← Back to Species List
Andrena perezana
Common Name: Mining Bee
Authority: Author
Traits
Solitary
Tongue: Short
Nesting Substrates
Ground
[source]
Assessment
Date: 1/1/1900
Justification:
IUCN rank justification paragraph
Distribution
Country Occurrence:
United States:
CaliforniaIllinoisNebraska
EOO:Unknown
AOO:Unknown
Map Notes:The map was created by generating a polygon around all records, generalizing it, and clipping it to the North American continent to remove areas of uninhabited habitat, such as the Pacific Ocean.
Population
Trend:Unknown
Generation Length:1.00 years
Habitats and Ecology
Food habits comment: Genus species is a dietary generalist specialist, and collects pollen from specific wide variety of plants including xxx.
Habitat comment: This species has been recorded in XXX, between XX and XX m.
Reproduction comment: This species likely nests underground like all other Andrena (Danforth et al. 2019), but nests from this species have not been described. Nest cells from other members of this genus are located at the ends of the lateral burrows, which are typically lined with a waxy Dufour’s gland secretion (Cane 1981) that serves to both isolate the provision from pathogens in the surrounding soil and to regulate water uptake from the soil atmosphere (Cane and Love 2021). Females provision each cell with a ball of pollen moistened with nectar on which they lay a single egg (Michener 2007).
Phenology comment: Records of this species come from months (Chesshire et al. 2023). Adults are assumed to emerge annually (Danforth et al. 2019).
Habitat Types
- 1 Forest and Woodland
- 1.1 Forest – Boreal
- 1.2 Forest - Subarctic
- 1.3 Forest – Subantarctic
- 1.4 Temperate Forest
- 1.5 Forest – Subtropical/tropical dry
- 1.6 Forest – Subtropical/tropical moist lowland
- 1.7 Forest – Subtropical/tropical mangrove vegetation above high tide level
- 1.8 Forest – Subtropical/tropical swamp
- 1.9 Forest – Subtropical/tropical moist montane
- 2 Savanna
- 2.1 Savanna - Dry
- 2.2 Savanna - Moist
- 3 Shrubland -> Shrubland - Temperate
- 3.1 Shrubland – Subarctic
- 3.2 Shrubland – Subantarctic
- 3.3 Shrubland – Boreal
- 3.4 Shrubland –Temperate
- 3.5 Shrubland – Subtropical/tropical dry
- 3.6 Shrubland – Subtropical/tropical moist
- 3.7 Shrubland – Subtropical/tropical high altitude
- 3.8 Shrubland – Mediterranean-type shrubby vegetation
- 4 Grassland
- 4.1 Grassland – Tundra
- 4.2 Grassland – Subarctic
- 4.3 Grassland – Subantarctic
- 4.4 Grassland - Temperate
- 4.5 Grassland – Subtropical/tropical dry
- 4.6 Grassland – Subtropical/tropical seasonally wet/flooded
- 4.7 Grassland – Subtropical/tropical high altitude
- 5 Wetlands (inland)
- 5.1 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent rivers/streams/creeks (includes waterfalls)
- 5.2 Wetlands (inland) – Seasonal/intermittent/irregular rivers/streams/creeks
- 5.3 Wetlands (inland) – Shrub dominated wetlands
- 5.4 Wetlands (inland) – Bogs, marshes, swamps, fens, peatlands
- 5.5 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 ha)
- 5.6 Wetlands (inland) – Seasonal/intermittent freshwater lakes (over 8 ha)
- 5.7 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent freshwater marshes/pools (under 8 ha)
- 5.8 Wetlands (inland) – Seasonal/intermittent freshwater marshes/pools (under 8 ha)
- 5.9 Wetlands (inland) – Freshwater springs and oases
- 5.10 Wetlands (inland) – Tundra wetlands (inc. pools and temporary waters from snowmelt)
- 5.11 Wetlands (inland) – Alpine wetlands (inc. temporary waters from snowmelt)
- 5.12 Wetlands (inland) – Geothermal wetlands
- 5.13 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent inland deltas
- 5.14 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent saline, brackish or alkaline lakes
- 5.15 Wetlands (inland) – Seasonal/intermittent saline, brackish or alkaline lakes and flats
- 5.16 Wetlands (inland) – Permanent saline, brackish or alkaline marshes/pools
- 5.17 Wetlands (inland) – Seasonal/intermittent saline, brackish or alkaline marshes/pools
- 5.18 Wetlands (inland) – Karst and other subterranean hydrological systems (inland)
- 6 Rocky Areas (e.g., inland cliffs, mountain peaks)
- 8 Desert
- 8.1 Desert- Hot
- 8.2 Desert - Temperate
- 8.3 Desert – Cold
- 14 Artificial - Terrestrial
- 14.1 Arable Land
- 14.2 Pastureland
- 14.3 Plantations
- 14.4 Rural Gardens
- 14.5 Urban Areas
- 14.6 Subtropical/Tropical Heavily Degraded Former Forest
- 16 Introduced Vegetation
- 17 Other
- 18 Unknown
Use and Trade
This species is not known to be utilized commercially.
Threats
Threat comments:
IF OCCURS IN SW: Since 2000, the Southwest U.S. has seen the worst drought in 1200 years (Williams, Cook, and Smerdon 2022). Drought can reduce the abundance of flowering plants on a landscape scale, and also reduce pollen and nectar quality (Wilson Rankin, Barney, and Lozano 2020). Drought conditions have been shown to reduce the diversity and abundance of native bees (Minckley, Roulston, and Williams 2013; Hung et al. 2021).
Certain aspects of this species' biology may make it more vulnerable to some threats. Andrena SPECIES is a ground nesting species, and nests may be harmed by certain agricultural practices such as tilling, which can kill bees nesting close to the surface (Williams et al. 2010). This species is a dietary specialist, which has been linked to higher risk of extinction due to reduced host plant availability, especially under climate change scenarios (Roberts et al. 2011) and reduced effective population sizes (Packer et al. 2005). Additionally, Andrena have been reported to have low reproductive output because of the short adult life span, and a low rate of brood cell provisioning (reviewed in Danforth et al. 2019). Other threats to bees generally include habitat loss or modification, climate change, pesticide use, exposure to pathogens from managed bee species, and competition with honey bees (Brown and Paxton 2009; Potts et al. 2010; Wojcik et al. 2018; Grab et al. 2019; Raven and Wagner 2021).
Threats Threats:
Timing: Scope: Severity: Impact Score:
Timing:
Past, Unlikely to Return
Ongoing
Future
Unknown
Past, unlikely to return
Scope:
Unknown
Whole: >90%
Majority: 50 - 90%
Minority <50%
Severity:
Very Rapid Declines
Rapid Declines
Slow, significant declines
Causing/Could cause fluctuations
Negligible declines
no decline
Unknown
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Housing & urban areas
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.2. Commercial & industrial areas
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry farming
7. Natural system modifications -> 7.1. Fire & fire suppression -> 7.1.1.Increase in fire frequency/intensity
7. Natural system modifications -> 7.1. Fire & fire suppression -> 7.1.2. Suppression in fire frequency/intensity
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes, and diseases -> 8.1 Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases -> 8.1.2. Named species
9. Pollution -> 9.3 Agricultural and forestry effluents -> 9.3.3 Herbicides and Pesticides
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.1. Habitat shifting & alteration
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.2.Droughts
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.3.Temperature extremes
Conservation Actions
Conservation needs
No known conservation actions are in place for this species.
Protected/Managed area comment: Observations of this species are known from Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land, but this does not confer any specific protections to the species.
Management comment: Specific conservation needs for this species have not been identified. Due to the importance of supporting wild bee populations for pollination services, general conservation practices are recommended including, restoring, creating, and preserving natural high-quality habitats to include suitable forage and nesting sites; limiting pesticide use on or near suitable habitat, particularly during the adult bee’s flight period; promoting farming and urban practices that increase pollinator-friendly plants in margin space; minimizing exposure of wild bees to diseases transferred from managed bees; and lastly, avoiding honey bee introduction to high-quality native bee habitat.
Conservation Actions Needed
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration
4. Education & awareness -> 4.3. Awareness & communications
5. Law & policy -> 5.2. Policies and regulations
Research needs
Research need comment: More information is needed about the population status, population trend, existing threats, range limits, habitat, and ecology of this species. Surveys targeting this species are needed throughout its range to determine its persistence throughout its historic range.
Research Needed
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1.3. Life History and Ecology
1.5. Threats
1.6 Conservation actions
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3.4. Habitat trends
Assessment
Date of assessment (month-day-year):
Assessors names (use * to indicate primary assessor, typically the participant with most experience/knowledge of the species):
Reviewer(s):
Contributors(s): For assessments using Winfree data: Faye Benjamin, Bethanne Bruninga-Socolar, Tina Harrison, Molly MacLeod, Michael Roswell, Rachael Winfree
For assessments using Vandame data: Philippe Sago, Jorge Mérida, Oscar Martinez, Rémy Vandame, and Carlos Cultid
For assessments using Hung data: Keng-Lou James Hung, John S. Ascher, Doug Yanega, Henry J. Cen, Adrienne Lee, David A. Holway
For a full list of the 162 institutions that contributed to the Chesshire et al. dataset, please see Chesshire et al. 2023, S1.
Facilitator(s) and compiler(s): Paige R. Chesshire, Erica E. Fischer, Nicolas J. Dowdy, Terry L. Griswold, Alice C. Hughes, Michael C. Orr, John S. Ascher, Laura M. Guzman, Keng-Lou James Hung, Neil S. Cobb and Lindsie M. McCabe
Red List Category and Criteria: Rank/Criteria
Justification:
IUCN rank justification paragraph
Rank reasons
This species is a solitary bee that occurs in range. Using all verified records of the species, the range extent is XXX km2. This species occurs in habitat. It is a dietary specialist/generalist and collects pollen from XXX to feed offspring. Across the range of the species, impacts from climate change, pesticide exposure, increased wildfire severity, and urbanization have been observed. These threats may be acting on the species at local levels. Number of localities, specific threats, projected decline. Therefore, this species is likely/unlikely to be threatened with extinction at this time.
NatureServe Specific Text (NOT OTHERWISE INCLUDED IN ABOVE TEXT):
For Rank Calculator:
1. Element occurrences (using separation distance of 5,000 m): xxx
1. Estimated Number of Element Occurrences Comments: Using all records from the last 30 years (since YEAR), this species is known from at least approximately XXX occurrences using a 5 km separation distance.
2. Population size: Unknown
3. Viability/Ecological integrity (choose one)
1. Number of occurrences with good viability/ecological integrity: Unknown
2. Percent of area occupied (For Species with Known AOO): N/A
4. Environmental Specificity: A. Broad. Generalist or community with all key requirements common. B. Narrow. Specialist or community with key requirements common.
1. Environmental specificity comments: This species is a dietary specialist, using pollen from the plant genus family BLANK, which likely restricts its distribution and phenology. Although host plants from this family are likely common and abundant across its range.
5. Intrinsic Vulnerability: B. Moderately vulnerable
1. Intrinsic vulnerability comments: Andrena have been reported to have low reproductive output because of the short adult life span, and a low rate of brood cell provisioning (reviewed in Danforth et al. 2019).
6. Trend
1. Short Term Trend: Unknown
2. Comments: Abundance estimates and population trends are not known for this species.
3. Long Term Trend: Unknown
4. Comments: Abundance estimates and population trends are not known for this species.
For Biotics Global Element Characterization:
1. Habitat
Forest/Woodland
Forest-Hardwood
Forest-Conifer
Forest-Mixed
Forest Edge
Woodland-Hardwood
Woodland-Conifer
Woodland-Mixed
Shrubland/chaparral
Savanna.
Grassland/Herbaceous
Old Field
Desert
Alpine Barren
Tundra.
Playa/Salt Flat
Sand/Dune
Barrens Areas
Bare rock/talus/scree
Cliff
Cropland/Hedgerow
Suburban/Orchard
Urban/edificarian
Aerial
2. Food Habits
1. Adult: nectarivore
2. Immature: nectarivore
Literature References:
Brown, Mark J. F., and Robert J. Paxton. 2009. “The Conservation of Bees: A Global Perspective.” Apidologie 40 (3): 410–16.
Cane, James H., and Byron G. Love. 2021. “Hygroscopic Larval Provisions of Bees Absorb Soil Water Vapor and Release Liquefied Nutrients.” Apidologie 52 (6): 1002–16.
Cane, J. H. 1981. “Dufour’s Gland Secretion in the Cell Linings of Bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea).” Journal of Chemical Ecology 7 (2): 403–10.
Chesshire, Paige R., Erica E. Fischer, Nicolas J. Dowdy, Terry L. Griswold, Alice C. Hughes, Michael C. Orr, John S. Ascher, et al. 2023. “Completeness Analysis for over 3000 United States Bee Species Identifies Persistent Data Gap.” Ecography, February. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.06584.
Danforth, Bryan N., Robert L. Minckley, John L. Neff, and Frances Fawcett. 2019. The Solitary Bees: Biology, Evolution, Conservation. Princeton University Press.
Grab, Heather, Michael G. Branstetter, Nolan Amon, Katherine R. Urban-Mead, Mia G. Park, Jason Gibbs, Eleanor J. Blitzer, Katja Poveda, Greg Loeb, and Bryan N. Danforth. 2019. “Agriculturally Dominated Landscapes Reduce Bee Phylogenetic Diversity and Pollination Services.” Science 363 (6424): 282–84.
Hung, Keng-Lou James, Sara S. Sandoval, John S. Ascher, and David A. Holway. 2021. “Joint Impacts of Drought and Habitat Fragmentation on Native Bee Assemblages in a California Biodiversity Hotspot.” Insects 12 (2). https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12020135.
Michener, Charles Duncan. 2007. The Bees of the World. Vol. 1. JHU Press.
Minckley, Robert L., T’ai H. Roulston, and Neal M. Williams. 2013. “Resource Assurance Predicts Specialist and Generalist Bee Activity in Drought.” Proceedings. Biological Sciences / The Royal Society 280 (1759): 20122703.
Packer, Laurence, Amro Zayed, Jennifer C. Grixti, Luisa Ruz, Robin E. Owen, Felipe Vivallo, and Haroldo Toro. 2005. “Conservation Genetics of Potentially Endangered Mutualisms: Reduced Levels of Genetic Variation in Specialist versus Generalist Bees.” Conservation Biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology 19 (1): 195–202.
Potts, Simon G., Jacobus C. Biesmeijer, Claire Kremen, Peter Neumann, Oliver Schweiger, and William E. Kunin. 2010. “Global Pollinator Declines: Trends, Impacts and Drivers.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25 (6): 345–53.
Raven, Peter H., and David L. Wagner. 2021. “Agricultural Intensification and Climate Change Are Rapidly Decreasing Insect Biodiversity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 118 (2). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002548117.
Roberts, Stuart, Simon Potts, Koos Biesmeijer, Michael Kuhlmann, William Kunin, and Ralf Ohlemüller. 2011. “Assessing Continental-Scale Risks for Generalist and Specialist Pollinating Bee Species under Climate Change.” BioRisk : Biodiversity & Ecosystem Risk Assessment 6 (December): 1–18.
Rousseau, Josée S., S. Hollis Woodard, Sarina Jepsen, Brianne Du Clos, Alison Johnston, Bryan N. Danforth, and Amanda D. Rodewald. 2024. “Advancing Bee Conservation in the US: Gaps and Opportunities in Data Collection and Reporting.” Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2024.1346795.
Williams, A. Park, B. I. Cook, and S. E. Smerdon. 2022. “Rapid Intensification of the Emerging Southwestern North American Megadrought in 2020–2021.” Nature Climate Change 12 (3): 232–34.
Williams, N. M., Elizabeth E. Crone, T’ai H. Roulston, Robert L. Minckley, Laurence Packer, and Simon G. Potts. 2010. “Ecological and Life-History Traits Predict Bee Species Responses to Environmental Disturbances.” Biological Conservation 143 (10): 2280–91.
Wilson Rankin, Erin E., Sarah K. Barney, and Giselle E. Lozano. 2020. “Reduced Water Negatively Impacts Social Bee Survival and Productivity Via Shifts in Floral Nutrition.” Journal of Insect Science 20 (5). https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/ieaa114.
Wojcik, Victoria A., Lora A. Morandin, Laurie Davies Adams, and Kelly E. Rourke. 2018. “Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation?” Environmental Entomology 47 (4): 822–33.
No threats recorded
Conservation Actions
Conservation needs
No known conservation actions are in place for this species.
Protected/Managed area comment: Observations of this species are known from Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land, but this does not confer any specific protections to the species.
Management comment: Specific conservation needs for this species have not been identified. Due to the importance of supporting wild bee populations for pollination services, general conservation practices are recommended including, restoring, creating, and preserving natural high-quality habitats to include suitable forage and nesting sites; limiting pesticide use on or near suitable habitat, particularly during the adult bee’s flight period; promoting farming and urban practices that increase pollinator-friendly plants in margin space; minimizing exposure of wild bees to diseases transferred from managed bees; and lastly, avoiding honey bee introduction to high-quality native bee habitat.
Actions Needed
- 1.2 Resource & habitat protection
- 2.3 Habitat & natural process restoration
- 4.3 Awareness & communications
Research Needs
Research need comment: More information is needed about the population status, population trend, existing threats, range limits, habitat, and ecology of this species. Surveys targeting this species are needed throughout its range to determine its persistence throughout its historic range.
Taxonomic Notes
(a. any taxonomic concerns about the validity of the species? b. any taxonomic revisions underway that would require a species reassessment.