ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2026
Bees feeling the burn.
Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Towards Acoustic Bioindicator Integration in AI-Based Wildfire Monitoring: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- The Future of Native Bees in Australia Under Environmental and Anthropogenic Change.Ecology and evolution · 2026Review
- Breeding System ofBiology · 2026Article
- Editorial for theInsects · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fire is a major form of environmental disturbance, and in recent years, due to anthropogenic climate change and anthropogenic land management, we are seeing increases in the frequency and intensity of fires. With bees being an important, diverse group of pollinators that is facing declines globally, understanding how they respond to fires is critical. Here, we conduct a literature review to understand what is known from the literature on how bees respond to fire, and how such responses to fire can vary depending on species life-history traits and aspects of fire regimes. Our literature review yielded 148 studies from 140 publications. Bee responses to fire were extremely variable, with no consistent pattern in abundance or species richness increasing, decreasing, or showing no significant change under fire. Different families and taxa responded differently and to different aspects of fire regimes. Generally, regarding taxonomic vulnerability, andrenids and colletids were vulnerable to fire, whereas halictids responded favourably to fire. In terms of guild, ground-nesting generalists responded favourably to fire, whereas cavity-nesting specialists were most vulnerable to fire. We revealed major gaps in research in the Southern Hemisphere and in tropical landscapes dominated by flowering trees, with most studies conducted in pine-forested, fire-prone landscapes in the Northern Hemisphere. Additionally, only a few studies used manipulative experiments, or have considered how to maximise bee recovery after fires. Overall, fire is an important disturbance affecting bee communities, and while some species may benefit from certain fire regimes, other species are vulnerable, and management to preserve such species under predictions of increasingly frequent and severe fires is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.