Bourdon velouté
Bombus confususSchenck, 1861
1 photo · Licences CC (Wikimedia Commons / iNaturalist)Click pour agrandir
Pays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome
Chargement du graphe…
Indicateurs du réseau écologique
Comment lire ce graphe
Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Bombus confusus et d'autres espèces, à partir de la base GloBI (Global Biotic Interactions, agrégation mondiale de la littérature scientifique) — source principale, complétée par d'autres jeux de données d'interactions agrégés par Ontologia. Il faut le comprendre comme une carte du savoir documenté, pas une carte de la réalité écologique exhaustive.
Limites principales
- Incomplet. La majorité des interactions écologiques en milieu naturel n'ont jamais été publiées. Une espèce sans liens visibles n'est pas isolée — elle est probablement mal étudiée.
- Biais publication pharmaco-agronomique. La littérature des interactions est polarisée par les enjeux économiques et sanitaires : parasitism / pathogen sur-pondéré sur les mammifères (recherche zoonoses, vecteurs), herbivory sur-pondéré sur les insectes phytophages (entomologie agronomique). À l'inverse, mutualisms, commensalisms et interactions sol/microbiote sont sous-cités. Conseil de lecture : sur les hubs mammifères ou les insectes ravageurs de culture, lire les arêtes parasitism / herbivory dominantes relativement au contexte de littérature, pas comme une mesure d'intensité écologique brute. Détails §10.1.
- Biaisé vers les espèces étudiées. Quelques espèces (oiseaux communs, abeille mellifère, espèces modèles) concentrent disproportionnellement plus d'interactions documentées. Notre score composite ajoute un malus aux hubs de littérature pour atténuer cette dominance visuelle.
- Interactions documentées globalement. Toutes les espèces affichées sont observées en France métropolitaine (les observations sont filtrées sur le territoire métropolitain), mais les interactions entre elles proviennent de la littérature scientifique mondiale. Une interaction documentée à l'étranger peut ne pas se réaliser à l'identique sur votre territoire. Le filtre « restreindre à ma commune » tient compte de la co-occurrence spatiale locale mais ne garantit pas l'interaction effective.
- Sans dimension temporelle. Les variations saisonnières (migration, floraison, cycle de vie) ne sont pas modélisées.
- Force d'interaction approximative. L'épaisseur des liens reflète le nombre de fois où l'interaction a été rapportée dans la littérature, pas son importance écologique réelle.
Comment nous sélectionnons les espèces affichées
Le graphe affiche au plus 31 nœuds par fiche (1 centre + 15 bulles depth=1 + 15 partenaires depth=2). Le serveur sélectionne intelligemment :
- Bulles famille créées si une cascade taxonomique existe ou si ≥3 espèces directement documentées partagent une même famille — les espèces sont absorbées dans la bulle (pas de doublon visuel)
- Espèces individuelles uniquement quand <3 dans une famille (sans cascade) — relations directes documentées
- Pas d'espèces inférées affichées en doublon — les cascades sont représentées via les bulles famille uniquement
- Partenaires depth=2 sélectionnés via algo priorité : candidat partagé par ≥2 docs de la famille (food web central) → reliant entre bulles → top sum_obs en dernier recours
- Sous-types GloBI traduits en français au survol de la flèche (chasse, parasite, parasitoïde, mycorhize…)
Le toggle Profondeur 1 ↔ 2 client-side cache ou affiche les partenaires depth=2 sans refetch. Filtres règne, type d'interaction, ordres/familles, patrimoniales et commune recalculent côté serveur (slow path live ~1-2 s).
Indicateurs avancés (mode expert) : Modularité Q (Newman 2006, PNAS), communautés (Louvain, Blondel et al. 2008, J. Stat. Mech.), nestedness NODF (Almeida-Neto et al. 2008, Oikos).
Source : GloBI · TAXREF v18 (INPN/MNHN) · BDC-Statuts · Wikidata
70 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
70
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
4
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.071
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
95 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
VU · Vulnérablecritères A3c↘Décroissante- Évaluation
- 2025 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – m
- Profondeur
- – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
The European populations of Bombus confusus have severely declined. In the last Red List assessment of the bees of Europe (Nieto et al. 2014), the authors estimated a decline of more than 30% in the past ten years of the assessment.
The species has indeed completely disappeared from Belgium, with the last observation dating back to 1957 (Drossart et al. 2019), and it was collected in the Netherlands for the last time in 1942 (Peeters 1995). In northern France, the species was much rarer than at the end of the last century (Rasmont and Mersch 1988, Rasmont, 1988) and seems to have entirely disappeared today (Lemoine et al. 2018, Folschweiller et al. 2020). In the rest of the French territory, the species is still present but data are scarce (D. Genoud, pers. comm. 2023). In Italy, the species was not found after 1940 (Quaranta et al. 2018). Berezin et al. (1995) reported that the species was close to extinction in the area around Moscow, and current data would be needed to evaluate if the species indeed disappeared from this area. The species is still recorded in Czechia (P. Biella, pers. comm. 2023). Strong populations of the species still exist in Estonia in Trifolium-rich areas (J. Devalez, pers. comm. 2023).
Rasmont and Mersch (1988) and Rasmont et al. (2021) attribute the overall regression of Bombus confusus to the discontinuation of the use of legumes (Fabaceae) as break crops and the systematic abandonment of clover cultivation. Given past rates of habitat transformation in Europe, the fact that agricultural transformation of landscapes is likely to continue, and the increasing impacts of climate change (Iserbyt and Rasmont 2012, Rasmont and Iserbyt 2012, Rasmont et al. 2015), the decline in the populations of Bombus confusus is expected to continue to the future, with a 30% decline of the population suspected to occur in the next 10 years (Rasmont et al. 2015, Ghisbain et al. 2023).
The species has indeed completely disappeared from Belgium, with the last observation dating back to 1957 (Drossart et al. 2019), and it was collected in the Netherlands for the last time in 1942 (Peeters 1995). In northern France, the species was much rarer than at the end of the last century (Rasmont and Mersch 1988, Rasmont, 1988) and seems to have entirely disappeared today (Lemoine et al. 2018, Folschweiller et al. 2020). In the rest of the French territory, the species is still present but data are scarce (D. Genoud, pers. comm. 2023). In Italy, the species was not found after 1940 (Quaranta et al. 2018). Berezin et al. (1995) reported that the species was close to extinction in the area around Moscow, and current data would be needed to evaluate if the species indeed disappeared from this area. The species is still recorded in Czechia (P. Biella, pers. comm. 2023). Strong populations of the species still exist in Estonia in Trifolium-rich areas (J. Devalez, pers. comm. 2023).
Rasmont and Mersch (1988) and Rasmont et al. (2021) attribute the overall regression of Bombus confusus to the discontinuation of the use of legumes (Fabaceae) as break crops and the systematic abandonment of clover cultivation. Given past rates of habitat transformation in Europe, the fact that agricultural transformation of landscapes is likely to continue, and the increasing impacts of climate change (Iserbyt and Rasmont 2012, Rasmont and Iserbyt 2012, Rasmont et al. 2015), the decline in the populations of Bombus confusus is expected to continue to the future, with a 30% decline of the population suspected to occur in the next 10 years (Rasmont et al. 2015, Ghisbain et al. 2023).
Menaces identifiées(5 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
11_1Habitat shifting & alterationRapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing9_3_1Nutrient loadsRapid DeclinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing2_1_3Agro-industry farmingSlow, Significant DeclinesWhole (>90%)Ongoing2_2_2Agro-industry plantationsSlow, Significant DeclinesMinority (<50%)Future11_2DroughtsVery Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
In their synthetic book “Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions”, Rasmont et al. (2021) expressed concern about the conservation of Bombus confusus. Data collected in the last decades suggest an unambiguous decline of the populations of this species a very large part of its European range, especially in central Europe where repeated local declines have been reported. The intensification of agriculture and subsequent habitat destruction at the European scale is considered as the main driver of the decline of B. confusus. Reforestation of open habitats could also pose a threat to the survival of the species (P. Rasmont, comm. pers. 2014). In addition, the impacts of climate change, including habitat alteration, droughts and especially the increasing frequency of heat waves, are believed likely to cause local population collapses (Rasmont and Iserbyt 2012).
Results from climate and land use change modelling also suggest that B. confusus is expected to lose a significant part of climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario modelled by Rasmont et al. (2015) (GRAS), the species could lose up to 98% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal model, and up to 57% in a full dispersal model). The latter authors placed the species into the category “Extremely high climate change risk”, reflecting the strong risk of climate change on this species. Projections of ecological niche models by Ghisbain et al. (2023), considering both land use change and climate change, also predict substantial reductions in ecologically suitable areas for B. confusus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 59% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. confusus to successfully disperse in the areas that will remain climatically and/or ecologically suitable is unknown. It also remains unpredictable whether the areas that are projected to appear “suitable” for the species in the future will remain clear of additional anthropogenic stressors not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). These additional (and likely synergistic) pressures include infrastructure development (for tourism and transport), pesticide use, pollution (by nitrogen and its subsequent impact on nitrophobic flowering plants, or by heavy metals), the spread of exotic invasive plants, the invasion of managed species and subsequent pathogen spill-over, among other potential stressors known to substantially impact bumblebee populations.
It is also unclear whether climatic events not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023), such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. confusus to acute heat stress is unknown. Previous works on another bumblebee model have demonstrated impaired cognition of these bees at elevated temperature (Gérard et al. 2022), as well as reduced fertility (Martinet et al. 2020), and research is needed as to whether B. confusus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. Wood et al. (2021) demonstrated that the diet of B. confusus is strongly associated with Fabaceae. The decline of this resource, largely due to increased soil concentrations of nitrogen from industrial fertilisers, could continue to negatively affect the populations of B. confusus in Europe.
Results from climate and land use change modelling also suggest that B. confusus is expected to lose a significant part of climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario modelled by Rasmont et al. (2015) (GRAS), the species could lose up to 98% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal model, and up to 57% in a full dispersal model). The latter authors placed the species into the category “Extremely high climate change risk”, reflecting the strong risk of climate change on this species. Projections of ecological niche models by Ghisbain et al. (2023), considering both land use change and climate change, also predict substantial reductions in ecologically suitable areas for B. confusus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 59% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. confusus to successfully disperse in the areas that will remain climatically and/or ecologically suitable is unknown. It also remains unpredictable whether the areas that are projected to appear “suitable” for the species in the future will remain clear of additional anthropogenic stressors not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). These additional (and likely synergistic) pressures include infrastructure development (for tourism and transport), pesticide use, pollution (by nitrogen and its subsequent impact on nitrophobic flowering plants, or by heavy metals), the spread of exotic invasive plants, the invasion of managed species and subsequent pathogen spill-over, among other potential stressors known to substantially impact bumblebee populations.
It is also unclear whether climatic events not considered in the models of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023), such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. confusus to acute heat stress is unknown. Previous works on another bumblebee model have demonstrated impaired cognition of these bees at elevated temperature (Gérard et al. 2022), as well as reduced fertility (Martinet et al. 2020), and research is needed as to whether B. confusus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures.
Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. Wood et al. (2021) demonstrated that the diet of B. confusus is strongly associated with Fabaceae. The decline of this resource, largely due to increased soil concentrations of nitrogen from industrial fertilisers, could continue to negatively affect the populations of B. confusus in Europe.
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
4_4Grassland - Temperate★14_1Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
This species is included in the National Red Lists or Red Data Books of the following European countries; Switzerland (Regionally Extinct; Amiet 1994); Czechia (Critically Endangered; Hejda et al. 2017); Germany (Threatened with Extinction; Westrich et al. 2011); Estonia (Least Concern; Soon 2020); Hungary (Critically Endangered; Sárospataki et al. 2005); Latvia (Endangered; Anonymous 1992); Lithuania (Vulnerable; Rašomavičius 2007), Moldova (Near Threatened; Anonymous 2002), the Netherlands (Regionally Extinct; Reemer 2018), Italy (Critically Endangered/Potentially Exctinct; Quaranta et al. 2018), Slovenia (Rare; Anonymous 2002), Spain (Vulnerable, Verdú et al. 2011) and Belgium (Regionally Extinct; Drossart el al. 2019).
It occurs in protected areas.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may maintain Bombus confusus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering B. confusus an adequate vegetation structure for nesting, foraging, mating and overwintering. Suitable habitats should exhibit a very minimal to null exposure to land use stressors such as pesticides, fertilizers, overgrazing, intensive ploughing where the species builds its nest, and cutting plants before the peak of the flowering period (cf. the general works of Williams and Osborne 2007, Goulson et al. 2008, Cameron and Sadd, 2020, Rasmont et al. 2021, Williams 2023 about bumblebee conservation). These areas should be connected to other stepping-stone habitats by ecological corridors to allow gene flow between populations of B. confusus. At macroscale, suitable efforts include (i) strengthened regulations about greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the ongoing climate change and its subsequent impact on bumblebees and other insects, (ii) strengthened regulations regarding pesticide use to address the contamination of ecosystems, (iii) robust mitigation strategies for protecting and restoring habitats across anthropogenically transformed land, (iv) the creation of highly-connected flower rich areas (within and across nations) that would constitute ecologically suitable shelters for B. confusus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
It occurs in protected areas.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may maintain Bombus confusus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering B. confusus an adequate vegetation structure for nesting, foraging, mating and overwintering. Suitable habitats should exhibit a very minimal to null exposure to land use stressors such as pesticides, fertilizers, overgrazing, intensive ploughing where the species builds its nest, and cutting plants before the peak of the flowering period (cf. the general works of Williams and Osborne 2007, Goulson et al. 2008, Cameron and Sadd, 2020, Rasmont et al. 2021, Williams 2023 about bumblebee conservation). These areas should be connected to other stepping-stone habitats by ecological corridors to allow gene flow between populations of B. confusus. At macroscale, suitable efforts include (i) strengthened regulations about greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the ongoing climate change and its subsequent impact on bumblebees and other insects, (ii) strengthened regulations regarding pesticide use to address the contamination of ecosystems, (iii) robust mitigation strategies for protecting and restoring habitats across anthropogenically transformed land, (iv) the creation of highly-connected flower rich areas (within and across nations) that would constitute ecologically suitable shelters for B. confusus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
Actions de conservation (2)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert
1_2Resource & habitat protection4_3Awareness & communications
Stress écologiques (10)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Ecosystem conversion1_1Ecosystem conversion1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality
Priorités de recherche (2)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Taxonomy1_5Threats
Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert
Royaumes biogéographiques
Palearctic
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
Terrestrial
Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert
- IUCN. 2025. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2025-2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 10 October 2025).
- Ghisbain, G., Thiery, W., Massonnet, F., Erazo, D., Rasmont, P., Michez, D. and Dellicour, S. 2023 (online). Projected decline in European bumblebee populations in the twenty-first century. <i>Nature</i> 628: 337-341.
- Williams, P.H. 2023. Can biogeography help bumblebee conservation? <i>European Journal of Taxonomy</i> 890(1): 165-183.
- Gérard, M., Amiri, A., Cariou, B. and Baird, E. 2022. Short-term exposure to heatwave-like temperatures affects learning and memory in bumblebees. <i>Global Change Biology</i> 28(14): 4251-4259. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16196
- Wood, T., Ghisbain, G., Rasmont, P., Kleijn, D., Raemakers, I., Praz, C., Killewald, M., Gibbs, J., Bobiwash, K., Boustani, M., Martinet, B. and Michez, D. 2021. Global patterns in bumble bee pollen collection show phylogenetic conservation of diet. <i>Journal of Animal Ecology</i> 90(10): 2421-2430.
- Rasmont, P., Ghisbain, G. and Terzo, M. 2021. <i>Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions</i>. NAP Editions, Verrières-le-Buisson, France.
- Soon, V. 2020. Eesti mesilaste (Hymenoptera: Colletidae, Andrenidae, Halictidae, Melittidae, Megachilidae, Apidae) ohustatuse hindamise tulemused 2020. SA KIK projekt nr. 14436 "Eesti mesilaste fauna baasuuring" lõpparuanne + Lisa 1. EELIS (Eesti looduse infosüsteemi). https://infoleht.keskkonnainfo.ee/GetFile.aspx?id=-1014893872
- Folschweiller, M., Hubert, B., Rey, G., Barbier, Y., D’Haeseleer, Y., Drossart, M., Lemoine, G., Proesmans, W., Rousseau-Piot, J.S., Vanappelghem, C., Vray, S. and Rasmont, P. 2020. <i>Atlas des bourdons de Belgique et du nord de la France</i>. Université de Mons (Belgique).
- Martinet, B., Zambra, E., Przybyla, K., Lecocq, T., Anselmo, A., Nonclercq, D., Rasmont, P., Michez, D. and Hennebert, E. 2020. Mating under climate change: Impact of simulated heatwaves on the reproduction of model pollinators. <i>Functional Ecology - British Ecological Society</i> 35(3): 739-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13738.
- Cameron, S.A. and Sadd, B.M. 2020. Global Trends in Bumble Bee Health. <i>Annual Review of Entomology</i> 65: 209-232.
- Drossart, M., Rasmont, P., Vanormelingen, P., Dufrêne, M., Folschweiller, M., Pauly, A., Vereecken, N. J., Vray, S., Zambra, E., D'Haeseleer, J. and Michez, D. 2019. Belgian Red List of Bees. Belgian Science Policy 2018 (BRAIN-be - (Belgian Research Action through Interdisciplinary Networks). Presse universitaire de l’Université de Mons, Mons.
- Lemoine, G., Hubert, B., Vanappelghem, C., Rasmont, P., Folschweiller, M., Drossart, M., François, N., Gadoum, S., Nicolas, B., Rey, G., Seignez, N. and Vago, J.L. 2018. Atlas préliminaire des bourdons (genre <i>Bombus</i>) du Nord et du Pas-de-Calais. <i>Société Entomologique du Nord de la France</i> Supplément au Bulletin n° 366: 1-60.
- Quaranta, M., Cornalba, M., Biella, P., Comba, M., Battistoni, A., Rondinini, C. and Teofili, C. 2018. Lista rossa IUCN delle api italiane minacciate. Comitato Italiano IUCN e Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Roma.
- Reemer, M. 2018. Basisrapport voor de Rode Lijst Bijen. <i>EIS Kenniscentrum Insectenen andere ongewervelden</i>.
- Hejda, R., Farkač, J. and Chobot, K. (eds.). 2017. <i>Červený seznam ohrožených druhů České republiky. Bezobratlí [Red List of threatened species of the Czech Republic. Invertebrates]</i>. Příroda, Praha.
- Rasmont P., Franzén M., Lecocq T., Harpke A., Roberts S.P.M., Biesmeijer J.C., Castro L., Cederberg B., Dvorák L., Fitzpatrick Ú., Gonseth Y., Haubruge E., Mahé G., Manino A., Michez D., Neumayer J., Ødegaard F., Paukkunen J., Pawlikowski T., Potts S.G., Reemer M., J. Settele, J. Straka, Schweiger O. 2015. Climatic Risk and Distribution Atlas of European Bumblebees. Biorisk 10 (<i>Special Issue</i>).
- Nieto, A., Roberts, S.P.M., Kemp, J., Rasmont, P., Kuhlmann, M., García Criado, M., Biesmeijer, J.C., Bogusch, P., Dathe, H.H., De la Rúa, P., De Meulemeester, T., Dehon, M., Dewulf, A., Ortiz-Sánchez, F.J., Lhomme, P., Pauly, A., Potts, S.G., Praz, C., Quaranta, M., Radchenko, V.G., Scheuchl, E., Smit, J., Straka, J., Terzo, M., Tomozii, B., Window, J. and Michez, D. 2014. <i>European Red List of bees</i>. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
- Iserbyt, S. and Rasmont, P. 2012. The effect of climatic variation on abundance and diversity of bumblebees: a ten years survey in a mountain hotspot. <i>Annales de la Société entomologique de France (N.S.)</i> 48(3-4): 261-273.
- Rasmont, P. and Iserbyt, S. 2012. The Bumblebees Scarcity Syndrome: Are heat waves leading to local extinctions of bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: <i>Bombus</i>)? <i>Annales de la Société entomologique de France (N.S.)</i> 48(3-4): 275-280.
- Verdú, J.R., Numa, C. and Galante, E. 2011. <i>Atlas y libro rojo de los invertebrados Amenazados de España (Especies Vulnerables)</i>. Dirección General de Medio Natural y Política Forestal, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Medio rural y Marino, Madrid.
- Westrich, P., Frommer, U., Mandery, K., Riemann, H., Ruhnke, H., Saure, C. and Voith, J. 2011. Rote Liste und Gesamtartenliste der Bienen (Hymenoptera, Apidae) Deutschlands - (5. Fassung, Dezember 2011) [Red List and complete species list of bees in Germany]. In: Bundesamt für Naturschutz (ed.), <i>Rote Liste der gefährdeter Tiere, Pflanzen und Pilze Deutschlands. Band 3: Wirbellose Tiere (Teil 1) [Red List of threatened animals, plants and fungi of Germany]</i>, pp. 371-416. Bonn.
- Goulson, D., Lye, G.C. and Darvil, B. 2008. Decline and conservation of bumble bees. <i>Annual Review of Entomology</i> 53: 11.1–11.18.
- Williams, P.H. and Osborne, J.L. 2007. Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. <i>Apidologie</i> 40(3): 367-387.
- Rašomavičius, V. (ed.). 2007. <i>Red Data Book of Lithuania (Lietuvos Raudonoji Knyga)</i>. pp. 800. Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius.
- Farkac, J., Král, D. and Škorpík, M. 2005. List of threatened species in Czech Republic. Invertebrates. Available at: <a href="http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx?&species=18217&pageid=116">http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx?&species=18217&pageid=116</a>.
- Sárospataki, M., Novák, J. and Molnár, V. 2005. Assessing the threatened status of bumble bee species (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Hungary, Central Europe. <i>Biodiversity and Conservation</i> 14(10): 2437-2446.
- Peeters, T.M.J. and Reemer, M. 2003. Bedreigde en verdwenen bijen in Nederlands (Apidae s.l.). Basisrapport met voorstel voor Rode Lijst. Stichting European Invertebrate Survey, Leiden.
- Anonymous. 2002. Cartea Rosie a Republicii Moldova. Available at: <a href="http://bsapm.moldnet.md/BDcr/cr2.html">http://bsapm.moldnet.md/BDcr/cr2.html</a>.
- Anonymous. 2002. Uradni list from Republik of Slovenia. <i>Official Gazette, Minister for the Environment and Spatial Planning</i> 56/99 and 31/00: Annex 14.
- Lilleleht, V. 2001. Red Data Book of Estonia. Available at: <a href="http://www.zbi.ee/punane/muu/saateks_e.html">http://www.zbi.ee/punane/muu/saateks_e.html</a>.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (4)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
assessor
Ghisbain, G., Praz, C., Rasmont, P., Williams, P., Cederberg, B., Devalez, J., Flaminio, S., Biella, P., Radchenko, V. & Dellicour, S.
contributor
Benrezkallah, J., Boustani, M., De Manincor, N., Michez, D. & Sentil, A.
evaluator
Tourbez, C.
facilitators
Bellotto, V., Put, S., Trottet, A. & Verëll, V.
Ghisbain, G., Praz, C., Rasmont, P., Williams, P., Cederberg, B., Devalez, J., Flaminio, S., Biella, P., Radchenko, V. & Dellicour, S. 2025. Bombus confusus (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T13340333A222006327. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Traits biologiques
4 valeurs · 1 source
Sources priorisées par qualité scientifique (peer-reviewed spécialisées → Wikidata fallback). Unités auto-converties, valeur max retenue en cas de mesures multiples. Méthodologie · Citations.
Indicateurs écologiquesTolérance thermique · radar EIVE · triangle CSR
Niche thermique
Logghe 2025Niche thermique observée par superposition de la distribution GBIF avec WorldClim (calcul Logghe et al. 2025 sur Europe NW). Représente la T° moyenne annuelle des mailles où l’espèce a été observée. Repères France à titre indicatif.
-10 °C50 °C
- Niche observée Europe NW 4.7 – 12.9 °C (moy. 9.6 °C)
- T° moy. France 1981-2010 11.0 °C
- Projection France 2050 ≈ 13.7 °C
Sources : Logghe et al. 2025 — overlay GBIF × WorldClim Europe NW. Repères France : T moy annuelle CHELSA 1981-2010 + projection DRIAS-2020 GWL20 (+2,7 °C). GlobTherm filtré aux groupes pour lesquels la comparaison à la T air a du sens (ectothermes terrestres + plantes) — exclut endothermes et aquatiques où la nature de la mesure (TNZ ou T eau) rend la comparaison non interprétable.
Répartition mondiale
Aucune observation géoréférencée avec précision suffisante (<10 km) dans GBIF pour cette espèce.
Consulter sur les bases externes
Observations & statuts
Cartographie
Note nomenclaturale & synonymesDétails taxonomiques + synonymes CoLExpert
Note nomenclaturale
TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHNSynonymes (2)— redirigent vers cette page
- Bombus confusus festivusHoffer, 1882
- Bombus confusus paradoxusDalla Torre, 1882
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).