It wasn’t until my first entomology class at Colorado State University as an undergraduate that I learned that working with insects was something one could pursue for their career. Though, like many other naturalists and entomologists, my passion started very early in life. The living, breathing, and thriving ecosystems that surround us or that we cultivate in our gardens strike us with awe and wonder, but the organisms that I found most interesting were the small arthropods and the plants associated with them. Even more specifically, I was drawn to pollinators and their behaviors within garden microcosms. I would spend many hours of my younger years observing and interacting with small ground nesting bees that dotted gravelly areas, and watching all kinds of species that visited the blooms around the neighborhood. Although pollinators are what I had always been striving to work with, my life led me in many different entomological directions.
An adrenid mining bee sitting on a currant leaf at the Hesthvn Nature Center and Sanctuary. Photo Credit: Taylor Janecek.
After graduating from Colorado State University with a degree in Wildlife Biology and Conservation (they did not offer entomology as a major at the time unfortunately), the very first opportunity I had was to work at an invertebrate zoo called the Butterfly Pavilion where I worked with so many different invertebrate species and also started beekeeping, which I kept doing for about 12 years. From there, my experiences included working with mosquitoes and predacious ground beetles at NEON (National Ecological Observatory Network), work with aquatic insects at the USGS National Water Quality Lab, and work with disease vectoring arthropods across the U.S. with the USDA National Wildlife Research Center. These experiences led me to apply for graduate school at Colorado State University, so that I could refine my entomological interests and expertise.
I started my Master’s degree in in 2021 in bio-agricultural sciences, specializing in entomology. I worked with a virus that was a relatively new pest in chile peppers in Southern Colorado, vectored by aphids. The goal of this research was to investigate methods to manage virus incidence in chile pepper systems using cultural control methods, such as fine-tuning planting dates or identifying and using resistant plant varieties. We found some very promising varieties that showed resistance through field and greenhouse experiments. An added benefit was that I was able to bring home hundreds of pounds of chile peppers! Throughout my Master’s I was also able to collaborate on quinoa research and hemp, graduating in 2023. I learned that I really love research and outreach, but pollinators were still at the front of my mind. If I were to continue in academia, it had to be studying and working directly with them.
Another photo from Hesthvn Nature Center and Sanctuary. I was lucky enough to see such a large proportion of Delphinium flowering. As I am not from this state, I am in a constant state of awe when I’m anywhere outdoors here. Photo Credit: Taylor Janecek.
That brings me to today. I started my doctoral studies in the Garden Ecology lab early this year under the advisement of Dr. Gail Langellotto. Gail and I share tremendous interest and passion for pollinator behavioral ecology and conservation. I am interested in exploring some Jen Haye’s preliminary findings, which suggest that we can select and plant floral resources in gardens in ways that alleviate competitive pressures from honey bees, to achieve a more sustainable coexistence with native, wild bees. Honey bees are here to stay, and they will almost always outcompete native bees in some way. I am interested in understanding how we can design and manage our gardens to provide a more harmonious habitat for them both. If this resonates with you, please consider signing up for my summer research project.
We will be documenting plants in these pollinator gardens so that we can:
***Document the most common pollinator plants being cultivated by Oregon gardeners,
***Relate garden plantings to the types of pollinators supported (e.g. bees, flies, and/or butterflies),
***Determine the seasonal extent of pollinator garden resources (summer only, or also covering early spring and summer, and
***Estimate the standing crop of resources available to pollinators within these pollinator gardens.
We will also be looking for plants in or around gardens that are considered magnet plants for honey bees and other the yellow-faced bumble bee. Magnet plants include those that provide large quantities of nectar, are highly attractive to the worker caste of eusocial bees, and that can draw abundant, eusocial bees away from the plants that native bees favor. I will study magnet plants in a manipulative field experiment, where I will document pollinator behavior on garden plantings, with and without magnet plants.
The Garden Ecology Lab was founded in 2017 to advance an understanding of how to plan, plant, and manage garden systems to promote environmental and human health. It is one of two labs in the United States, and the only one in the Western US, to specifically focus on studies of garden ecology.
In this article, I provide an update on our native plant studies, with a focus on results that may be of particular interest to nursery owners. Brief summaries of many of our lab’s studies can be found on the ‘For Gardeners’ page of our lab website. Some nurseries have printed out copies of these lab briefs, so that their customers can see the ecological benefits of various plants. More briefs are planned for this year. Periodically visit our website for updates.
Native Plants in Garden Retail Centers
Interest in native plant gardening has drastically grown in recent years, but many native plants remain difficult to find for purchase. In the April 2019 issue of The Digger, Dr. Aaron Anderson highlighted three barriers that gardeners face, when trying to purchase native plants: 1) lack of advertising by native plant nurseries or gardeners’ lack of familiarity with these nurseries, 2) variation in nursery stock among native plant growers, and 3) geographic distance that gardeners might have to travel to find the plants they are looking for. These specific barriers were ones that Aaron faced when he was setting up his field study of insect communities associated with 23 species of Pacific Northwest Native plants.
Aaron used the Oregon Flora’s gardening resource page to locate where he could buy his study plants. He ultimately ended up purchasing plants from two retail nurseries (one in Corvallis and the other in Forest Grove) and two pop up native plant sales (one in Corvallis and one in Portland). He also worked with two wholesale nurseries that were generous enough to sell or donate study plants or seed in the small quantities he was seeking (one in Salem and one in Silverton). Because he has been asked this question, often, Aaron also wrote a blog post on ‘Where to Buy Native Plants in Oregon‘.
After a three-year field study, Aaron was able to identify 10 native plants which support a diversity of bee species. We developed an infographic to share this information with gardeners, and include lavender in the image, since many gardeners perceive lavender to be a pollinator-friendly plant (Bennett 2019).
Image 1: The number of estimated bee species associated with PNW native plants is shown in a yellow circle, above each bar. Lavender is shown as a comparison, since it is recognized as a pollinator-friendly plant by many gardeners.
Today, Oregon Flora’s garden resource page lists 10 nurseries where gardeners can find and purchase native plants (Oregon Flora 2025). I used their plant-finding tool, to see whether I could find the 10 native plants that we recommend to gardeners. None of the nurseries were listed as carrying all of these recommended plants: two nurseries were listed as carrying 6 species, three nurseries carried 5, two nurseries carried 4, and three nurseries carried 2. All of the 10 nurseries were listed as carrying Oregon sunshine (Eriophyllum lanatum). None were listed as carrying Farewell-to-spring (Clarkia amoena), varileaf phacelia (Phacelia heterophylla), or common madia (Madia elegans).
Farewell-to-Spring, a promising native nursery plant
The absence of farewell-to-spring from nursery shelves is particularly disappointing, because it has become a favorite in our lab group. Its native range spans the Bay Area of California, north through Oregon and Washington and into British Columbia. In Oregon, it grows west of the Cascades to the coast and is found in a variety of habitats including coastal prairie, grasslands and forested areas. It is an easy-to-grow annual plant with erect stems (5.4” maximum height), thin, green leaves and bright pink flowers. In our study plots, first bloom occurred anywhere between early June and early July and lasting through early August through late October, depending upon seasonal weather patterns and supplemental irrigation.
Farewell-to-spring attracts a diversity of beneficial insects. Aaron collected 14 bee species, 15 predatory insect taxa, and 12 parasitoid taxa from this wildflower (Anderson 2022, Anderson et al. 2022) documenting its ecological value for attracting pollinators, as well as natural enemies that promote the biological control of insect pests. In a separate, but related field study, Jen Hayes looked at the pollinator assemblages on eight species of wild-type native plants and 1-3 of their cultivars. Jen provided an overview of this study in the October 2020 issue of The Digger (Hayes and Langellotto 2020), and the full report of this study was recently published (Hayes et al. 2025) for folks wanting more detailed information.
Farewell-to-spring was one of the native plants in her field study of pollinators on native plants and native cultivars. The cultivars she used were ‘Aurora’ (dark pink blossoms with a cream center), ‘Dwarf White’ (white blossoms), and ‘Scarlet’ (red blossoms with a light pink center). She documented 32 total pollinator species from the wild-type plant (with an estimated 104 total pollinator species), 17 pollinators on ‘Aurora’ (28 species estimated), 23 pollinators on ‘Dwarf White’ (24 species estimated), and 9 pollinators on ‘Scarlet’ (13 species estimated). Furthermore, she found that specialist bees, which are picky about where they collect pollen, were either exclusively found on wild-type native plants (two species, Megachile gravita and Melissodes microstictus), or were found in higher abundance on wild-type plants compared to cultivars (two species, Melissodes lupinus and Melissodes clarkiae). Because specialist bees have relatively narrow diet preferences, including their preferred forage plants is an easy way to attract these unique bees into a garden, and to locally increase pollinator biodiversity.
In addition to the importance of wild-type Farewell-to-spring as a forage plant, Jen worked with Mallory Mead (a former undergraduate student in our lab) to document its importance for bee nest material. Many leafcutter bee species use leaves, mud, resin, sticks, pebbles, or petals when they build their nests. Jen documented two species of petal-cutting bees in her study plot, each of which had a significant association with Farewell-to-spring and its cultivars. Megachile montivaga had significant associations with the wild type native and ‘Dwarf White’. Megachile brevis was significantly associated with the wild type native, ‘Dwarf White’, and ‘Aurora’.
Although Jen found evidence that the leafcutting bees were significantly associated with two of the three cultivars she included in her study, Mallory documented a very strong preference for the wild-type native over the cultivars, when she documented foraging for nesting material. Because leafcutting bees leave a characteristic crescent cut in petals, Mallory could document foraging for nesting material by counting the number of petal cuts from each plant. Wild type native plants had 3-4X as many petal cuts than cultivars. Even when we controlled for bloom count per plant, the wild type native was significantly preferred over the cultivars.
Image 3: Number of petal cuts by bees on wild-type Farewell-to-spring, and 3 cultivars.
Native Cultivars Are Often Easier to Find and Buy
Given the high abundance and diversity of beneficial insects associated with Farewell-to-spring, as well as its unique association with specialist foragers and petal-cutting bees, we enthusiastically recommend this plant to ecologically-minded gardeners. However, the average gardener shopping for this species is more likely to encounter cultivars than wild-type plants. This is partly because the plethora of Farewell-to-spring cultivars are on the market. In addition to the three included in Jen’s study, gardeners can find ‘Double Azalea’ (pink, purple, red, white flowers), ‘Lilac’ (pink petals with dark red center spots), ‘Pink to Red’ (red petals with light pink edges), ‘White’ (white flowers), ‘Pink’ (light pink flowers with no other markings); and ‘Sugarplum’ (semi-double flowers, light pink with rose-colored center markings, dwarf, somewhat bushy).
As noted earlier, native plants can be difficult to source in the retail marketplace. Offerings may not reflect the regional species pool of plants (Zinnen and Matthews 2022), and in some areas, 77% of the native plants on market shelves are actually hybrids or cultivars (Coombs et al. 2020). However, multiple studies have found that gardeners are willing to pay higher prices for native plants and locally sourced plant materials.
Somewhat unexpectedly, in a recent survey of 719 gardeners (Hayes et al. in preparation), 81% report that they buy their native plants at pop-up plant sales hosted by Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Master Gardener groups, or other non-profits. A comparable percentage of gardeners (78%) said that they buy their native plants at retail plant nurseries. However, given the transient nature of pop-up plant sales, it was surprising to us that they were as or more popular than brick-and-mortar stores for native plant purchases. I think this speaks to the difficulty many gardeners have finding the plants they are seeking, and how non-profit plant sales are filling a market void. It also points to a market opportunity for the nursery industry, in general.
References:
Anderson, A. 2019. Native plant production and marketing. The Digger, April Issue, pp 33-36.
Anderson, A. (2022). Evaluating the Attractiveness of Pacific Northwest Native Plants to Insects and Gardeners [Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of Ph.D.] Oregon State University.
Anderson, A. G., Costner, L., Best, L., & Langellotto, G. A. (2022). The bee fauna associated with Pacific Northwest (USA) native plants for gardens. Conservation Science and Practice, 4(10), e12801.
Bennett L. 2019. Examining the gap between interest and understanding of provisioning for bees: A capstone project to support urban bee conservation [Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of M.N.R.]. Oregon State University.
Coombs, G., Gilchrist, D., & Watson, P. (2020). An assessment of the native and invasive horticultural plants sold in the mid-Atlantic region. Native Plants Journal, 21(1), 74-82.
Hayes, J., Langellotto, G. 2020. Pollinator plant trials: researchers test the value of Willamette Valley natives and nativars. The Digger, October Issue, pp 33-37.
Hayes JJ-M, Bell NCS, Best LR, et al. 2025. Pacific Northwest native plants and native cultivars Part I: Pollinator visitation. Environ. Entomol. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvae126.
Zinnen, J., Matthews, J. W. 2022. Native species richness of commercial plant vendors in the Midwestern United States. Native Plants Journal, 23 (1) 4-15.
I had been to my mom’s hometown of Bagamanoc many times, but never before as a budding entomologist. In 1993, I packed my bags with the many tools used to collect and curate insects: glassine envelopes to store and sort butterflies, insect pins and boxes, a pinning block, and nets. Once on the ground in this rural region of the tropics, I set out to catch and kill new specimens for my personal insect collection. My prized find was a large birdwing butterfly, with black and red markings and wingspan of more than 6 inches: Atrophaneura semperi. I nearly vibrated with excitement as I caught her in my net. I carefully pulled her out and held her between my thumb and forefinger, so that I could pinch her thorax and break her flight muscles; a trick that was passed down to me by more experienced entomologists. This would ensure that she could no longer move, an activity that might scrape off scales or tear her wings. Pristine specimens are the standard for insect collections.
By the time I boarded a plane to return home, my prized find had been decimated. Ants had found her, and eaten her abdomen. I was crestfallen and ashamed that I had killed her. Since that time, I largely stopped collecting insects for my personal collection. I limit my collection to two taxa (longhorned beetles and metallic wood boring beetles), to keep from killing and pinning every insect that I see. But I have been involved in the lethal collection of many insect specimens for my work, and it is not without the occasional pangs of guilt.
A recent news story profiled Master Gardener volunteers who had collected 25,000 bees in Pennsylvania to further scientific understanding of wild bee abundance and diversity in the state.1 As the story was shared on social media, the comments and concerns related to lethal sampling accumulated: why was it necessary to kill the bees we are supposed to be helping?
In this article, I briefly examine the science, politics, and ethics of lethal sampling.
The Science
I know of only one study that has directly examined the impact of repeated, lethal sampling on insect communities.2 In this study, the authors sampled wild bees every two weeks throughout a season, or once per season. They found no effect of repeated sampling on any of the response variables they measured, including bee abundance, species richness, or community composition. They suggest that density-dependent competitive release may explain their results: decreased survivorship by some is compensated by increased fecundity from others. In essence, as you remove bees from the community, it reduces the intensity of competition and allows surviving bees to produce more offspring than they would have been able to if they had to compete with other bees for resources.
Lethal sampling has long been the rule in studies of insect biodiversity. In homage to the “lock and key hypothesis,” which suggests that genital morphology acts as a reproductive barrier that ultimately defines a species, identifying an insect to species may mean dissecting out genitalia for microscopic examination. In fact, there is a piece of equipment that some entomologists use, that is designed to inflate and harden insect genitalia, called a phalloblaster or vesica everter. This penis pump for insects cost $2,727 in 1997.
A shift away from lethal sampling has been happening for quite some time, particularly for butterflies and other large insects that can be identified by sight. On iNaturalist, many insects are identified to species by combining advances in machine learning and computer vision with crowd-sourced verifications from the iNaturalist community. The platform has led to the discovery and rediscovery of multiple insect species.3, 4
A few of the 2,691 specimens collected for a recent study of garden bee biodiversity. Photo credit: Gail Langellotto.
The Politics
Insects are generally exempt from regulatory oversight. But recent stories of insect declines and the emergence and growth of the insect farming industry has led at least one law school to teach a course on insect law. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) govern the ethical care of animals used in research studies, but exempts invertebrates from oversight, except for cephalopods (octopus, squid and cuttlefish).
Few laws govern the collection of insect specimens. However, in the state of Washington, insects are classified as wildlife. Permits are required to collect insects for scientific study. This has complicated the launch of the Washington Bee Atlas, run by the Washington Department of Agriculture, which must secure permits from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for every bee collected.
The Ethics
The cephalopod exemption to IACUC oversight is notable, and is based on the recognition that cephalopods are sentient, self-aware, and capable of feeling or fearing pain. Insects don’t have a brain, per se. Instead, they have three clusters of nerve fibers, which form the supraesophageal ganglion. This fact has sometimes been used to argue that insects can’t feel pain, but reviews of recent studies suggest that there is evidence that some insect adults may feel pain,5 and that some may feel emotional states such as stress.6
Another high-profile study found evidence that bumblebees play.7 Play is classified as an activity that does not result in an obvious reward or adaptive outcome, among other criteria. In this study, researchers documented bumblebees interacting with balls in ways that satisfy the criteria for play. The bees received no reward for this behavior. As in many other animals, younger bees played more often than older bees. If insects are sentient, the field of entomology would undergo a revolution of practice.
But scientists are increasingly using and improving nonlethal methods in entomology,9 including the use of DNA barcoding, catch and release, and camera traps. Because the study of insects has largely been exempt from regulatory oversight, most entomologists have yet to reflect on the moral considerations of catching and killing insects. However, as we learn more about insect cognition, the time may be coming to carefully weigh the costs and benefits of lethal collection methods and to invest in technologies that advance the use of non-lethal options.
An example of a solar-powered and open sourced camera trap, to study insect visits to an artificial flower platform. Photo by Maximilian Sittinger. (CC-BY-SA-4.0).
1Stimpston, Ashley. 2024. Twenty master gardeners have collected 25,000 bees. Here’s why. The Washington Post (October 24, 2024).
2Gezon, Zachariah J. et al. 2015. The effect of repeated, lethal sampling on wild bee abundance and diversity. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6(9): 1044-1054.
3Tugwell, James, Masashi and Gaston, Kevin J. 2024. Sixteen insect species photographed for the first time by citizen scientist. ABC News, Australia (October 19, 2024).
4Mesaglio, Thomas. 2021. First known photographs of living specimens: the power of iNaturalist for recording rare tropical butterflies. Journal of Insect Conservation, 25: 905-911.
5Gibbons, M. et al. 2022. Can insects feel pain? A review of the neural and behavioral evidence. Advances in Insect Physiology, 63: 155-229.
6Lambert, H. et al. 2021. Wouldn’t hurt a fly? A review of insect cognition and sentience in relation to their use as food and feed. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 243: 105432.
7Galpayage Dona, Hiruni Samadi et al. 2022. Do bumblebees play? Animal Behavior, 194: 239-251.
8Hallman, Caspar A. et al. 2017. More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLOS One, 12(10): e0185809.
9Lovei, Gabor L. and Ferrante, Marco. 2024. The use and prospects of nonlethal methods in entomology. Annual Review of Entomology, 69: 183-198.
The Grow(in)’ On! Visioning Summit, held September 17-19, 2024, in Portland, Oregon, bridged agriculture and urban design, exploring ways to integrate farming within urban spaces. Hosted by the University of Oregon’s Institute for Health in the Built Environment, this summit convened experts to tackle sustainable building-integrated agriculture. Through workshops and discussions, participants gained insights into global practices, fostering collaboration aimed at reshaping food production in urban settings.
Each speaker not only brought a unique angle to the challenges and opportunities in building-integrated agriculture but also sparked actionable ideas for reshaping our urban landscapes to nourish both people and the environment. This summit reinforced the critical intersections of technology, sustainability, and community-driven innovation that we need to move forward.
One of the highlights of the Grow(in)’ On! Visioning Summit was the time spent in small action groups, where we organized around shared themes and goals. These self-formed groups fostered deeper connections and allowed us to dive into specific challenges in building-integrated agriculture. It was inspiring to see the diverse strategies we came up with and to know we’re collectively moving forward on these fronts. I’m excited to see the impact of our ongoing work and look forward to reconnecting and sharing our progress soon.
For more details about the summit and speakers, visit the event website.
My mother introduced me to gardening at a young age, growing parsley, tomatoes, marigolds, and basil. With spending much time in the garden, so came spending time with the insects. We would catch bumble bees in little jars to look at before letting them continue with their day. We would ooh and ahh over the butterflies that would visit our lilac bush in the late spring. With learning to garden came an interest in insects that I could not shake. With optimism that I would find a field that I would connect with, I started my voyage within academia in general Biology. Through a series of university transfers and focusing my passions, I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Botany and Entomology from Oregon State University in September of 2023. During my time as an undergraduate student, I came across a paper discussing pollinators in the Arctic. I knew little about the process of pollination in an environment of such varying climates, and soon came to learn that flies were one of the most predominant pollinators in this curious ecosystem.
I took this image in 2021 of the garden space I was lucky to spend my time in. Featured is my beautiful dog, Francis, who is also a fan of insects!
Thus began my exploration into the world of fly pollinators. Underexamined and typically unassuming, I became enamored by these curious insects. As I was living between temperate and continental climates, moving from British Columbia, Quebec, New York, and Oregon, I looked to the ecosystems that I interacted with. Though “flashier” than the arctic muscid fly, as seen in the compelling report by Tiusanen et al. (2016), flower flies became both my academic and personal ardor. Also known as hover flies and syrphid flies, flower flies are integral pollinators in urban environments. Stopping at the flowering bushes and herbs during the blooming seasons to hunt for the flower flies and watching videos about them during the colder months, I ceased to subdue my fascination.
During the final term of my undergraduate degree at Oregon State University, I met Dr. Langellotto who shared my adoration for flower flies. Dr. Langellotto introduced me to the predatory nature of flower fly larvae, expanding my once-exclusively lens of flower flies as pollinators to flower flies as essential managers of insect pests, such as aphids and mealybugs. Under the expert advisement of Dr. Langellotto, I began my master’s degree at the beginning of April 2024 and have dedicated my thesis project to my flower fly friends. As an ode to all invertebrate and vertebrate pollinators, entomologists, gardeners, citizen scientists, and nature-enjoyers, I hope that my research project calls to you.
Thus comes my announcement for folks who garden. For this Summer 2024, the researchers of the Garden Ecology Lab are looking for people who garden in Corvallis or Portland, Oregon, to participate in a study of flower flies. In this study, student researchers of the lab will be examining how garden size, tree cover, and floral abundance changes the composition of flower flies. Excellent at mimicry, voracious predators of plant pests as larvae, and valuable pollinators as adults, flower flies are important insects in urban garden systems. Also known as hover flies or syrphid flies, they are often seen on warm and sunny days collecting nectar. We are looking for gardens of many kinds; whether it is entirely covered by trees, without trees, a garden with a great variety of flowering plants, an edible garden, a highly maintained garden, or a minimally maintained garden. A wide range of garden types will allow us to see patterns in what attracts flower flies to urban gardens.
In a second, more informal experiment, student researchers of the lab will be looking at food preference of flower fly larvae. We will look at flower flies that predate on aphids and if there are aphid species of greater interest to the larvae. To narrow down this study, we will look at Brassicas in edible gardens. Brassicas are a family of plants that include broccoli, cabbage, brussels sprouts, arugula, radishes, collards, mustard greens, and turnips.
If you are interested in sharing your garden in either of these studies, please submit your interest by May 20th, 2024, following the surveys above. After this date, we will close the surveys and contact participants if they were selected by June 1, 2024. If selected, your garden will be surveyed once a month between mid-June and mid-October 2024.
References:
Tiusanen, M., Hebert, P.D.N., Martin Schmidt, N., & Roslin, T. (2016). One fly to rule them all- muscid flies are the key pollinators in the Arctic. Proceedings B, 283: 1839. https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.2016.1271
Study: Native Plants & Native Cultivars: Understanding Pollinator Preference for Native Plants and their Cultivated Counterparts in the Pacific Northwest
Thank you for your interest our survey! We are done collecting survey responses at this time. If you previously took the survey and have any questions, please direct them to Gail.Langellotto@oregonstate.edu and/or Jen.Hayes@oregonstate.edu.
This article was written for the regular column that I submit to the Hardy Plant Society of Oregon (HPSO) Quarterly Magazine. I am grateful to the team at HPSO for their editorial skills and feedback, that always improve what I write.
No Mow May is an initiative that was started in 2019 by Plantlife, a non-profit that works to restore meadow habitats in the United Kingdom. Their annual campaign called on garden owners and greenspace managers to cease mowing in the month of May, in order to move lawn-dominated yards towards a more natural approach. The movement quickly spread to other regions of the globe, as an easy and feel-good measure that almost any land manager could take to promote biodiversity and protect pollinators. In the United States, Bee City USA adopted the No Mow May campaign, which they also refer to as Mow Less Spring, as a way to conserve native pollinators.
A No Mow groundcover, being managed for increased flowers and pollinators. Photo by: Kenneth Allen (CC BY-SA 2.0). Source: https://www.geograph.ie/photo/6860492
There is some science to support the notion that less-intensely managed lawns benefits biodiversity. Our lab group even wrote about it in a blog post on No Mow May, including sharing a meta-analysis of 14 studies from North America and Europe showed that plant diversity and invertebrate diversity increased in lawns, as mowing intensity decreased [1]. However, several studies included in this review had mowing treatments that are not generally practical for most residential yards. Some studies compared lawns mowed once per week to lawns that were mowed once per year, for example. One of the few studies that compared mowing frequencies that approximate real world conditions was conducted in Springfield, Massachusetts [2]. In this study, Dr. Susannah Lermann and colleagues compared bee abundance and diversity from yards mowed every week, every two weeks, and every three weeks. Lawns mowed every three weeks had 2.5X more lawn flowers than other lawns. Interestingly, lawns mowed every two weeks had the highest bee abundance, but lowest bee species richness. The authors speculate that the higher grass height of the three-week mowed lawns covered lawn flowers, and made them less accessible to many bees. The higher lawn height also made the three-week mowed lawns less acceptable to nearby neighbors, leading the authors to suggest that a ‘two-week regime might reconcile homeowner ideas with pollinator habitat’.
Example of a lawn-dominated yard participating in the Lermann et al. 2018 study. Note the minimal landscaping and bare patches in the lawns, which were common throughout the sites. Also note the yard sign in the lawn explaining the objectives of the study. Photo Credit: Susannah Lermann, from Lermann et al. 2018.
That brings us back to No Mow May, and whether or not there is science to support the idea that not mowing for an entire month might benefit pollinators. In 2020 (soon after the start and spread of No Mow May) Del Toro and Ribbons published a paper that suggested that households that observed No Mow May had three times more bee species and five times higher bee abundance than spaces that were regularly mowed [3]. The results were highlighted in a New York Times story[4], and resulted in a change in the City of Appleton code that suspended an 8” lawn height restriction for the month of May, via a 6-3 split vote for and against the resolution[5]. Israel Del Toro, lead author of the study, was elected to Appleton’s Common Council, soon after leading the effort to adopt the resolution. By 2022, an additional 25 U.S. cities had followed suit [6], with their own declarations in support of No Mow May.
As the No Mow May movement grew, so did controversy surrounding the Del Toro and Ribbons study. Bee taxonomist Zach Portman noted serious issues with the bees identified in the study. Horticulture Professor Bert Cregg noted that the study was confounded, by comparing home lawns that were not mowed to park spaces that were mowed. With this experimental design, it is impossible for the authors to disentangle the effects of mowing (e.g. mowed or not mowed) from the effects of habitat type (e.g. home lawn versus park). In November of 2022, the authors retracted their study ‘after finding several potential inconsistencies in data handling and reporting’. After the retraction, the City of Appleton considered a resolution to eliminate No Mow May, claiming that the program lacks scientific backing. However, this resolution did not pass [7].
What is a science-informed gardener to do, amidst confusing and sometimes conflicting messaging related to pollinator conservation in a yard? First, note that science self-corrects, when the system works well. Retractions are part of that corrective process. Second, remember that bees can be found in lawn areas, particularly if lawns are less managed. The Lermann study demonstrated that lawns can host a surprising richness of bee species: 72, 60, and 62 bee species, in lawns mowed every week, two weeks, or three weeks, respectively. Note that to be part of this study, homeowners had to agree to not use herbicides or irrigation, during the length of the study. As a result of reduced management, lawns in this study often had bare patches that might be good nesting habitat for soil-nesting bees. Relaxing your mowing regime to every 1-2 weeks is supported by good science. Stowing your mower for an entire month is not. Finally, if you want to manage your yard for pollinators, planning and planting a pollinator garden is likely to net more species than stowing your mower. Indeed, many critics of the No Mow May movement, including native plant advocate Doug Tallamy, suggest that providing a temporary safe haven, regardless of its length of time, is counterproductive for pollinators and other wildlife it was meant to benefit. We currently have a paper in review, addressing this very topic. I look forward to sharing the highlights with readers, once it is published.
A Willamette Valley lawn with grasses setting seed, after weeks of no mowing. Photo Credit: Gail Langellotto.
At the conclusion of the skin microbiome study, many gardeners asked for more information on how gardening affects the gut microbiome. Dr. Mhuireach received USDA funding to conduct a pilot study, to address this question. Gardeners in Linn and Lane Counties are specifically invited to apply.
The deadline to apply to participate in this NEW study is August 15th.
We are seeking healthy adult gardeners to engage in a research study exploring microbiota of fresh fruits and vegetables from gardens and supermarkets, and their potential to influence the gut microbiome. To be eligible, you must be between the ages of 18–45, be fluent in English, live in Lane or Linn County, and have access to a garden that can provide enough fruits and vegetables for the diet intervention. Participants will receive $50 at the beginning of the study, $50 upon completion, and a $75 allowance to purchase supermarket fruits and vegetables.
Study activities: If you participate, you will be asked to undergo two week-long diet intervention periods during which you will eat the USDA-recommended amount of fruits and vegetables. In one period all of the produce should be sourced from your garden and in the other the same produce should be sourced from a supermarket. You will be also asked to pre-plan your meals for the intervention periods, complete a Lifestyle, Health, & Diet Questionnaire, maintain a Daily Fruit & Vegetable Log, collect samples of all the fruits and vegetables you eat, collect stool (fecal) samples, and collect a tapwater sample. The total duration of participation is 24 days, with an expected average time commitment of 20–30 minutes per day.
Potential risks: Participants will be exposed to microorganisms from garden and supermarket produce, however, this exposure occurs during normal daily life. There is also a risk that privacy or confidentiality could be breached, though precautions will be taken to avoid such breaches.
Benefits: There are no direct benefits to participating in this study.
Before we dive in to the article, I want to share why this topic is important to me. I identify as a queer entomologist in two ways: 1) I am queer and I am an entomologist, and 2) I am interested in the ways that entomology expands and defies western understanding and expression of gender. The natural world, especially insects, teaches us that queerness is inherently natural and expressed in diverse ways.
Image description: An intersex bee from the genus Agapostemon. The right side presents characteristics that typify a female Agapostemon: green metallic abdomen, robust legs with pollen carrying hairs, shorter, thicker antennal segments. The left side presents male characteristics, including a yellow and black striped abdomen, yellow legs with fewer hairs, and elongated antennal segments.
Cavallaro begins the article discussing “Shared Traits: Entomologists and LGBTQ+ Folks” by Rae Olsson, which mirrors many conversations I have had with my fellow queer entomologists. Us folks who grow up chasing, collecting, and admiring insects tend to be viewed as weird, odd, or even outcasts. Queer folks are often far too familiar with the feeling of being marginalized, othered, and at odds with society. But, there is an odd comfort in knowing that you are a weirdo studying something weird.
The article continues, noting the advances that ESA (The Entomological Society of America) has made in providing an inclusive environment for LGBTQ+ folks and elevating their voices. We have seen these advances in the form of inviting people to include their pronouns on the annual event badges, introducing symposia on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) issues, and removing states with anti-LGBTQ+ laws from potential future meeting locations. He also points out recently identified insects that have been bestowed names of queer icons, which I wrote about during last year’s pollinator week post.
Cavallaro reports that 7.2% percent of ESA members have identified themselves as LGBTQ+, which reflects the U.S. national average. He notes that STEM still has many barriers to overcome as it is “rooted in a competitive and heteronormative culture” and “workspaces for queer-spectrum STEM professionals and students can be unsupportive and exclusionary.” Both STEM and entomology still have a long way to go in terms of acceptance, encouragement, and representation of queer folks.
As someone who attended a prestigious field entomology program and was called a “disney princess” on the first day, I can attest to the flippancy with which queer folks and femme-presenting folks are often treated in professional entomological spaces. It is, however, validating to witness the largest entomological organization in the U.S. taking the time to address, welcome, and better their ability to support their LGBTQ+ membership.
Ecolawn research plots at OSU’s Lewis Brown Turfgrass Research Farm in 2019. Photo: Brooke Edmunds, Oregon State University
What is an ecolawn?
An ecological lawn, or ecolawn, is a reduced input alternative to a conventional mowed grass lawn. While numerous possibilities for an ecolawn exist, they all include multiple low-growing herbaceous plants that work well together and require less mowing, fertilizer and irrigation. In addition to reducing maintenance and resource utilization, they also provide important habitat for pollinators like bees and butterflies.
Help us find examples!
We are looking for examples of beautiful ecolawns throughout western Oregon. A few requirements:
Includes 3 or more different herbaceous broadleaf plants; additional grasses optional
Mutually compatible and ecologically stable when grown together
Installed for 2+ years (Spring 2021 or earlier)
All or most plants less than 1 foot in height
Looks good all year (and most of your neighbors would agree that it looks good 😊)
Needs little to no water to stay green through dry summer months
Little mowing (once per month to once per year)
Little or no fertilizer and no pesticides following installation
We want to find, understand and share your (or your neighbor’s) ecolawn. Ecolawns are part of a more sustainable future for Oregon. If you have a good example, please email 2-3 photos and contact information to Dr. Phil Allen, Visiting Professor in Horticulture at Oregon State University: allephil@oregonstate.edu
