Bourdon à tache noire
Bombus laesusMorawitz, 1875
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 laesus 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
11 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
11
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
3
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.109
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
78 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
VU · Vulnérablecritères B2ab(iii)↘Décroissante- Évaluation
- 2025 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – m
- Profondeur
- – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
Bombus laesus is rarely an abundant species. There are declines reported in some parts of Europe and a lack of recent data which is thought to represent genuine population declines rather than sampling bias. The species occurs in small subpopulations which are isolated from each other. Whilst there are no data to show whether these small subpopulations are viable, it is possible that they will not be viable in the long term given the local declines reported, and so it is precautionarily considered to be severely fragmented.
Menaces identifiées(1 menace classée CMP-IUCN)
2_1_3Agro-industry farmingRapid 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 some concern about the conservation of Bombus laesus. Data collected in the last decades suggest local declines of the populations of this species in Europe.
No model formally studying the impact of climate change and land use change are available in the European-scale studies of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). This is due to the fact that (i) before 2021 the taxonomic status of the taxa laesus and mocsaryi was not clarified (see Brasero et al. 2021), with Rasmont et al. (2015) considering both taxa as separate species and (ii) a lack of post-2000 data prevented Ghisbain et al. (2023) to consider modeling and projecting the distribution of the niche of this species.
The potential for B. laesus to successfully disperse in ecologically and/or climatically suitable areas in near future is unknown, but is inferred to be low. The taxon laesus is especially associated with true steppe, and this habitat is unlikely to expand in the next decades. It is unpredictable whether areas with (likely synergistic) pressures including infrastructure development (for tourism, 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 and of above all agricultural intensification, will be remain suitable for populations of B. laesus. In common with many steppe species, the intensification of agriculture and regression of pastoral practices have reduced the area of available habitat for B. laesus, and this is considered to be the main threat at present.
It is also unclear whether climatic events such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. laesus 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. laesus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures. Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with (e.g. Asteracaea, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae) will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. A decline of its key resources could negatively affect the small populations of B. laesus in Europe.
No model formally studying the impact of climate change and land use change are available in the European-scale studies of Rasmont et al. (2015) and Ghisbain et al. (2023). This is due to the fact that (i) before 2021 the taxonomic status of the taxa laesus and mocsaryi was not clarified (see Brasero et al. 2021), with Rasmont et al. (2015) considering both taxa as separate species and (ii) a lack of post-2000 data prevented Ghisbain et al. (2023) to consider modeling and projecting the distribution of the niche of this species.
The potential for B. laesus to successfully disperse in ecologically and/or climatically suitable areas in near future is unknown, but is inferred to be low. The taxon laesus is especially associated with true steppe, and this habitat is unlikely to expand in the next decades. It is unpredictable whether areas with (likely synergistic) pressures including infrastructure development (for tourism, 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 and of above all agricultural intensification, will be remain suitable for populations of B. laesus. In common with many steppe species, the intensification of agriculture and regression of pastoral practices have reduced the area of available habitat for B. laesus, and this is considered to be the main threat at present.
It is also unclear whether climatic events such as the increased occurrence of droughts, heat waves, or storms will also modify the future range of this species. The resistance of B. laesus 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. laesus would be similarly threatened by repeated exposures to such temperatures. Whether the flowering plants the species is most strongly associated with (e.g. Asteracaea, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae) will remain sufficiently abundant in the future is also unknown. A decline of its key resources could negatively affect the small populations of B. laesus in Europe.
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 four European countries: Czechia (Data Deficient; Hejda et al. 2017); Estonia (Regionally Extinct; Soon 2020); Hungary (Critically Endangered; Sárospataki et al. 2005) and Ukraine (Vulnerable; Monchenko et al. 2009). This species was previously listed in the National Red List of Estonia in a different category (Data Deficient; Lilleleht 2001). This species occurs in protected areas.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may maintain Bombus laesus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering B. laesus 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 (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. laesus. 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. laesus and other insects, as well as hotspots of public awareness.
General efforts aimed at pollinator conservation may maintain Bombus laesus populations. At local scales, appropriate conservation efforts include low-intensity grassland management (i.e. reduced grazing or cutting frequency) offering B. laesus 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 (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. laesus. 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. laesus 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 (2)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality
Priorités de recherche (2)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Taxonomy1_2Population size, distribution & trends
Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert
Royaumes biogéographiques
Palearctic
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
Terrestrial
Références bibliographiques (17)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
- Brasero, N., Ghisbain, G., Lecocq, T., Michez, D., Valterová, I., Biella, P., Monfared, A., Williams, P.H., Rasmont, P. and Martinet, B. 2021. Resolving the species status of overlooked West‐Palaearctic bumblebees. <i>Zoologica Scripta</i> 50(5): 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/zsc.12486.
- Rasmont, P., Ghisbain, G. and Terzo, M. 2021. <i>Bumblebees of Europe and neighbouring regions</i>. NAP Editions, Verrières-le-Buisson, France.
- 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.
- 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
- 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., Settele, J., Straka, J. and Schweiger, O. 2015. Climatic Risk and Distribution Atlas of European Bumblebees. <i>Pensoft</i>.
- Monchenko, V.I., Ermolenko, V.M., Movchan, Y.V. and Szczerbak, M.M. 2009. <i>Red Data Book of Ukraine - Animal kingdom</i>. Global consulting, Kiev.
- Williams, P.H. and Osborne, J.L. 2007. Bumblebee vulnerability and conservation world-wide. <i>Apidologie</i> 40(3): 367-387.
- 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.
- 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>.
- Rasmont, P. 1988. Monographie écologique et zoogéographique des Bourdons de France et de Belgique (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombinae). Faculté des Sciences agronomiques de Gembloux.
- Reinig, W.F. 1972. Ökologische Studien an mittel- und südosteuropäischen Hummeln (<i>Bombus</i> Latr., 1802; Hym., Apidae). <i>Mitteilungen der Münchner Entomologischen Gesellschaft</i> 60: 1-56.
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 laesus (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T221367277A221366985. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Répartition mondiale
Aucune observation géoréférencée avec précision suffisante (<10 km) dans GBIF pour cette espèce.
Consulter sur les bases externes
Note nomenclaturale & synonymesDétails taxonomiques + synonymes CoLExpert
Note nomenclaturale
TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHNSynonymes (7)— redirigent vers cette page
- Bombus laesus ferrugiferaSkorikov, 1909
- Bombus laesus mocsaryiKriechbaumer, 1877
- Bombus maculidorsisPanfilov, 1956
- Bombus maculidorsis angarensisPanfilov, 1956
- Bombus mocsaryiKriechbaumer, 1877
- Bombus mocsaryi sidemiiRadoszkowski, 1888
- Bombus tianschanicusPanfilov, 1956
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).