I have found that the local beekeepers often have a very good understanding of what plants will attract bees to an orchard at different times of year.
Most of us do not rely on honey bees for pollination so I wonder why the question posted draws so much reference to this species. Honey bees for me are a luxury pollinator- it is the indigenous and varied group including syrphid flies, mason bees, carpenter bees and many I don’t recognize that the orchards I manage rely on.
A few of my customers keep hives, but I don’t notice an increase in fruit set at these sites.
On the subject of dandelions, at my site where I get most of the time to observe year after year, dandelions are never a big draw and never out compete my fruit blossoms, and I hove lots of dandelions. Even when honeybees are around they ignore the dandelions and aren’t interested in them even when the fruit blossoms are done.
Very small bees tend to my dandelions and that means I have to weed whack them before every insecticide spray which is the reason I hate dandelions.
I thought I remembered reading that the problem wasn’t that the holes in the side of the flowers damaged anything but that they enabled insects (including other insects that would come after the ones that make the holes) to get the nectar without doing the pollination work. My experience is the same, however: I have holes in almost all my blueberry flowers every year and it never seems to be a problem.
This has been an interesting discussion. For me, my main pollinators for my fruit trees are honeybees. I have a large amount of rosemary, lavender and some California natives (Ceanothus, and few others) in my yard that all bloom at the same time my fruit trees bloom. They are all huge honeybee magnets. I do see some smaller bees (maybe sweat bees), and some flies, but by far and above, at this time of year it is honey bees. Later on, I get big bumblebees and carpenter bees, but they are usually after the blue Morning Glories that start blooming about now. And a few butterflies, mainly Monarchs, Swallowtails, Sulphers and Frittilaries. The Frittilaries also come later, when the Passiflora entwined with the Morning Glories on the chainlink fence behind the east side of my walk & pick orchard are also in bloom.
I was wondering why there were holes in the SIDES of the blueberry blossoms!!! Good to know. But I’m getting plenty of blueberries too, so it’s not a problem here.
You could turn that into a poem, Patty! Lovely description.
1 Like
I agree.
1 Like
Thank you, Lizzy & Alan, very kind of you to say! I had a visitor to my garden yesterday, who said the same thing - Tom Spellman of DWN. He was kind enough to take time out of his very busy schedule to stop by my place to take a look at my Minnie Royal and Royal Lee, to see if there was anything he could suggest to improve my yield. He loved my garden, thought I was doing everything I could do. His suggestions to do a 2nd fertilizing no later than June, use low N, reduce water in August to encourage dormancy I’m already doing. So, hoping that year 5 will be “the year”.
Richard I think that is a great way to get bees interested in your fruit flowers. Bees like ants send out scouts. It just stands to reason that if they are nearby the discovery time should be shorter.
1 Like
Leaf cutter bees loved my blueberry leaves as much as I loved the blueberries. Worked out for both of us.
Some research done at NC State indicated that native insects provided the largest amount of pollination followed by honey bees for blueberries. Carpenter bees were rated as neutral if I remember correctly. The interesting fact was that after a while the honey bees learn to use the holes made in the blooms by the carpenter bees to rob the nectar rather than pollinating the bloom properly, I have a huge number of carpenter bees on my blueberries and the sound of the bees is almost scary! My neighbor has several hives of honeybees, but I see about 10 or more carpenter bees for each honey bee The fruit set on the blueberries is normally excellent, so I don’t believe the carpenter bees are doing any damage
Researchers, like the rest of us, tend to exaggerate their significance, or in this case, the significance of their research. Often large conclusions are drawn from inconclusive or inadequate evidence and passed on as established fact. This is one reason some people become cynical with all research even though it is generally more useful than anecdotal observation, but both are imperfect and necessary tools.
Very, very true. Long held anecdotal observation has proven to trump “supposed” scientific research in many, many cases though
The best case is when the research and my observations agree.
I had a researcher/plant breeder who was looking at the southern highbush blueberries I was growing explain that if I continued to give my SHB the same amount of care and attention that I gave my rabbiteye blueberries I was going to kill them. I was not aware at that time that the researcher was responsible for developing several of the blueberries I was growing. I chose to ignore his advice and I lost about 500 SHB.
I’m fortunate to live in a state that is active in plant breeding and research on several of the fruits that I grow. Some of this research gets published in fancy horticultural journals with complex statistics that I don’t understand, but a lot of the research has proven to be beneficial to small growers like myself.
1 Like
Now I’m curious about specifically what killed them, even though I am up north.
I’d go along with this if you are referring to “supposed” research touted by Dr. Oz. On the otherhand I reject the statement outright if you are referring to articles in peer-reviewed journals accepted for faculty publication by departments in the UC system.
I find the generalized degrading statements about research in this thread offensive.
Richard, if you are offended it is unimportant, not even worthy of discussion, IMO. If you have something to contribute useful to those of us trying to grow fruit please contribute.
The point I am making is something I find often discussed and understood by professional and home fruit growers alike. You take researched information with a grain of salt- you take anecdotal information with 2 grains but both go into the recipe ot trying to figure out how to make fruit trees work for you.
Medical research pertaining to a single species- homo sapien, regularly produces false information- eggs contribute to high cholesterol leading to cardiovascular disease- high salt intake leads to high blood pressure, etc. etc, etc
Horticultural research is 10 times as riddled with variables that can’t be taken into account and funding is much smaller. Something happens in one type of soil during the weather of one or three seasons is not more than a suggestion it will occur when the variables shift.
This began with a case where a researcher discovered an activity of carpenter bees that could conceivably prevent blueberries from producing adequate crops. This led to guidelines for commercial growers to destroy all carpenter bees in their vicinity distributed by at least one university.
Several people on this forum have found carpenter bees to be very useful as pollinators and have not had any difficulty with them in their blueberry stands. I’m one of these people (my plants can barely hold the weight of their carpenter bee pollinated crops year after year) and I want others not to take the research that says otherwise as gospel. I don’t like the idea of killing carpenter bees, an important native pollinator, because of conclusions drawn from research that seem to be overblown.
2 Likes
I have not tried to exterminate the carpenter bees even given the damage they have done to my farm buildings and some damage to the fascia boards of my house.
When the blueberries are in bloom the buzzing sound from the carpenter bees is huge, almost scary! It not unusual to see 20 or more carpenter bees on each blueberry bush. Since the introduction of honey bees by my neighbor, I now see a few honey bees but not nearly as many as the carpenter bees. Carpenter bees and bumble bees look similar, but I’m sure I have carpenter bees, not bumble bees. The research done in NC which is a big commercial produce of blueberry rated carpenter bees as “neutral” as a pollinator for blueberry.
The researcher/plant breeder who advised me that SHB require a lot more care and attention than rabbiteye is now retired but is still well known nationally and internationally. In fact he coined the phrase “southern highbush’” His breeding program produced O’neil, Premier, Power Blue and about a dozen other variety of Blueberry. At one point over 50% of all of the blueberries produced in NC were introduced from his breeding program. When he commented about killing the SHB with the same level of attention that I gave the rabbiteye, I did not understand his superior knowledge and understanding of blueberry production and I did not follow his advise. I lost 500 plants as a result, The take away is SHB are much more sensitive to the proper level of organic matter, moisture, nitrogen and weed control than rabbiteye . If would have followed his advise I would have a saved a lot of money
For the fruit that I grow, I have found the research to be accurate and useful.
Alan, I’m sorry you misunderstood the meaning of the phrase ‘generalized degrading statements about research’. My comment had nothing to do with carpenter bees.
I find the fact that you find my statement offensive…offensive. And silly to be honest.
Would you like to inquire about the meaning of my statement or would you rather pout about it.
Anecdotal observation led many to feel tobacco smoking was bad for your health hundreds of years ago. It was generally known because people observed those who were heavy smokers dieing of respiratory illnesses that they did not then understand. Medical research had simply not advanced to such a point as to get a handle on exactly what was happening.
Last night I read about a guy who wrote a revolutionary war song used by the Continental Army. When that man died it was written that he died of respiratory illness as a result of smoking. So they knew and understood the result, just not the physiological cause. T. Jefferson also referred to the evils upon the body of tobacco use.
Fast forward nearly 150 years to the 1940’s and studies had began to determine if smoking caused cancer etc. Numerous milestones in research were reached but nothing concrete enough to challenge the vaunted tobacco industry and their very deep pockets.
As late as 1960 only one-third of all US doctors believed that the case against cigarettes had been established.(http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87.full)
It was not until 1964 that the Surgeon General issued statements and warnings on the health risks associated with smoking. Even then, that warning was directed to Men only as research didn’t support the same in women at that point. 200 years later!
Another point on “research” is that it is sometimes skewed or otherwise muddied and polluted based on what the “researchers” want to prove. For example the tobacco industries own research showed smoking caused cancer in I believe 1954ish, but it was changed, suppressed and hidden from the public as it would be detrimental to their own cause. Other studies that had came about around the same time were fought and disputed by the industry using falsified data to support their position that there was no link to smoking and cancer or heart disease. It took a few whistleblowers to leak the information that began an investigation years later. The result of that investigation led to a massive lawsuit against the industry. I believe it may have been Brown and Williamson Co. if you are interested in fact checking me.
So you see Richard…if you had been a tobacco user anytime before the 1960’s you’d have been well served to heed anecdotal evidence as opposed to waiting on “peer reviewed” scientific research on smoking. Sadly…millions were and millions died, some doubting tobaccos dangerous effects right up to their slow miserable deaths.
This is just the first example that came to mind.
Oh yeah, almost forgot. Remember too that if it were not for strong anecdotal evidence, the research would likely never have begun in the first place.
Just as Alan said neither is perfect, nor is either fully flawed. All studies are funded by someone though and you have to always wonder what their motivations are. If you think “peer review” always stops bad science from being implemented then you are very naïve in the ways of the world.