Honeybees are actually not very good at pollinating plants; they take most of the pollen back to their hive instead of spreading it between plants. Furthermore, they often outcompete (non-honey producing) indigenous bees that are actually good at pollinating plants.
Bees do take most of the pollen back, but flowers don't need most of the pollen anyways. As with most species of sexually-reproducing lifeforms, the males produce much much more sperm than is actually needed for the reproductive act, and they do this precisely because so much sperm will be lost in the process. In other words: flowers account for the loss of pollen to pollinators. Flowers also make nectar to reward pollinators -- nectar production is otherwise pointless for flowers, and yet they put serious energetic effort into producing a pointless product.
You did imply something about honeybees being non-native in many areas, thus like invasive species. To be specific, honeybees have not been native to the Americas for millions of years.
Honeybees are domesticated, and as usual humans tend to select for animals that produce more. Even so they'd need to produce enough to hold the hive over winter.
The energy taken by the bees and turned into honey is a cost from the flower’s point of view. I think you are looking at the efficiency of honey as a food, while the previous poster is looking at the efficiency of bees as pollinators?
Honeybees are actually not very good at pollinating plants; they take most of the pollen back to their hive instead of spreading it between plants. Furthermore, they often outcompete (non-honey producing) indigenous bees that are actually good at pollinating plants.
Bees do take most of the pollen back, but flowers don't need most of the pollen anyways. As with most species of sexually-reproducing lifeforms, the males produce much much more sperm than is actually needed for the reproductive act, and they do this precisely because so much sperm will be lost in the process. In other words: flowers account for the loss of pollen to pollinators. Flowers also make nectar to reward pollinators -- nectar production is otherwise pointless for flowers, and yet they put serious energetic effort into producing a pointless product.
You did imply something about honeybees being non-native in many areas, thus like invasive species. To be specific, honeybees have not been native to the Americas for millions of years.
This comment captures the actual efficiency of the bee. The article measures it by time-per-plant.
I mean, honey is pure carbs, so anything that produces so much excess of it can’t possibly be very efficient
Honeybees are domesticated, and as usual humans tend to select for animals that produce more. Even so they'd need to produce enough to hold the hive over winter.
I feel like it’s the opposite, the amount of energy packed into a single drop of honey makes it very efficient.
The energy taken by the bees and turned into honey is a cost from the flower’s point of view. I think you are looking at the efficiency of honey as a food, while the previous poster is looking at the efficiency of bees as pollinators?
2 replies →
thaaaat is how the world works (that is how the world works)