U. 1954. Pollination requirements
of macadamia. Hawaii Agric. Exp. Stn.
Tech. Bull. 22:1–40
150. Utami N. 1986. Pollination in sago
(Metroxylon sagu). Berita Biol. 3:229–
151. van der Pijl L. 1953. On the flower biol-
ogy of some plants from Java. Ann. Bo-
151a. van Nieuwstadt MGL, Iraheta CER.
1996. Relation between size and for-
aging range in stingless bees (Apidae,
Meliponinae). Apidologie 27:219–28
152. Velthuis H. 1990. The biology and the
economic value of the stingless bees,
compared to the honey bees. Apiacta
153. Venturieri GA, Pickersgill B, Overal
WL. 1993. Floral biology of the Ama-
zonian fruit tree “cupuassu” (Theo-
broma grandiflorum). In Biodiversity
the Future, London, p. 23. London:
Linn. Soc. London, R. Bot. Gard.
sect pollinators of macadamia and their
relative importance. J. Aust. Inst. Agric.
155. Wallace H. 1994. Bees and the pollina-
tion of macadamia. PhD thesis. Univ.
156. Wallace HM, Vithanage V, Exley EM.
1996. The effect of supplementary pol-
lination on nut set of Macadamia (Pro-
teaceae). Ann. Bot. 78:765–73
157. Wang XZ, Chen YP, Gao XO, Xie JM.
1981. The discovery of Melipona sp.
pollinating Amomum villosum Lour. in
Yunnan Province. Yunnan Agric. Sci.
158. Wille A. 1965. Las abejas atarr´ a de
la regi´ on mesoamericana del g´ enero
y subg´ enero Trigona (Apidae-Melipo-
nini). Rev. Biol. Trop. 13:271–91
159. Wille A. 1976. Las abejas jicotes del
genero Melipona (Apidae: Meliponini)
de Costa Rica. Rev. Biol. Trop. 24:123–
160. Wille A. 1983. Biology of the stingless
bees. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 28:41–64
161. Wille A, Orozco E, Raabe C. 1983.
Polinizaci´ on del chayote Sechium edule
(Jacq.) Swartz en Costa Rica. Rev. Biol.
coffee (Coffea canephora); the role of
leafcutter bees in Papua New Guinea.
Entomol. Exp. Appl. 50:113–24
163. Young AM. 1983. Nectar and pollen
robbing of Thunbergia grandiflora by
Trigona bees in Costa Rica. Biotropica
Copyright of Annual Review of Entomology is the property of Annual Reviews Inc. and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.