Editorial: Women in bee science

Editorial on the Research Topic
Women in bee science

In this Research Topic, Frontiers in Bee Science celebrates women scientists redefining the frontiers of melittology, from studies of stingless bees in Brazilian coffee crops to analyses of honey bee waggle dances in Appalachia. In addition to highlighting these amazing scientists and their colleagues, we celebrate the diversity of topics they investigate and the breadth of their research methods.

Readers may ask if a focus on gender-based researcher choice in exploring a Research Topic is still needed at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century. Our answer is yes because recent data document the continuing minority status of women in research positions. The 2025 estimate of the global percentage of researchers that are female hovers around 30% but this estimate is acknowledged by UNESCO to be based on incomplete reporting (UNESCO, 2024). Recent studies have documented the slow movement toward equity of gender representation in entomology, the field that encompasses bee science. In Brazil, for example, women are significantly less likely than men to be employed in permanent positions in entomology despite being awarded the majority of bachelor’s and master’s degrees in that field (Hipólito et al., 2021). Women earn nearly 50% of all doctoral degrees in entomology in North America, but, as in Brazil, are employed at levels far below the proportion of degrees earned (Walker, 2018; ESA, 2024). There is no single or simple answer to the question of how underrepresented groups overcome barriers to participation in research, but it is our hope that cultivating spaces for visibility within Frontiers in Bee Science can help build a more inclusive community.

All specialty sections of Frontiers in Bee Science - Bee Protection and Health, Bees in Pollination, Bee Genetics, and Bee Physiology - are represented in this Research Topic. The perspective is international, and so lively that we suspect that all of the authors have heeded the advice of opinion piece authors Alves-dos-Santos and Gaglianone “to leave the comfort of air conditioning and venture into fieldwork, where things happen.” Alves-dos-Santos and Gaglianone argue specifically for a renascence of natural history studies, but we think their words apply equally well to all bee scientists.

The investigations of Dias Ramos et al. focused on the role of the stingless bee Scaptotrigona depilis in sustainable coffee cultivation in Brazil, with special attention paid to off-target impacts of neonicotinoid pesticides. This paper is complemented by a systematic review by Dennis and Gibbs on neonicotinoid effects on Bombus spp. pollinators in Europe and North America. These authors show that we currently know more about the behavioral and reproductive impacts of neonicotinoids on bumblebees than we know about possible alterations in pollination efficiency. Together, these papers document the global impacts of the use of systemic pesticides on bee pollinators and highlight future research imperatives.

Another topic on the minds of bee researchers is climate change, specifically the impact on bee populations of warming and changes in precipitation patterns. Oliveira et al. used species distribution modeling and state-of-the-art climate forecasting to predict the impact of warming on bee-pollinated food and cash crops. They examined potential spatial mismatches between the distributions of native bee pollinators and Neotropical plant species such as tropical fruits and coffee. Nunes-Silva et al. modeled the responses to plausible climate change scenarios over coming decades of two species of Amazonian bumblebees, Bombus brevivillus and Bombus transversalis. Their investigations revealed that B. brevivillus is at risk of losing more than 40% of its suitable climate zone extent, but that impacts on B. transversalis were not expected to be as severe, underscoring the importance of identifying species-specific patterns. Gornell and Sickel provided a global overview of gene flow in Bombus populations, correlating genetic structure and environmental variables to inform the design of conservation measures on a changing planet. This accessible review article can serve as an invaluable introduction to bee genetics for those new to the field.

The western honey bee, Apis mellifera, is represented in this Research Topic from diverse perspectives. Alger et al. describe the use of UBeeO, synthetic pheromones derived from natural semiochemicals emitted by diseased brood, in measures of hygienic behavior. This team, based in North America (but with assistance from The Bee Lady Apiaries in Queensland, Australia) shared evidence that UBeeO can be used to identify honey bee colonies that are resistant to the parasitic mite Varroa destructor and a wide range of other pathogens, including RNA viruses, microsporidian parasites, and fungal diseases. Such tools are of vital importance to beekeepers at all scales, from backyard hobbyists to large-scale commercial operators. Prendergast et al. investigated the impact of Apis mellifera on populations of Australian native bees at the urban/bushland interface. By using trap nests, they were able to quantify resource competition between introduced honey bees and cavity-nesting native bee assemblages. The result is a set of practical recommendations for honey bee colony management and for planting of pollen sources exploited by native bees. McHenry et al. used modern video capture of bee behavior and sophisticated network analyses to extend our understanding of the link between recruitment and the waggle dances performed by individual foragers. The details are not only fascinating - it turns out they shape the behavioral ecology of honey bee exploitation of available resources.

The interdisciplinarity of modern bee research is evident across but also within each of these studies and reviews. The breadth of topics covered reveals that women in bee science have a dual commitment to addressing pressing 21st-century challenges and seizing the field’s most exciting opportunities. Each of the female scientists represented in this Research Topic is endeavoring to extend the pioneering work of past generations of women in apiculture, a list that includes leaders such as Eva Crane (1912-2007), who founded the International Bee Research Association in 1949, and Anna Maurizio, who founded the forerunner of the modern International Commission for Plant-Pollinator Relationships in 1950 (Eva Crane Trust, 2026; ICPPR, 2026). It is our hope that this current Research Topic inspires a new generation of scientists to follow their curiosity toward solutions that protect both global food security and the biodiversity of the world’s bees.

Author contributions

SF: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. VI-F: Writing – review & editing. PN-S: Writing – review & editing. HW: Writing – review & editing.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The authors SF, HW, VI-F declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Entomological Society of America (ESA) (2024). 2024 Annual Report: Growing a Diverse Entomology Community. Available online at: https://entsoc.org/about/annual-report (Accessed January 5, 2026).

Google Scholar

Eva Crane Trust (2026). Eva’s Work. Available online at: https://www.evacranetrust.org/en/page/eva-s-work (Accessed January 19, 2026).

Google Scholar

Hipólito J., Shirai L. T., Halinski R., Guidolin A. S., da Silva Dias Pini N., Sílvia Soares Pires C., et al. (2021). The gender gap in Brazilian entomology: an analysis of the academic scenario. Neotrop Entomol 50, 859–872. doi: 10.1007/s13744-021-00918-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

ICPPR: International Commission for Plant-Pollinator Relationships (2026). About IPCCR. Available online at: https://wissen.julius-kuehn.de/icppr/icppr/theme/about-icppr (Accessed January 19, 2026).

Google Scholar

UNESCO (2024). The Gender Gap in Science: Status and Trends (Paris, FR: UNESCO Digital Library). Available online at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000388805 (Accessed January 5, 2026).

Google Scholar

Walker K. A. (2018). Gender gap in professional entomology: Women are underrepresented in academia and the U.S. government. Ann. Entomol. Soc Am. 111, 355–362. doi: 10.1093/aesa/say030

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar