@article{stanghellini_schultheis_holmes_2003, title={Adaptation and market potential of Jack o' Lantern and miniature pumpkin cultivars in eastern North Carolina}, volume={13}, ISSN={["1063-0198"]}, DOI={10.21273/horttech.13.3.0532}, abstractNote={In 1998 and 1999, a total of 27 large-fruited and 15 miniature-fruited pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) cultivars were evaluated for adaptation to eastern North Carolina grow- ing conditions. Test categories were yield (fruit number and weight); fruit characteristics (shape, rind and stem attributes); and susceptibility to edema (wart-like growths on fruit exterior), foliar diseases, preharvest and postharvest fruit decay, and viruses. Yields of large pumpkins ranged from over 3,200 fruit/acre (7,907 fruit/ha) for `SVT 4613367', `Autumn Gold', and `Gold Standard' to less than 1,000 fruit/acre (2,471 fruit/ha) for `Gold Rush' and `Progold 200'. For miniature pumpkins, over 33,000 fruit/acre (81,542 fruit/ha) were produced by `Touch of Autumn', `Lil' Pump- ke-mon', and `HMX 5682', whereas `Mystic' and `Progold 100' produced less than 7,000 fruit/acre (17,297 fruit/ha). `Gold Rush', `Howden', and `Progold 510' (large), and `EXT 4612297', `Lil' Goblin', and `Lil' Ironsides' (miniature) appeared the most susceptible to foliar diseases. Preharvest fruit decay ranged from 0% for `Howden' and `EXT 4612297' to over 20% for `Lil' Goblin', `Jumping Jack', `Peek-A-Boo', and `Tom Fox'. Virus incidence on fruit and foliage was low on virus-resistant cultivars ('SVT 4613367' and `EXT 4612297'), and ranged from 4% to 74% for nontransgenic cultivars. Virus incidence and/or severity on foliage and fruit were not related. `Early Autumn' (large) and `Touch of Autumn' (miniature) were the most prone to edema. `Aspen' and `Magic Lantern' (large) and `Baby Pam', `Lil' Goblin', and `Spooktacular' (miniature) were the most susceptible to postharvest fruit decay. Fruit characteristics are discussed in relation to marketability and possible consumer appeal to pumpkins.}, number={3}, journal={HORTTECHNOLOGY}, author={Stanghellini, MS and Schultheis, JR and Holmes, GJ}, year={2003}, pages={532–539} }
 @article{stanghellini_ambrose_schultheis_2002, title={Diurnal activity, floral visitation and pollen deposition by honey bees and bumble bees on field-grown cucumber and watermelon}, volume={41}, ISSN={["2078-6913"]}, DOI={10.1080/00218839.2002.11101065}, abstractNote={SUMMARY Honey bees (Apis mellifera) and bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) were compared for three aspects of pollinating behaviour on field-grown cucumber (Cucumis sativus) and watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). We measured: (1), diurnal foraging activity periods (as related to anthesis); (2), floral visitation rates (number of flowers visited per min by individual foragers); and (3), stigmatic pollen deposition (number of pollen grains deposited on stigmas after single bee visits to female flowers). B. impatiens was more effective than A. mellifera for all three parameters on both crops. B. impatiens initiated foraging activity 15–40 min before A. mellifera; both species continued foraging until flowers closed in early afternoon. B. impatiens consistently visited more flowers per min (P < 0.001) and deposited equal or greater amounts of pollen (P < 0.001) than A. mellifera, particularly during the initial hours of floral anthesis which is when these crops are most receptive to pollination. The data additionally suggest that researchers evaluating different pollinator candidates should consider time-of-day effects when comparing pollen deposition rates between pollinators, as time-of-day had a marked influence on pollen deposition in these studies.}, number={1-2}, journal={JOURNAL OF APICULTURAL RESEARCH}, author={Stanghellini, MS and Ambrose, JT and Schultheis, JR}, year={2002}, pages={27–34} }
 @article{stanghellini_schultheis_ambrose_2002, title={Pollen mobilization in selected cucurbitaceae and the putative effects of pollinator abundance on pollen depletion rates}, volume={127}, ISSN={["2327-9788"]}, DOI={10.21273/jashs.127.5.729}, abstractNote={Very little is known about the rate at which pollen grains are mobilized within insect-pollinated crop systems, and this is especially true the for commercial production of field-grown cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.), monoecious muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.), and triploid watermelon [Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsum. & Nakai]. The rates of pollen depletion for these crops were therefore investigated on plots simulating commercial crop production using a mixed honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) and bumble bee (Bombus impatiens Cresson) pollinator complex. At anthesis, staminate cucumber, muskmelon, and watermelon flowers contained on average 10539, 11176, and 30739 pollen grains/flower, respectively. At the time flowers closed in the early afternoon (1300 to 1400 hr), only 61% of the total pollen produced had been removed from staminate cucumber flowers, 44% to 62% from muskmelon, and 81% from watermelon flowers. The results suggest that total pollen production in these crops may not necessarily reflect total pollen availability to floral visitors (bees). However, of the total amount of pollen actually removed per flower, >57% occurred during the 2 h following flower anthesis of cucumber and muskmelon, and >77% occurred during the 2 h following flower anthesis of watermelon. Thus, most of the accessible pollen was removed shortly after anthesis, which is when these crops are most receptive to pollination. Nonviable triploid and viable diploid watermelon pollen were removed at similar rates (P = 0.4604). While correlation analyses were not possible for the influence of variable bee abundance on pollen depletion rates, higher bee populations in one year appeared to increase the rate at which pollen grains were removed from staminate flowers.}, number={5}, journal={JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE}, author={Stanghellini, MS and Schultheis, JR and Ambrose, JT}, year={2002}, month={Sep}, pages={729–736} }
 @article{ambrose_stanghellini_hopkins_2000, title={A scientific note on the threat of small hive beetles (Aethina tumida Murray) to bumble bee (Bombus spp.) colonies in the United States}, volume={31}, ISSN={["0044-8435"]}, DOI={10.1051/apido:2000136}, abstractNote={Note scientifique sur la menace que represente le petit coleoptere des ruches (Aethina tumida Murray) pour les colonies de bourdons (Bombus spp.) aux Etats-Unis.}, number={3}, journal={APIDOLOGIE}, author={Ambrose, JT and Stanghellini, MS and Hopkins, DI}, year={2000}, pages={455–456} }
 @article{stanghellini_ambrose_hopkins_2000, title={Bumble bee colonies as potential alternative hosts for the small hive beetle (Aethina tumida Murray)}, volume={140}, number={1}, journal={American Bee Journal}, author={Stanghellini, M. S. and Ambrose, J. T. and Hopkins, D. I.}, year={2000}, pages={71–75} }
 @article{stanghellini_ambrose_schultheis_1998, title={Seed production in watermelon: A comparison between two commercially available pollinators}, volume={33}, ISSN={["2327-9834"]}, DOI={10.21273/hortsci.33.1.28}, abstractNote={The number of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) continues to decline due to parasitic mite pests and other factors. Honey bees and bumble bees (Bombus impatiens Cresson) were therefore compared for their effects on the seed set of watermelon [Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsum. & Nakai] in a 2-year field experiment. The experiment was a 2 x 4 + 2 factorial, comparing bee type (honey bee or bumble bee) at four visitation levels (1, 6, 12, and 18 bee visits) to pistillate flowers, with two controls: a no-visit treatment and an open-pollinated treatment. Bee visitation level had a strong positive influence on seed set (P ≤ 0.0001). All flowers bagged to prevent insect visitation aborted, demonstrating the need for active pollen transfer between staminate and pistillate watermelon flowers. Flowers visited by B. impatiens consistently contained more seed than those visited by A. mellifera, when compared at equal bee visitation levels (P ≤ 0.0001). We conclude that bumble bees have great potential to serve as a supplemental pollinator for watermelon when honey bees available for rental are in limited supply.}, number={1}, journal={HORTSCIENCE}, author={Stanghellini, MS and Ambrose, JT and Schultheis, JR}, year={1998}, month={Feb}, pages={28–30} }
 @article{stanghellini_ambrose_schultheis_1998, title={Using commercial bumble bee colonies as backup pollinators for honey bees to produce cucumbers and watermelons}, volume={8}, DOI={10.21273/horttech.8.4.590}, abstractNote={The effectiveness of bumble bees, Bombus impatiens Cresson, and honey bees, Apis mellifera L., on the pollination of cucumber, Cucumis sativus L., and watermelon, Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsum. & Nakai, was compared under field conditions. Comparisons were based on fruit abortion rates and seed set as influenced by bee type (honey bee or bumble bee) and the number of bee visits to treatment flowers (1, 6, 12, and 18 bee visits), plus two controls: a no-visit treatment and an open-pollinated (unrestricted visitation) treatment. For both crops, an increased number of bee visits had a strong positive effect on fruit and seed set. All cucumber and watermelon flowers bagged to prevent insect visitation aborted, demonstrating the need for active transfer of pollen between staminate and pistillate flowers. Bumble bee-visited flowers consistently had lower abortion rates and higher seed sets in the cucumber and watermelon studies than did honey bee-visited flowers when compared at the same bee visitation level. Only slight differences in fruit abortion rates were detected between bee types in the watermelon study. However, abortion rates for bumble bee-visited flowers were consistently less than those for honey bee-visited flowers when compared at equal bee visitation levels, with one exception at the 12 bee visit level. As the number of honey bee colonies continues to decline due to parasitic mite pests and based on the data obtained, we conclude that bumble bees have a great potential to serve as a supplemental pollinator for cucumbers, watermelons, and possibly other vine crops, when honey bees available for rental are in limited supply.}, number={4}, journal={HortTechnology}, author={Stanghellini, M. S. and Ambrose, J. T. and Schultheis, J. R.}, year={1998}, pages={590–594} }
 @article{stanghellini_ambrose_schultheis_1997, title={The effects of honey bee and bumble bee pollination on fruit set and abortion of cucumber and watermelon}, volume={137}, number={5}, journal={American Bee Journal}, author={Stanghellini, M. S. and Ambrose, J. T. and Schultheis, J. R.}, year={1997}, pages={386–391} }