Bourdon distingué

Bombus distinguendusMorawitz, 1869

Animal

VULR Monde (IUCN)

1 photo · Licences CC (Wikimedia Commons / iNaturalist)Click pour agrandir

Filtrer le graphe par contexte spatialPays · 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 distinguendus 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

122 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires

122

Espèces avec interactions documentées

Types d'interactions

Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…

Connectance

0.087

Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché

Rang animalia

97 %

Percentile vs ensemble des animalia

Liste rouge IUCN

VU · Vulnérablecritères A2c↘Décroissante

Évaluation complète

Évaluation: 2025 · v3.1
Altitude: – m
Profondeur: – m

État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert

At the European scale, Bombus distinguendus is a severely declining bumblebee species, to the point of having completely disappeared from some countries. Declines in the overall species' distribution in Europe indicate that the population had likely declined by more than 30% in the ten years prior to the previous assessment (Rasmont and Iserbyt 2010-2012, Nieto et al. 2014). In Sweden, the southern limit of the range of the species has withdrawn by around 400 km since 1970 (B. Cederberg, pers. comm. 2023). There are, however, recent records of the species in Czechia (South and West Bohemia, P. Biella pers. comm. 2023). A small population of B. distinguendus was recently re-discovered close to the French-Swiss border, on Cirsium eriophorum (Bénon et al. 2020). The decline of this species in a significant part of its historical range was already noted by many authors and discussed in the previous Red List of European bees. Due to the scarcity of more recent data, we cannot assess the percentage of this decline in a 10 year frame, but it could be close to 30%.

Menaces identifiées(3 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

2_1_1
Shifting agriculture
Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
11_3
Temperature extremes
Slow, Significant DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
12_1
Other threat
Slow, Significant 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 B. distinguendus. Data collected in the last decades suggest an unambiguous decline of the populations of this species, especially in central Europe where local declines have been reported.

Results from climate and land use change modelling also suggest that B. distinguendus is expected to lose a significant part of climatically suitable territories by the end of the century. Under the most severe climate change scenario (GRAS) modelled by Rasmont et al. (2015), the species could lose up to 87% of climatically suitable areas by 2100 (under a no dispersal model, and up to 64% under a full dispersal model). The latter authors placed the species into the category “Very high climate change risk”, reflecting the potential 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. distinguendus in Europe by 2061-2080 (up to 98% under the SSP5-8.5 scenario). In addition, the potential for B. distinguendus 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 ornitrophobic flowering plants, or by heavy metals), the spread of exotic invasive plants, the invasion of managed species and subsequent pathogen spillover, 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. distinguendus 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. distinguendus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures. The impacts of climate change, especially the increasing frequency of heat waves for species with late phenology such as B. distinguendus (Rasmont and Iserbyt 2012), may have played a role in past declines and could contribute to future declines.

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) showed that the diet of B. distinguendus is very strongly associated with Fabaceae. The decline of this resource, largely due to increased soil concentrations of nitrogen from industrial fertilizers, could continue to negatively affect the populations of B. distinguendus in Europe. Changes in agricultural practice (particularly through intensification and the subsequent increased nitrogen deposition, swapping from hay production to silage, and reduction of Fabaceae cropping systems) have already considerably reduced the amount of suitable habitats for B. distinguendus.

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

4_4Grassland - Temperate★

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 (Endangered; Hejda et al. 2017); Finland (Least Concern; Hyvärinen et al. 2019); Sweden (Near Threatened; SLU Artdatabanken 2020); Denmark (Critically Endangered; Wind and Pihl 2010); Germany (Highly Threatened; Westrich et al. 2011); Great Britain (Endangered; Shirt 1987); Hungary (Data Deficient; Sárospataki et al. 2005); Ireland (Endangered; Fitzpatrick et al. 2006); Norway (Endangered; Artsdatabanken 2021); Estonia (Endangered; Soon 2020); the Netherlands (Regionaly Extinct; Reemer 2018); Belgium (Regionally Extinct; Drossart et al. 2019). It is extinct in Belgium since 1976 (Rasmont 1988). This species was listed in the previous National Red Lists of the Czech Republic (Vulnerable; Farkac et al. 2005), Sweden (Near Threatened; Gärdenfors 2010), Estonia (Near Threatened; Lilleleht 2001), Norway (Endangered; Kålås et al. 2010) and the Netherlands (Critically Endangered; Peeters and Reemer 2003). It occurs in protected areas. The species is carefully monitored in the UK by the Bumblebee Conservation Trust.

General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may contribute to maintain B. distinguendus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering B. distinguendus an adequate vegetation structure for nesting, foraging, mating and overwintering. Suitable habitats should exhibit a low to null exposure to land use stressors such as pesticides (insecticides, fungicides and herbicides), overgrazing, intensive plowing 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. distinguendus. 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. distinguendus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.

Actions de conservation (2)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert

1_2Resource & habitat protection
4_3Awareness & communications

Stress écologiques (5)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert

1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
2_1Species mortality
2_1Species mortality
2_3_5Inbreeding

Priorités de recherche (2)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert

1_2Population size, distribution & trends
3_1Population trends

Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert

Royaumes biogéographiques

NearcticPalearctic

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. Nature 628: 337-341.
Williams, P.H. 2023. Can biogeography help bumblebee conservation? European Journal of Taxonomy 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. Global Change Biology 28(14): 4251-4259. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16196
Rasmont, P., Ghisbain, G. and Terzo, M. 2021. Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions. NAP Editions, Verrières-le-Buisson, France.
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. Journal of Animal Ecology 90(10): 2421-2430.
Artsdatabanken. 2021. Norsk rødliste for arter 2021. Available at: <a href="https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021">https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021</a>.
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. Functional Ecology - British Ecological Society 35(3): 739-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13738.
SLU Artdatabanken. 2020. Rödlistade arter i Sverige 2020. SLU Artdatabanken, Uppsala.
Cameron, S.A. and Sadd, B.M. 2020. Global Trends in Bumble Bee Health. Annual Review of Entomology 65: 209-232.
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
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.
Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. and Liukko, U.M. 2019. The 2019 Red List of Finnish Species. Ympäristöministeriö and Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki.
Reemer, M. 2018. Basisrapport voor de Rode Lijst Bijen. EIS Kenniscentrum Insectenen andere ongewervelden.
Hejda, R., Farkač, J. and Chobot, K. (eds.). 2017. Červený seznam ohrožených druhů České republiky. Bezobratlí [Red List of threatened species of the Czech Republic. Invertebrates]. 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 (Special Issue).
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. European Red List of bees. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Rasmont, P. and Iserbyt, S. 2012. The Bumblebees Scarcity Syndrome: Are heat waves leading to local extinctions of bumblebees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Bombus)? Annales de la Société entomologique de France (N.S.) 48(3-4): 275-280.
Sheffield, C. S., and P. H. Williams. 2011. Discovery of Bombus distinguendus (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in continental North America. JESO 14.
Williams, P.H., An, J. and Huang, J. 2011. The bumblebees of the subgenus Subterraneobombus: integrating evidence from morphology and DNA barcodes (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombus). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 163: 813-862.
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.), 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], pp. 371-416. Bonn.
Rasmont, P. and Iserbyt, I. 2010-2012. Atlas of the European Bees: genus Bombus. STEP Project. Atlas Hymenoptera. Mons Available at: <a href="http://www.zoologie.umh.ac.be//hymenoptera/page.asp?ID=169">http://www.zoologie.umh.ac.be//hymenoptera/page.asp?ID=169</a>.
Gärdenfors, U. 2010. Rödlistade arter i Sverige - The 2010 Red List of Swedish Species. ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala.
Wind, P. and Pihl, S. 2010. The Danish Red List. The National Environmental Research Institute.
Kålås, J.A., Viken, Å., Henriksen, S. and Skjelseth, S. 2010. Norsk Rødliste for arter 2010 (The 2010 Norwegian Red List for Species). Artsdatabanken.
Goulson, D., Lye, G.C. and Darvil, B. 2008. Decline and conservation of bumble bees. Annual Review of Entomology 53: 11.1–11.18.
Cameron, S. A., Hines, H. M. and Williams, P. H. 2007. A comprehensive phylogeny of the bumble bees (Bombus). . Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 91: 161-188.
Williams, P.H. and Osborne, J.L. 2007. Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. Apidologie 40(3): 367-387.
Fitzpatrick, U., Murray, T.E., Byrne, A., Paxton, R.J. and Brown, M.J.F. 2006. Regional red data list of Irish Bees. National Parks and Wildlife Service (Ireland) and Environment and Heritage Service (N. Ireland).
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>.

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 distinguendus (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T13340348A222007475. Accessed on 05 May 2026.

Traits biologiques

4 valeurs · 1 source

Traits arthropodes & araignées(4)

Température moyenne: 8,6 °C; Logghe
Amplitude thermique: 8,9 °C; Logghe
Température max: 10,8 °C; Logghe
Température min: 1,9 °C; Logghe

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 2025

Niche 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 1.9 – 10.8 °C (moy. 8.6 °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.