Rosmarlinasiah*
| Sahindomi Bana | Sri Mariani | Surya Cipta Ramadhan Kete
© 2024 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Apis dorsata Binghamii is an endemic forest bee found on the Sulawesi Island. Forest ecosystems provide perfect conditions for bee survival. The goal of this research is to identify feasible tree species as feed sources and to analyze the physical harm to trees as beehives. Purposive sampling is used in the site determination strategy, which entails putting observation stations on trees that host forest bee colonies. The sample center point (nest tree) is the starting point for drawing transects in the four cardinal directions, each 500 meters apart and measuring 20m × 20m with 20 plots. Vegetation analysis includes species diversity using the Shannon-Wiener method and the Importance Value Index using the Mueler-Dombois and Ellenberg methods. Physical damage to forest bee foraging trees was assessed using the Forest Health Monitoring method. The results indicated a high diversity of tree species (H'= 3.14). The major species are Castanopsis buruana Miq. and Payena acuminate (Blume) Pierre (Kuma). This plant has a wide and tall tree diameter, produces nectar and pollen through blossoms, and bees use it as a nest. However, this study discovered a variety of trees that had been damaged. The most common causes of tree damage are lianas and termites, accounting for 30% of the total. The Eha (Castanopsis buruana Miq.) sustained the most damage. As a result, forest conservation measures are required to restore the health of trees used as beehives and food sources for Apis dorsata Binghamii bees, as well as to increase honey production.
Apis dorsata Binghamii, bee forage, nest stress, physical damage, species diversity
Forest is a very valuable and fundamental natural resource [1], because they contain biodiversity [2] as a source of germplasm [3], sources of wood and non-wood (timber and non-timber) [4], water management [5], flood and erosion prevention [6], water and air purification [7, 8] and recreation [9]. To protect the diversity of biological resources, the Indonesian government enacts Law Numbers 5 of 1990, 23 of 1997, and 41 of 1999 [10].
Forest areas are regions designated by the government as permanent forests, whereas forests are classified as conservation, protected, or producing forests [10].
These places play an essential role in reducing deforestation and environmental degradation. The Mangolo Area, located in Kolaka Regency, Southeast Sulawesi Province, has been recognized by the government as a conservation area in the form of a Nature Tourism Park under the Minister of Forestry's Decree No. 142/Kpts-II/1990 dated April 2, 1990, with an area of 5,200 Ha.
The Mangolo Nature Tourism Area features a lowland tropical rainforest ecology. Vegetation diversity in tropical rainforest environments is characterized by broad-leaved, green vegetation and high levels of tree density [11, 12]. Throughout the year, this forest receives adequate sunlight, water, and rainfall. As a result, tropical woods provide a perfect habitat for wildlife and plants alike. It is corroborated by statistics showing that tropical rainforests have the highest degree of species richness and endemicity in the world [13].
The utilization of the Mangolo natural tourist park region is mostly for forest products. Forest bees are a forest product found in this area. As pollinating insects, forest bees can work in harmony with forest ecosystems. Forest bees (Apis dorsata Binghamii) are honey-producing insects. Apis dorsata Binghamii is the largest subspecies of Apis dorsata, with a white stripe on its stomach [14, 15]. This species is only found on Sulawesi Island and is considered endemic to the island [16, 17]. Currently, it cannot be cultivated [18]. It can also be found in the Mangolo Nature Tourism Area.
Apis dorsata Binghamii bees play a crucial role in the maintenance of forest ecosystems by pollinating numerous forest trees. This species needs woodlands for nesting and foraging [19]. As a result, any disturbance to the forest ecosystem will have an impact on its survival. Apis dorsata Binghamii bees typically nest in trees at elevations greater than 5 meters above ground [17]. Furthermore, discovered 9 families of various types of plants as nests: Arecaceae (Arenga pinnata), Myrtaceae (Psidium sp), Anacardiaceae (Mangifera sp), Malvaceae (Ceiba pentandra), Melastomataceae (Melastoma sp), Sapindaceae (Nephelium lappaceum), Fabaceae (Gliricidia sepium), Verbenaceae (Lantana camara), and Lythraceae (Lagerstroemia sp). Because it produces more nectar and pollen, the Arengan pinnata plant species has the highest percentage frequency among the others. Forage plants are the plants that produce food sources.
Apis dorsata Binghamii bees rely heavily on nectar and pollen [20] for nutrition [21] and protein for sexual maturity and body development [22]. This will have an impact on bee breeding. Meanwhile, plant abundance and flowering season have a significant impact on the availability of nectar and pollen. The abundance of flowering plants improves bee habitat and food availability. This is critical for honey production [23].
Apis dorsata Binghamii bees have a high honey production capacity, with 10-50 kg per nest [20]. This has an impact on local communities that rely on hunting in the forest for revenue. Aside from that, forest degradation in the Mangolo natural tourism region continues, therefore bee forage plants, which provide food for bees, are declining and even threatened with extinction. Parasitic larvae and pupae also drive bee colonies to migrate [24-26]. As a result, it is vital to assess the health of woods, particularly those that supply fodder for bees in the Mangolo natural tourist park area.
The study is conducted in the Mangolo Nature Tourism Park Area, Ulunggolaka Village, Latambaga District, Kolaka Regency, Southeast Sulawesi Province (Figure 1). It was launched from April to July 2023. The study focused on bee plant species found in the study area.
The research materials were flowering plants at tree level. The tools utilized were innovative, including a machete, compass, Abney level, and GPS. Plant measurement instruments include meter tape, meter roll, tally sheet, paper, pencil, and pen. The documentation tool is a camera.
Figure 1. Study site
The sampling procedure is carried out at tree observation sites where forest bees (Apis dorsata Binghamii) live. The sample center point (nest tree) serves as the starting point for drawing transects 500 metres apart in four cardinal directions: east, west, north, and south. Each transect consists of five plots measuring 20m × 20m that are ordered sequentially. The total number of observation plots was twenty (Figure 2). Plant specimens are collected and identified in the field. Unknown plant species were maintained in a dry herbarium at Halu Oleo University's Forestry Department Laboratory.
The sampling method employs a systematic approach with random stars. The first measuring plot is randomly placed based on the type of tree containing the beehive, while the second plot is systematically placed based on the honey bee radius of ± 700 meters or ± 154 ha per day. The measuring plot was designed as a circle with a radius of 17.8 meters, encompassing a total area of 0.10 hectare. The sampling intensity employed was 1.54 hectares, resulting in 16 measurement plots. The distance between the measuring plots is 100 meters (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Observation plot
Inventory plants by noting the plant type, number of plants, plant density, and presence of blooms in each measuring plot. At the Forestry Department Laboratory, Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Halu Oleo University, unknown plant species were preserved in a dry herbarium for identification purposes.
The data used for analysis include the number of individuals per species, the number of species, stem diameter, nectar and pollen producing plants, flowering status, and the shape and type of tree damage. The data was then analyzed to determine forest bee forage using the descriptive method, species diversity index using the Shannon-Wiener method in Soegianto [27], Importance Value Index (IVI) using the Mueler-Dombois and Ellenberg method [28], and forage tree physical damage by forest bees (Apis dorsata Binghamii) using the Forest Health Monitoring Method [29].
Shannon-Wiener index, $\text{H}^{\prime}=-\sum_{i=1}^S\left(\frac{n i}{N}\right) \ln \left(\frac{n i}{N}\right)$ (1)
where, Shannon-Wiener index is the species diversity index, ni is the number of type I individuals, N is the total number of individuals, and S is the number of species found. According to Aye and Shibata [12], the H' index typically ranges from 1.5 to 3.5, but seldom exceeds 4.5. The higher the H' number, the greater the diversity.
Mueler-Dombois and Ellenberg index, IVI = frekuensi relatif + densitas relatif + dominasi relatif (2)
3.1 Plant species as potential forage for Apis dorsata Binghamii
Flora types were identified in the Mangolo Nature Tourism Park area to learn more about the forest bee Apisdosata bringhamii's food sources. There were 276 possible vegetation specimens found, including 43 kinds and 24 families (Table 1). Fabaceae, Anacardiaceae, and Moraceae have the most forage source species producing nectar, pollen, and nest trees, with four species each, followed by Meliaceae, Dilleniaceae, Chrysobalanaceae, Simaroubaceae, Annonaceae, Hypericaceae, Guttiferaceae, Fagaceae, Burseraseae, Podocarpaceae, Myristicaceae, Verbenaceae, and Crustacean, each with one species (Figure 3). The genetic mix of plants in an area can influence their distribution and availability as a food source [30].
The number of nectar-producing plants is bigger than that of pollen sources and nest trees, with 35, 27, and 9 species, respectively. Honey bees feed mostly on nectar and pollen from flowering plants. Nuraeni et al. [17] reported similar findings. Flowering plants (Angiosperms) and bees form a symbiotic, mutually beneficial interaction. Flowers produce nectar and pollen, which worker bees collect to nourish their colonies, whilst bees pollinate flowering plants, increasing their output [31, 32]. Similar to this study, bees gather food to maintain their species' survival [33].
Figure 3. Amount of bee feed based on family
Nectar is frequently used as a source of carbonates and amino acids, which bees convert into honey. Pollen as a source of protein, lipids, vitamins, and minerals [34], and resin as propolis to fill gaps, caulk cracks, reduce and plug holes [35], and as a material for building beehives [36].
The Fabaceae family is one of the three plant groups most usually seen producing nectar and pollen at the research site. This is consistent with research undertaken by Al-Ghamdi and Al-Sagheer [37]. However, unlike the findings of Nuraeni et al. [17], the types of nectar and pollen generating plants are from the Arecaceae family, namely the Arenga pinnata type. This is due to fabaceace's high adaptability in ecosystems and global dissemination [38]. The Fabaceae plant family contains approximately 19,500 species divided into 720-730 genera. This plant tribe is worldwide and divided into three subtribes: Caesalpinioideae, Faboideae, and Mimosoideae. Morphologically, the leaves are compound, unifoliate, or bifoliate, the flowers are bisexual, unisexual, symmetrical actomorphic or zygomorphic, hypogynous or perigynous, and the fruit is winged pods (samara) or drupe [39]. The fabaceaceae tribe includes plants that are widely used and have high economic value as a green plant, food source, medicinal plant, ornamental plant, wood producer, erosion control, and land reclamation [40]. As a result, this plant plays a vital role in maintaining the forest resource ecology.
Table 1. Plant species as potential forage
|
No. |
Botanical Name |
Family |
Source of Forage |
Flowering Calendar |
IVI (%) |
H’ |
|
1 |
Castanopsis buruana Miq. |
Fabaceae |
NS + N + P |
Jul., Aug., Sept., and Dec. |
48.15 |
0.27 |
|
2 |
Lithocarpus glutinosus |
Fabaceae |
NS + N + P |
Jun., Jul., Aug., Sept., and Dec. |
2.19 |
0.04 |
|
3 |
Inocarpus fagiferus Fosb. |
Fabaceae |
N |
Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.18 |
0.04 |
|
4 |
Kalappia celebica Kosterm |
Fabaceae |
N |
Apr. and May |
5.47 |
0.09 |
|
5 |
Tetrameles nudiflora |
Myrtaceae |
N + P |
Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.14 |
0.04 |
|
6 |
Eugenia sp. |
Myrtaceae |
N + P |
Mar., Apr., May, Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
3.95 |
0.04 |
|
7 |
Syzygium cumini |
Myrtaceae |
N + P |
Mar., Apr., May, Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
3.9 |
0.06 |
|
8 |
Microcos paniculata L. |
Malvaceae |
N + P |
Mar., Apr., May and Jun. |
5.29 |
0.09 |
|
9 |
Durio zibethinus |
Malvaceae |
NS + N + P |
Mar., Apr. and May |
4.62 |
0.06 |
|
10 |
Ceiba pentandra |
Malvaceae |
NS + N + P |
May, Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
4.95 |
0.06 |
|
11 |
Semecarpus cuneiformis |
Anacardiaceae |
N |
Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.16 |
0.04 |
|
12 |
Koordersiodendron pinnatum |
Anacardiaceae |
N |
Jul., Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
10.97 |
0.09 |
|
13 |
Dracontomelon dao |
Anacardiaceae |
N + P |
Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
4.6 |
0.06 |
|
14 |
Agathis dammara |
Araucariaceae |
N |
Mar. and Apr. |
2.58 |
0.04 |
|
15 |
Artocarpus sp. |
Moraceae |
P |
Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
2.13 |
0.04 |
|
16 |
Ficus sp. |
Moraceae |
NS + P |
Mar., Apr., Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
6.27 |
0.06 |
|
17 |
Artocarpus champeden |
Moraceae |
NS + P |
Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
13.16 |
0.11 |
|
18 |
Artocarpus integra |
Moraceae |
P |
Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.69 |
0.04 |
|
19 |
Nephelium ramboutan |
Sapindaceae |
NS + N + P |
Sept., Oct. and Nov. |
14.11 |
0.06 |
|
20 |
Schleichera oleosa |
Sapindaceae |
N |
Sept. and Oct. |
2.17 |
0.04 |
|
21 |
Sandoricum koetjapi |
Meliaceae |
N |
May, Jun., Aug., and Sept. |
4.2 |
0.09 |
|
22 |
Cinnamomum celebicum Miq |
Lauraceae |
N + P |
Feb, Mar., Apr., May, Jun., Jul. and Aug. |
6.75 |
0.09 |
|
23 |
Litsea grandis Hook |
Lauraceae |
NS + N + P |
Jun., Jul., Aug., Sept., and Dec. |
8.7 |
0.11 |
|
24 |
Mallotus philippensis Lam |
Euphorbiaceae |
N |
Jul., Aug., Sept., and Oct. |
2.16 |
0.04 |
|
25 |
Mallotus paniculatus |
Euphorbiaceae |
N |
Jul., Aug., and Sept. |
6.73 |
0.11 |
|
26 |
Palaqium obovatum |
Sapotaceae |
N + P |
Sept., Oct., Nov. and Dec. |
55.34 |
0.34 |
|
27 |
Palaqium obtusifolium |
Sapotacea |
N + P |
Jul., Aug., and Sept. |
3.2 |
0.06 |
|
28 |
Dillenia cerrata |
Dilleniaceae |
N |
Sept. and Oct. |
17.11 |
0.16 |
|
29 |
Maranthes corymbose Bl. |
Chrysobalanaceae |
N |
Jun., Jul., Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
2.82 |
0.04 |
|
30 |
Ailanthus integrifolia |
Simaroubaceae |
P |
Mar., Apr. and May |
2.3 |
0.04 |
|
31 |
Mitrephora macrocarpa |
Annonaceae |
N |
Aug. and Sept. |
12.81 |
0.14 |
|
32 |
Cratoxylum hypericinum |
Hypericaceae |
N + P |
Apr., May, Jun., Jul., Aug., and Sept. |
3.77 |
0.06 |
|
33 |
Adenandra celebica |
Magnoliaceae |
N |
Feb, Mar., Apr. and May |
3.37 |
0.06 |
|
34 |
Magnolea pterocarpan Roxb |
Magnoliaceae |
N |
Mar., Apr., May, Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.16 |
0.04 |
|
35 |
Calophyllum waworoenti |
Guttiferaceae |
N + P |
Mar., Apr., May, Sept. and Oct. |
2.15 |
0.04 |
|
36 |
Gustafia augusta L. |
Lecythidaceae |
N |
Jun., Jul., Aug., and Sept. |
2.2 |
0.04 |
|
37 |
Lithocarpus celebicus |
Fagaceae |
P |
Apr., May, Jun., Jul., Aug., Sept. and Oct. |
2.15 |
0.04 |
|
38 |
Garuga floribunda Decne |
Burseraseae |
N |
6-9Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
14.11 |
0.06 |
|
39 |
Dacrydium elatum |
Podocarpaceae |
P |
May, Jun., Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
4.68 |
0.06 |
|
40 |
Knema cinerea |
Myristicaceae |
P |
Jul., Aug. and Sept. |
2.3 |
0.04 |
|
41 |
Planchonia valida Blume |
Lecythidaceae |
N |
Jan., Feb, Mar. and Dec. |
2.24 |
0.04 |
|
42 |
Vitex cofassus |
Verbenaceae |
NS + N + P |
7-10Jul., Aug. Sept. and Oct. |
2.5 |
0.04 |
|
43 |
Anthocepalus cadamba |
Crustacean |
P |
Mar. and Apr. |
4.46 |
0.06 |
|
∑ |
300 |
3,14 |
||||
Note: NS (Nest Trees), N (Nectar), Polen (P).
3.2 Flowering calendar
The flowering calendar helps to determine the availability of bee feed at the research site. If there is a lot of forage available, honey bees can collect nectar or pollen to store in their nest. The nest's forage will be used to meet daily needs as well as fodder reserves. During the flowering season, bees are constantly building nests; queen bees lay eggs, while worker bees actively collect nectar and pollen [41].
Observations demonstrate that plants with the potential to be used as food for honey bees have various life cycles. However, it is available all year, albeit the quantity varies month to month. This condition is also consistent with study conducted in Negeria [42], India [43], Saudi Arabia [37] and Nepal [44]. In general, the plants found in this locality are annuals with flowering periods that vary greatly depending on the planting season. Plants such as Castanopsis buruana Miq., Ficus sp. and Calophyllum waworoenti can bloom twice a year. Because the bee food plants flower at different times, honey bee food is always available. According to Setiawan and Susilawati [45], when certain plants do not flower, other plants can meet the food needs of bees.
3.3 Importance Value Index
The Importance Value Index (IVI) is a metric used to assess the dominance of a plant type in its community. A species' IVI value indicates its importance in the community. The dominant plants at this area are Palaqium obovatum from the Sapotaceae family and Castanopsis buruana Miq. from the Fabaceae family, with IVI values of 55.34% and 48.15%, respectively. This plant has a high dominance value due to its huge stem diameter and is typically found in forests. Palaqium obovatum and Castanopsis buruana Miq. are bee-friendly plants because they have blooms and nectar. This tree's properties are similar to research [45], while having a distinct species of plant.
3.4 Diversity index
The Shannon-Wiener diversity index measures species richness and abundance in vegetation [46]. The analysis results suggest that the diversity value at the research location was 3.14, which is considered good (>3) [47]. A great diversity of species in an area suggests good environmental stability, thus bee food is readily available. This has a good impact on honey production. Diversity of forest resources for nesting and honey production.
3.5 Forest health index
Environmental degradation, limited food supply, and parasites on larvae and pupae all contribute to forest bees (Apis dorsata Binghamii) migratory behavior. As a result, this research was continued by assessing environmental damage at the research site. Environmental degradation is approached by looking at the trees physical damage as a bee’s habitat. A tree is considered healthy or normal if it can perform its physiological functions in accordance with its genetic potential, and it is considered damaged if it is disturbed by pathogens or certain environmental conditions, causing one of its physiological functions to deviate from normal conditions [48].
According to data from observations of physical damage to trees at the study site, out of the 236 trees that were found, 71 (or 30%) had physical damage, and 164 (or 70%) were considered to be in good health. Liana, Termites, Konk, Excessive Brum, Cancer, Open Wounds, Broken Branches, Tumors, Broken Stems, Resin, Broken Roots > 3 feet, and Other Types are the 12 categories of damage (Table 2).
Vines account for 27% of tree damage in this region, followed by termites (15%), open wounds (11%), tumors (9%), cones (8%), excessive brums, cancer, and broken branches, each at 6%, damaged stems and others (4%), resin and broken roots >3 feet, each at 3% (Figure 4). Liana is a plant that propagates or is supported by trees, yet its root system is located in the ground and serves as a source of nutrition. Liana attacks can harm or even kill trees. Plants that are entangled with lianas include Castanopsis buarana Miq., which forest bees employ as nest trees, nectar producers, and pollen producers. This physical damage to the tree shows that the tree's health is at risk, which affects bee migration to better sites [49]. This verifies Chase et al.’s [50] research, which found that forest loss can have a wide-ranging impact on the forest resource ecology, including a drop in the honey bee population, specifically the Apis dorsata Binghamii.
Table 2. Trees physical damage
|
Code |
Damage Type |
Type |
Amount Tree |
|
01 |
Cancer |
Artocarpus chempeden, Artocarpus integer Castanopsis buruana Miq. (2 trees),Garuga floribunda |
5 |
|
02 |
Conc |
Inocarpus fagiferus, Coordersiodendron pinnatum,nephelium ramboutan,Palaquium obtusifolium, Pterospermum celebicum, Kalappia celebica |
6 |
|
03 |
Open Wounds |
Pterospermum celebicum, Agathis dammara, Calophyllum inophylum, Mitrephora macrocarpa (2 trees), Nephelium ramboutan, Tetrameles nudiflora, Spiraeopsis celebica |
8 |
|
04 |
Resinosis |
Agathis dammara, Nephelium ramboutan |
2 |
|
05 |
Broken Stem |
Tetrameles nudiflora, Xanthostemon petiolatus |
2 |
|
06 |
Termite |
Ailanthus integrifolia, Nephelium ramboutan, Dacrydium elatum, Semecarpus cuneiformis, Payena sp, Castanopsis buruana Miq., Eugenia sp. (2 trees), lithocarpus glutinosus |
9 |
|
20 |
Liana |
Artocarpus sp, Palaqium obovatum (3 trees), Inocarpus fagiferus (2 trees), Palaquium obtusifolium, Mitrephora macrocarpa, Parinari corimbosum Miq., Tetrameles nudiflora (3 trees), Microcos paniculata L, Castanopsis buruana Miq., Cratoxylum hypericinum, Knema cinerea, Lithocarpus glutinosus, Coordersiodendron pinnatum |
17 |
|
22 |
Broken branch |
Castanopsis buruana Miq., Tetrameles nudiflora, Calophyllum inophylum, Dillenia cerrata |
4 |
|
23 |
Excessive Brum |
Castanopsis buruana Miq., Eugenia sp (2 trees), Mitrephora macrocarpa |
4 |
|
26 |
Tumor |
Castanopsis buruana Miq., Cinnamomum celebicum, Cratoxylum hypericinum, Gustavia augusta L |
4 |
|
31 |
Tunnel |
Coordersiodendron pinnatum |
1 |
|
05.06 |
Broken stems & Termites |
Lithocarpus celebicus |
1 |
|
06, 20 |
Termites & Liana |
Palaquium obtusifolium, Semecarpus cuneiformis |
2 |
|
05, 26 |
Broken stems & Tumors |
Castanopsis buruana Miq.(2 trees) |
2 |
|
22.31 |
Broken Branch, Tunnel |
Mallotus philippensis |
1 |
|
20.26 |
Liana & Tumor |
Spiraeopsis celebica |
1 |
|
13.23 |
Broken roots > 3 feet, Brum excessive |
Microcos paniculata L |
1 |
|
03.20.31 |
Liana, open wounds, tunnels |
Tetrameles nudiflora |
1 |
|
∑ |
71 |
||
Figure 4. Type and percentage of trees physical damage
Based on the health of the trees, stakeholders must conduct regular monitoring, particularly in terms of pest and disease prevention and treatment, in order to reduce the extent of tree damage. This is because the honey bee Apis dorsata Binghamii relies on the tree's health for feeding and nesting. Apart from that, Apis dorsata Binghamii, an endemic species to Sulawesi, must be protected in accordance with the mandate of Law No. 5 of 1990 Concerning the Conservation of Biological Natural Resources and Their Ecosystems.
The diversity of tree species foraged by the forest bee Apis dorsata Binghamii in the Mangolo Nature Tourism Park is classed as high abundance (H'= 3.14), dominated by the Castanopsis buruana Miq. species (IVI= 48.15) and the Palaqium obovatum species (IVI= 55.34). There are nine varieties of nest trees, 35 plants that provide flowers nectar, and 27 plants that generate pollen. Each plant's flowering time varies, however the distribution of flowering times is available from January to December. Physical damage to bee foraging trees was 30% (71 trees), while those that remained healthy were 70% (164 trees). The most common causes of tree physical harm are liana entanglements and termite assaults.
[1] Hasyim, S., Abdullah, R., Ibrahim, H. (2021). Forest damage and preservation through forest resources management in Indonesia. GeoJournal, 86(5): 2183-2189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10177-5
[2] Betts, M.G., Wolf, C., Ripple, W.J., Phalan, B., Millers, K.A., Duarte, A., Butchart, S.H.M., Levi, T. (2017). Global forest loss disproportionately erodes biodiversity in intact landscapes. Nature, 547(7664): 441-444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23285
[3] Karapatzak, E., Dichala, O., Papanastasi, K., et al. (2023). A multifaceted evaluation approach for Greek native neglected and underutilized forest fruit trees and shrubs as natural sources of antioxidants: Consolidating the framework for their sustainable agronomic exploitation. Plants, 12(8): 1642. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12081642
[4] Asamoah, O., Danquah, J.A., Bamwesigye, D., Verter, N., Acheampong, E., Boateng, C.M., Kuittinen, S., Appiah, M., Pappinen, A. (2023). Perceptions of commercialisation and value-addition of non-timber forest products in forest adjacent communities in Ghana. Discover Sustainability, 4(1): 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-023-00146-6
[5] Zhang, Z., Zhang, L., Xu, H., Creed, I.F., Blanco, J.A., Wei, X.H., Sun, G., Asbjornsen, H., Bishop, K. (2023). Forest water-use efficiency: Effects of climate change and management on the coupling of carbon and water processes. Forest Ecology and Management, 534: 120853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2023.120853
[6] Vatandaşlar, C., Yavuz, M., Leuchner, M. (2020). Erosion control service of forest ecosystems: A case study from Northeastern Turkey. In: Nedkov, S., et al. (eds), Smart Geography, pp. 443-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28191-5_32
[7] Song, C., Lee, W.K., Choi, H.A., Kim, J., Jeon, S.W., Kim, J.S. (2016). Spatial assessment of ecosystem functions and services for air purification of forests in South Korea. Environmental Science & Policy, 63: 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.005
[8] Vilhar U. (2017). Water regulation and purification. In: Pearlmutter, D., et al. (eds), The Urban Forest, pp. 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50280-9_5
[9] Löfroth, T., Merinero, S., Johansson, J., Nordström, E.M., Sahlström, E., Sjögren, J., Ranius, T. (2024). “Land-sparing benefits biodiversity while land-sharing benefits ecosystem services”: Stakeholders' perspectives on biodiversity conservation strategies in boreal forests. Ambio, 53: 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-023-01926-0
[10] Undang Undang No. 41 Tahun 1999 Tentang: Kehutanan. https://geographylovers.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/undang-undang-no-41-tahun-1999-tentang-kehutanan.pdf, accessed on Jun. 12, 2024.
[11] Sanjeewani, H.N., Samarasinghe, D.P., De Costa, W.J.M. (2024). Influence of elevation and the associated variation of climate and vegetation on selected soil properties of tropical rainforests across a wide elevational gradient. Catena, 237: 107823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2024.107823
[12] Aye, T.H., Shibata, S. (2023). Vegetation structure and tree species diversity inside and outside a newly established Zalon Taung National Park in Northwest Myanmar. International Journal of Forestry Research. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/8409374
[13] Brodie, J.F., Giordano, A.J., Ambu, L. (2015). Differential responses of large mammals to logging and edge effects. Mammalian Biology, 80(1): 7-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2014.06.001
[14] Maa, T.C. (1953). An inquiry into the systematics of the Tribus Apidini or honey bees (Hym.). Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy.
[15] Zahara, I., Fahri, F., Lamerkabel, J.S., Qashiratuttarafi, Q., Juliandi, B., Raffiudin, R. (2022). Landmark-Based Geometric Morphometric of Apis dorsata and A. d. binghami Wing Venation in Indonesian Archipelagos. HAYATI Journal of Biosciences, 29(5): 658-668.
[16] Ruttner, F. (1988). Biogeography and Taxonomy of Honeybees. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
[17] Nuraeni, S., Syaid, N.M., Sadapotto, A. (2023). Identification of pollen as afood resource for honey bees (Apis binghami) in the village of Bonto Manurung, District of Tompobulu, Regency of Maros. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1277(1): 012033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1277/1/012033
[18] Lo, N., Gloag, R.S., Anderson, D.L., Oldroyd, B.P. (2010). A molecular phylogeny of the genus Apis suggests that the Giant Honey Bee of the Philippines, A. breviligula Maa, and the Plains Honey Bee of southern India, A. indica Fabricius, are valid species. Systematic Entomology, 35(2): 226-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2009.00504.x
[19] Rianti, P., Suryobroto, B., Atmowidi, T. (2010). Diversity and effectiveness of insect pollinators of Jatropha curcas L. (Euphorbiaceae). HAYATI Journal of Biosciences, 17(1): 38-42. https://doi.org/10.4308/hjb.17.1.38
[20] Rosmarlinasiah, H. (2020). Potential of Forest Honey Bees. Q Media Publishing. https://qmediapublishing.com/buku/potensi-lebah-madu-hutan/.
[21] van Rijn, P.C., van Houten, Y.M., Sabelis, M.W. (2002). How plants benefit from providing food to predators even when it is also edible to herbivores. Ecology, 83(10): 2664-2679. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2664:HPBFPF]2.0.CO;2
[22] Dobson, H.E., Bergström, G. (2000). The ecology and evolution of pollen odors. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 222: 63-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984096
[23] Deprá, M.S., Delaqua, G.G., Freitas, L., Gaglianone, M.C. (2014). Pollination deficit in open-field tomato crops (Solanum lycopersicum L., Solanaceae) in Rio de Janeiro state, southeast Brazil. Journal of Pollination Ecology, 12: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.26786/1920-7603(2014)7
[24] Paar, J., Oldroyd, B.P., Huettinger, E., Kastberger, G. (2004). Genetic structure of an Apis dorsata population: the significance of migration and colony aggregation. Journal of Heredity, 95(2): 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esh026
[25] Rattanawannee, A., Chanchao, C. (2011). Bee diversity in Thailand and the applications of bee products. In: Changing Diversity in Changing Environment, pp. 133-162.
[26] Makinson, J.C., Schaerf, T.M., Rattanawannee, A., Oldroyd, B.P., Beekman, M. (2014). Consensus building in giant Asian honeybee, Apis dorsata, swarms on the move. Animal Behaviour, 93: 191-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.04.029
[27] Soegianto A. (1994). Ekologi Kuantitatif: Metode Analisis Populasi dan Komunitas. Surabaya: Usaha Nasional.
[28] Mueller-Dombois, D., Ellenberg, H. (1974). Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. Wiley, New York.
[29] Mangold, R. (1995). Forest Health Monitoring: Field Methods Guide. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, New York.
[30] Al-Ghamdi, A.A., Al-Khulaidi, A., Al-Sagheer, N.A., Nuru, A., Tadesse, Y. (2020). Identification, characterization and mapping of honey bee flora of Al-Baha region of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Environmental Biology, 41(3): 613-622.
[31] Corlett, R.T. (2010). Honeybees in natural ecosystems. In: Honeybees of Asia, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 215-225.
[32] Agussalim, A., Agus, A., Umami, N., Budisatria, I.G.S. (2017). Variation of honeybees forages as source of nectar and pollen based on altitude in Yogyakarta. Buletin Peternakan, 41(4): 448-460. https://doi.org/10.21059/buletinpeternak.v41i4.13593
[33] Somme, L., Vanderplanck, M., Michez, D., Lombaerde, I., Moerman, R., Wathelet, B., Wattiez, R., Lognay, G., Jacquemart, A.L. (2015). Pollen and nectar quality drive the major and minor floral choices of bumble bees. Apidologie, 46: 92-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13592-014-0307-0
[34] Brodschneider, R., Gratzer, K., Heigl, H., Auer, W., Moosbeckhofer, R., Crailsheim, K. (2018). What we can (or cannot) learn from multifloral pollen pellets. Bee World, 95(3): 78-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.2018.1483057
[35] Lamerkabel, J.S. (2011). Mengenal jenis-jenis lebah madu, produk-produk dan cara budidayanya. Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi, 9(1): 70-79.
[36] Tahir, H., Irundu, D., Rusmidin, R. (2021). Jenis Tumbuhan Sumber Pakan Lebah (Trigona Sp.) Di Desa Mirring Polewali Mandar Sulawesi Barat. Jurnal Nusa Sylva, 21(2): 39-47. https://doi.org/10.31938/jns.v21i2.339
[37] Al-Ghamdi, A.A., Al-Sagheer, N.A. (2023). Plant species as potential forage for honey bees in the Al-Baha Mountain Region in southwestern Saudi Arabia. Plants, 12(6): 1402. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12061402
[38] Mountara, A., Irsyam, A.S.D., Hariri, M.R., Al Anshori, Z., Andari, D. (2021). Keberadaan Desmanthus virgatus (Fabaceae) meliar di Pulau Jawa. Konservasi Hayati, 17(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.33369/hayati.v17i1.12813
[39] Simpson, M.G. (2010). Diversity and classification of flowering plants: Eudicots. Plant systematics, 2010: 275-448.
[40] Quattrocchi, U. (2012). CRC World Dictionary of Medicinal and poisonous Plants: Common Names, Scientific Names, Eponyms, Synonyms, and Etymology (5 Volume Set). CRC Press.
[41] Rosmarlinasiah, R., Kabe, A., Uslinawaty, Z., Syamsul, S. (2020). The potential of beeforage Apis dorsata Binghamii at KPHP gula Raya Tobimeita Kendari. Jurnal Celebica: Jurnal Kehutanan Indonesia, 1(2): 1-10.
[42] Ayansola, A.A., Davies, B.A., Davies, B.A. (2012). Honeybee floral resources in Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Biology and Life Science, 3(1): 127-139. https://doi.org/10.5296/jbls.v3i1.1720
[43] Divekar, P.A., Singh, K., Verma, C.K., Rai, A.B., Singh, B., Yadav, S., Karkute, S.G. (2023). Assessment of bee flora and development of a floral calendar in relation to pharmaceutical potential of honey and bee pollen in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. Annals of Phytomedicine, 12(1): 844-855. https://doi.org/10.54085/ap.2023.12.1.55
[44] Bhattarai, S., Adhikari, S., Ojha, A., Joshi, Y.R., Manandhar, S., Acharya, S., Bist, D. (2023). Preparation of floral calendar of bee flora available in Lamjung district, Nepal. Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science, 8(3): 295-301. https://doi.org/10.26832/24566632.2023.080304
[45] Setiawan, I., Susilawati, E. (2023). Inventory of food source plants for honey bees (Apis Cerana) in Buana Sakti village, Batanghari district, east Lampung regency. Sylva: Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Kehutanan, 12(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.32502/sylva.v12i1.7037
[46] Omayio, D., Mzungu, E., Kakamega, K. (2019). Modification of Shannon-wiener diversity index towards quantitative estimation of environmental wellness and biodiversity levels under a non-comparative Scenario. Journal of Environment and Earth Science, 9(9): 46-57. https://doi.org/10.7176/JEES/9-9-06
[47] Sutrisna, T., Umar, M.R., Suhadiyah, S., Santosa, S. (2018). Diversity and composition of tree vegetation in Lanna and Takapala Water Fall Area, Gowa Regency, South Sulawesi. Bioma: Jurnal Biologi Makassar, 3(1): 12-18.
[48] Agrios, G.N. (2005). Plant Pathology. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-02037-6
[49] Oldroyd, B.P., Nanork, P. (2009). Conservation of Asian honey bees. Apidologie, 40(3): 296-312. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido/2009021
[50] Chase, M.H., Charles, B., Harmon-Threatt, A., Fraterrigo, J.M. (2023). Diverse forest management strategies support functionally and temporally distinct bee communities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 60(11): 2375-2388. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14513
