Inter‐assemblage facilitation: the functional diversity of cavity‐producing beetles drives the size diversity of cavity‐nesting bees

Inter‐specific interactions are important drivers and maintainers of biodiversity. Compared to trophic and competitive interactions, the role of non‐trophic facilitation among species has received less attention. Cavity‐nesting bees nest in old beetle borings in dead wood, with restricted diameters corresponding to the body size of the bee species. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the functional diversity of cavity‐producing wood boring beetles ‐ in terms of cavity diameters ‐ drives the size diversity of cavity‐nesting bees. The invertebrate communities were sampled in 30 sites, located in forested landscapes along an elevational gradient. We regressed the species richness and abundance of cavity nesting bees against the species richness and abundance of wood boring beetles, non‐wood boring beetles and elevation. The proportion of cavity nesting bees in bee species assemblage was regressed against the species richness and abundance of wood boring beetles. We also tested the relationships between the size diversity of cavity nesting bees and wood boring beetles. The species richness and abundance of cavity nesting bees increased with the species richness and abundance of wood boring beetles. No such relationship was found for non‐wood boring beetles. The abundance of wood boring beetles was also related to an increased proportion of cavity nesting bee individuals. Moreover, the size diversity of cavity‐nesting bees increased with the functional diversity of wood boring beetles. Specifically, the mean and dispersion of bee body sizes increased with the functional dispersion of large wood boring beetles. The positive relationships between cavity producing bees and cavity nesting bees suggest that non‐trophic facilitative interactions between species assemblages play important roles in organizing bee species assemblages. Considering a community‐wide approach may therefore be required if we are to successfully understand and conserve wild bee species assemblages in forested landscapes.     

Hedgerow presence does not enhance indicators of nest‐site habitat quality or nesting rates of ground‐nesting bees

A major challenge in habitat restoration is targeting the key aspects of a species' niche for enhancement, particularly for species that use a diverse set of habitat features. However, restoration that focuses on limited aspects of a species' niche may neglect other resources that are critical to population persistence. We evaluated the ability of native plant hedgerows, planted to increase pollen and nectar resources for wild bees in agricultural landscapes, to provide suitable nesting habitat and enhance nesting rates of ground‐nesting bees. We found that, when compared to unmanaged field edges (controls), hedgerows did not augment most indicators of nest habitat quality (bare ground, soil surface irregularity, and soil hardness), although coarser soils were associated with higher incidence and richness of nesting bees. Hedgerows did not augment nesting rates when compared to control edges. Although all the bee species we detected nesting were also found foraging on floral resources, the foraging versus nesting assemblages found within a site were highly dissimilar. These results may reflect sampling error; or, species found foraging but not nesting in hedgerows could be utilizing hedgerows as “partial habitats,” nesting outside hedgerow plantings but foraging on the floral resources they provide. We conclude that although hedgerows are known to provide critical floral resources to wild bees especially in resource‐poor intensive agricultural landscapes, simply increasing vegetative diversity and structure may not be simultaneously enhancing nesting habitat for ground‐nesting bees.     

Floral resources,body size,and surrounding landscape influence bee community assemblages in oak‐savannah fragments

相似文献   

Restored native prairie supports abundant and species‐rich native bee communities on conventional farms

Native pollinators are increasingly needed on conventional farms yet rarely fostered via management. One solution is habitat restoration in marginal areas, but colonization may be constrained if resident pollinator richness is low or if restored areas fail to provide sufficient floral or nesting resources. We quantified restoration outcomes for native bees, and associated resources, on three conventional farms with forb‐grass prairie plantings on marginal areas of varying sizes, in a heavily farmed region of central North America. We tested bee abundance and richness in restored prairie versus the dominant habitats of the region—crops, forest remnants, and edges of fields and roads. Restored prairie supported 2× more species (95 of 119 total species) and 3× more bees (72% of captured individuals) compared to the other cover types. All richness and abundance differences among habitat types were associated with higher floral resources in restored prairie. Thirty percent of the bee species were unique to prairie, consistent with long‐distance dispersal but begging the question of origin given the absence of prairie regionally. Our results suggest that road and field edges may be the source, as these areas had more floral and nesting resources than forest or crop fields combined and supported 55% of all species despite covering only approximately 5% of the sampled farms. Habitat scarcity is not the only constraint on native bees in agricultural landscapes, with increasing concern over disease and chemicals. However, we observed that restored areas on marginal lands of conventional farms can support abundant and species‐rich populations of native bees.     

Ecological meta‐networks integrate spatial and temporal dynamics of plant–bumble bee interactions

Bumble bees can forage on a large number of wild plants and crops. The survival of a colony depends on the availability of suitable food resources within foraging range and throughout their forage season. We studied the spatial and temporal use of floral resources by bumble bees in a set of 30 local plant communities and used these data to model colony survival under different combinations of patch size and bumble bee flight distance. Floral resources vary spatially and temporally at the landscape level, and bumble bees track these resources across the landscape during the season. The simulation model showed that different patterns of resources availability could affect the survival and distribution of bumble bee nests across the landscape. This model can be used to generate hypotheses explaining bumble bee richness and abundance that can be tested in real landscapes. Integrating the spatial and temporal dynamics of the flower resources used by bumble bees provides a new perspective that can be used to inform bumble bee conservation, particularly in the context of their widespread decline in recent decades.     

Arid grassland bee communities: associated environmental variables and responses to restoration

In recent years restoration project efforts in arid grasslands of the Pacific Northwest have increased; however, little is known about the bee communities in these areas or how restoration affects them. Native bees provide an essential ecosystem service through pollination of crops and native plants and understanding their response to restoration is a high priority. To address this issue, we conducted a three‐year study in an arid bunchgrass prairie with three objectives: (1) describe the bee community of this unique grassland type and its temporal variability; (2) investigate environmental variables influencing the community; and (3) examine effects of restoration on the community. We identified 62 bee species and found strong seasonal and inter‐annual variation in bee abundance, richness, diversity, and species composition. Unexpectedly, these temporal trends did not correspond with patterns in floral resources; however, several variables were associated with variation in bee abundance, richness, and diversity among sites. Sites with high levels of litter cover had more bees, while sites with taller vegetation or more blooming flowers had greater species richness but lower diversity. We found no detectable effect of restoration on bee abundance, richness, diversity, or composition. Species composition at native sites differed from those in actively and passively restored sites, which did not differ from each other. Restored sites also had fewer flowers and differing floral composition relative to native sites. These results suggest that if grassland restoration is to benefit bees, efforts should focus on both expanding floral resources and enhancing variables that influence nesting habitat.     

Flower preferences and pollen transport networks for cavity‐nesting solitary bees: Implications for the design of agri‐environment schemes

Floral foraging resources are valuable for pollinator conservation on farmland, and their provision is encouraged by agri‐environment schemes in many countries. Across Europe, wildflower seed mixtures are widely sown on farmland to encourage pollinators, but the extent to which key pollinator groups such as solitary bees exploit and benefit from these resources is unclear. We used high‐throughput sequencing of 164 pollen samples extracted from the brood cells of six common cavity‐nesting solitary bee species (Osmia bicornis, Osmia caerulescens, Megachile versicolor, Megachile ligniseca, Megachile centuncularis and Hylaeus confusus) which are widely distributed across the UK and Europe. We documented their pollen use across 19 farms in southern England, UK, revealing their forage plants and examining the structure of their pollen transport networks. Of the 32 plant species included currently in sown wildflower mixes, 15 were recorded as present within close foraging range of the bees on the study farms, but only Ranunculus acris L. was identified within the pollen samples. Rosa canina L. was the most commonly found of the 23 plant species identified in the pollen samples, suggesting that, in addition to providing a nesting resource for Megachile leafcutter bees, it may be an important forage plant for these species. Higher levels of connectance and nestedness were characteristic of pollen transport networks on farms with abundant floral resources, which may increase resilience to species loss. Our data suggest that plant species promoted currently by agri‐environment schemes are not optimal for solitary bee foraging. If a diverse community of pollinators is to be supported on UK and European farmland, additional species such as R. canina should be encouraged to meet the foraging requirements of solitary bees.     

An overview of proximate factors affecting the nesting behavior of solitary wasps and bees (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) in preexisting cavities in wood

Guilds of Aculeate solitary wasps and bees that nest in preexisting cavities in wood are important components of terrestrial ecosystems because they engage in several ecological interactions (e.g. predation and pollination) with other species of plants and animals. Spatial and temporal variations in richness and abundance of solitary wasps and bees can be related to changes in environmental structure and in the diversity of other groups of organisms. The nesting period of these Aculeata is their most critical life cycle stage. Females of solitary wasp and bee species invest relatively more time constructing and provisioning their nests than do females of social species. Differently from species that nest in the soil or construct exposed nests, the main factors affecting the reproductive success of solitary species nesting in preexisting wood holes are still unknown. Our objective is to provide an overview of the role of proximate causes of nesting failure or success among solitary wasps and bees (Aculeata), for designing effective conservation and management strategies for these Hymenoptera.     

Time since establishment drives bee and hoverfly diversity,abundance of crop-pollinating bees and aphidophagous hoverflies in perennial wildflower strips

Wildflower strips (WFS) are amongst the most commonly applied measures to promote pollinators and natural enemies of crop pests in agroecosystems. Their potential to enhance these functionally important insect groups may vary substantially with time since establishment of WFS. However, knowledge on their temporal dynamics remains scarce, hampering recommendations for optimized design and management. We therefore examined temporal dynamics of taxonomic and functional groups of bees and hoverflies in perennial WFS ranging from one to ≥6 years since sowing with a standardized species-rich seed mixture of flowering plants in 18 agricultural landscapes in Switzerland. The abundance of wild bees, honeybees and hoverflies declined after the second year by 89%, 62% and 72%, respectively. Declines in bee abundance and hoverfly species richness were linear and those of aphidophagous hoverflies exponential, while wild bee species richness peaked in the third year. Declines over time generally paralleled decreases in flower abundance (-83%) and flowering species richness (-61%) and an increase in grass cover (+70%) in WFS. Flowering plant species richness showed strong positive relationships with dominant crop-visiting wild bees and aphidophagous hoverflies. Furthermore, dominant crop-visiting wild bees, but not aphidophagous hoverflies, were positively related to the proportion of (semi-)open semi-natural habitat in the surrounding landscape (500 m radius), but negatively with forest. We conclude that the effectiveness of perennial WFS to promote pollinator diversity, crop-pollinating bees and aphidophagous hoverflies through foraging resources decreases after the first two to three years, probably due to a decline of diverse and abundant floral resources. Although older perennial WFS may still provide valuable nesting and overwintering opportunities for pollinators and natural enemies, our findings indicate that regular re-sowing of perennial WFS may be necessary to maintain adequate floral resource provisioning for effective pollinator conservation and promotion of crop pollination and natural pest control services in agricultural landscapes.     

Enhancing flowering plant functional richness improves wild bee diversity in vineyard inter‐rows in different floral kingdoms

Wild bees are threatened by multiple interacting stressors, such as habitat loss, land use change, parasites, and pathogens. However, vineyards with vegetated inter‐rows can offer high floral resources within viticultural landscapes and provide foraging and nesting habitats for wild bees. Here, we assess how vineyard management regimes (organic vs. conventional; inter‐row vegetation management) and landscape composition determine the inter‐row plant and wild bee assemblages, as well as how these variables relate to functional traits in 24 Austrian and 10 South African vineyards. Vineyards had either permanent vegetation cover in untilled inter‐rows or temporary vegetation cover in infrequently tilled inter‐rows. Proportion of seminatural habitats (e.g., fallows, grassland, field margins) and woody structures (e.g., woodlots, single trees, tree rows) were used as proxies for landscape composition and mapped within 500‐m radius around the study vineyards. Organic vineyard management increased functional richness (FRic) of wild bees and flowering plants, with woody structures marginally increasing species richness and FRic of wild bees. Wild bee and floral traits were differently associated across the countries. In Austria, several bee traits (e.g., lecty, pollen collection type, proboscis length) were associated with flower color and symmetry, while in South African vineyards, only bees’ proboscis length was positively correlated with floral traits characteristic of Asteraceae flowers (e.g., ray–disk morphology, yellow colors). Solitary bee species in Austria benefitted from infrequent tillage, while ground nesting species preferred inter‐rows with undisturbed soils. Higher proportions of woody structures in surrounding landscapes resulted in less solitary and corbiculate bees in Austria, but more aboveground nesting species in South Africa. In both countries, associations between FRic of wild bees and flowering plants were positive both in organic and in conventional vineyards. We recommend the use of diverse cover crop seed mixtures to enhance plant flowering diversity in inter‐rows, to increase wild bee richness in viticultural landscapes.     

Spatial scale of observation affects α, β and γ diversity of cavity-nesting bees and wasps across a tropical land-use gradient

Aim Anthropogenic changes in land use may have major consequences for global biodiversity. However, species diversity is determined by a suite of factors that may affect species differently at different spatial scales. We tested the combined effects of land use and spatial scale on α, β and γ diversity in the tropics using experimental communities of cavity‐nesting bees and waSPS (Hymenoptera: Aculeata). We aimed to determine whether: (1) land‐use intensity negatively affects species richness of cavity‐nesting Hymenoptera, (2) β diversity, both within and between plots, is higher in more natural systems, (3) species richness of flowering herbs correlates positively with species richness of Hymenoptera within and across habitats, (4) richness of cavity‐nesting Hymenoptera in highly modified habitats declines with increasing distance from natural or semi‐natural habitats, (5) the effects of land use, herb diversity and forest distance on Hymenoptera α and β diversity vary at different spatial scales, and (6) bees and waSPS respond to land use in a similar way. Location Manabi, south‐west Ecuador. Methods We examined diversity (species richness) within 48 plots of five habitat types that comprised a gradient of decreasing agricultural intensity from rice and pasture to coffee agroforests, unmanaged abandoned agroforests and forest fragments, using standardized nesting resources for reproducing communities of cavity‐nesting bees and waSPS. Results (1) Land use significantly affected α diversity of trap‐nesting bees and waSPS at the subplot (per trap) scale, but not subplot β diversity or plot‐scale species richness (γ diversity). (2) Beta diversity was surprisingly higher between plots within a land‐use type than between land‐use types. (3) Species richness of bees and waSPS increased with diversity of flowering herbs at the subplot (trap) scale only. (4) Forest distance correlated positively with bee species richness at the plot scale only. (5) Land use, herb diversity and forest distance each showed significant correlations with bee and wasp diversity at only one spatial scale. (6) Despite differences in life history, bees and waSPS responded to land‐use intensity in a similar way. Main conclusions The effects of land use on species richness were highly dependent on spatial scale. Subplot‐scale analyses showed that rice and pasture contained the highest species diversity, whereas plot‐scale analyses showed no significant difference in the diversity of different land‐use types. We emphasize caution in the estimation of biodiversity at only one spatial scale, and highlight the surprisingly large contribution of managed land to the regional biodiversity of these species.     

Response of wild bee diversity,abundance, and functional traits to vineyard inter‐row management intensity and landscape diversity across Europe

Agricultural intensification is a major driver of wild bee decline. Vineyards may be inhabited by plant and animal species, especially when the inter‐row space is vegetated with spontaneous vegetation or cover crops. Wild bees depend on floral resources and suitable nesting sites which may be found in vineyard inter‐rows or in viticultural landscapes. Inter‐row vegetation is managed by mulching, tillage, and/or herbicide application and results in habitat degradation when applied intensively. Here, we hypothesize that lower vegetation management intensities, higher floral resources, and landscape diversity affect wild bee diversity and abundance dependent on their functional traits. We sampled wild bees semi‐quantitatively in 63 vineyards representing different vegetation management intensities across Europe in 2016. A proxy for floral resource availability was based on visual flower cover estimations. Management intensity was assessed by vegetation cover (%) twice a year per vineyard. The Shannon Landscape Diversity Index was used as a proxy for landscape diversity within a 750 m radius around each vineyard center point. Wild bee communities were clustered by country. At the country level, between 20 and 64 wild bee species were identified. Increased floral resource availability and extensive vegetation management both affected wild bee diversity and abundance in vineyards strongly positively. Increased landscape diversity had a small positive effect on wild bee diversity but compensated for the negative effect of low floral resource availability by increasing eusocial bee abundance. We conclude that wild bee diversity and abundance in vineyards is efficiently promoted by increasing floral resources and reducing vegetation management frequency. High landscape diversity further compensates for low floral resources in vineyards and increases pollinating insect abundance in viticulture landscapes.     

Competition between honey bees and wild bees and the role of nesting resources in a nature reserve

The European honey bee exploits floral resources efficiently and may therefore compete with solitary wild bees. Hence, conservationists and bee keepers are debating about the consequences of beekeeping for the conservation of wild bees in nature reserves. We observed flower-visiting bees on flowers of Calluna vulgaris in sites differing in the distance to the next honey-bee hive and in sites with hives present and absent in the Lüneburger Heath, Germany. Additionally, we counted wild bee ground nests in sites that differ in their distance to the next hive and wild bee stem nests and stem-nesting bee species in sites with hives present and absent. We did not observe fewer honey bees or higher wild bee flower visits in sites with different distances to the next hive (up to 1,229 m). However, wild bees visited fewer flowers and honey bee visits increased in sites containing honey-bee hives and in sites containing honey-bee hives we found fewer stem-nesting bee species. The reproductive success, measured as number of nests, was not affected by distance to honey-bee hives or their presence but by availability and characteristics of nesting resources. Our results suggest that beekeeping in the Lüneburg Heath can affect the conservation of stem-nesting bee species richness but not the overall reproduction either of stem-nesting or of ground-nesting bees. Future experiments need control sites with larger distances than 500 m to hives. Until more information is available, conservation efforts should forgo to enhance honey bee stocking rates but enhance the availability of nesting resources.     

Diversity and specificity of host‐natural enemy interactions in an urban‐rural interface

1. Urbanisation and agricultural intensification cause the replacement of natural ecosystems but might also create novel habitats in urban and rural ecosystems promoting some insect communities by providing food and nesting resources. 2. This study investigated how host–natural enemy communities change in urban and rural landscapes and their transitional zone, the urban–rural interface, by using trap nests for cavity‐nesting Hymenoptera in gardens and rapeseed fields that were either isolated or paired in the urban–rural interface. 3. Host dynamics were important for natural enemy occurrence, species richness and parasitism rates, and landscape effects were evident for natural enemy variables except for the richness of bee natural enemies. The number of parasitised brood cells was at its highest in the urban–rural interface, but the highest parasitism rates of bees were observed in isolated gardens. Parasitism rates of bees were negatively affected by host abundance, while parasitism rates of wasps were positively affected. 4. Higher specialisation and lower connectivity of host–natural enemy interactions were found in paired habitats than in isolated habitats. This indicates that paired habitats comprise more specific natural enemies and vulnerable interactions, while isolated habitats comprise more generalist natural enemies, and thus interactions appear more stable. 5. These results confirm that host dynamics play an essential role in the abundance and richness of natural enemies and drive parasitism. However, high habitat heterogeneity found in the urban–rural interface can also have an effect on host–natural enemy communities. This highlights that the provisioning of resources in the urban–rural interface can benefit insect communities in these areas.     

Agricultural landscapes with organic crops support higher pollinator diversity

Pollinators are traditionally thought to perceive non-flowering crop fields as hostile landscape matrix. In this study, we show that landscapes composed of higher proportions of organic crop fields support more bee species at greater abundances in fallow strips. An increase in organic cropping in the surrounding landscape from 5% to 20% enhanced bee species richness in fallow strips by 50%, density of solitary bees by 60% and bumble bee density by 150%. Bee species richness and bumble bee density responded strongest to organic cropping in landscape sectors with 500 m radius, solitary bee density in landscape sectors with 250 m radius. The most likely source of these results is that crop and noncrop habitats are strongly connected via bee foraging at the landscape scale. It seems likely that bees depending on nesting sites in fallow strips benefited from the more abundant flower resources provided by broadleaved weeds in organic crop fields. We conclude that the incorporation of organic crop fields into conventionally managed agricultural landscapes can provide food resources needed to sustain greater pollinator species richness in noncrop habitats.     

Reduced abundance and earlier collection of bumble bee workers under intensive cultivation of a mass‐flowering prairie crop

One of the most commonly seeded crops in Canada is canola, a cultivar of oilseed rape (Brassica napus). As a mass‐flowering crop grown intensively throughout the Canadian Prairies, canola has the potential to influence pollinator success across tens of thousands of square kilometers of cropland. Bumble bees (Bombus sp.) are efficient pollinators of many types of native and crop plants. We measured the influence of this mass‐flowering crop on the abundance and phenology of bumble bees, and on another species of social bee (a sweat bee; Halictus rubicundus), by continuously deploying traps at different levels of canola cultivation intensity, spanning the start and end of canola bloom. Queen bumble bees were more abundant in areas with more canola cover, indicating that this crop is attractive to queens. However, bumble bee workers were significantly fewer in these locations later in the season, suggesting reduced colony success. The median collection dates of workers of three bumble bee species were earlier near canola fields, suggesting a dynamic response of colonies to the increased floral resources. Different species experienced this shift to different extents. The sweat bee was not affected by canola cultivation intensity. Our findings suggest that mass‐flowering crops such as canola are attractive to bumble bee queens and therefore may lead to higher rates of colony establishment, but also that colonies established near this crop may be less successful. We propose that the effect on bumble bees can be mitigated by spacing the crop more evenly with respect to alternate floral resources.     

Bee visitation rates to cultivated sunflowers increase with the amount and accessibility of nectar sugars

Pollinators make foraging decisions based on numerous floral traits, including nectar and pollen rewards, and associated visual and olfactory cues. For insect‐pollinated crops, identifying and breeding for attractive floral traits may increase yields. In this study, we examined floral trait variation within cultivated sunflowers and its effects on bee foraging behaviours. Over 2 years, we planted different sunflower inbred lines, including male‐fertile and male‐sterile lines, and measured nectar volume, nectar sugar concentration and composition, and corolla length. During bloom, we recorded visits by both managed honey bees and wild bees. We then examined consistency in relative nectar production by comparing field results to those from a greenhouse experiment. Sunflower inbred lines varied significantly in all floral traits, including the amount and composition of nectar sugars, and in corolla length. Both wild bee and honey bee visits significantly increased with nectar sugar amount and decreased with corolla length, but appeared unaffected by nectar sugar composition. While wild bees made more visits to sunflowers providing pollen (male‐fertile), honey bees preferred plants without pollen (male‐sterile). Differences in nectar quantity among greenhouse‐grown sunflower lines were similar to those measured in the field, and bumble bees preferentially visited lines with more nectar in greenhouse observations. Our results show that sunflowers with greater quantities of nectar sugar and shorter corollas receive greater pollination services from both managed and wild bees. Selecting for these traits could thus increase sunflower crop yields and provide greater floral resources for bees.     

Interannual bumble bee abundance is driven by indirect climate effects on floral resource phenology

Climate change can influence consumer populations both directly, by affecting survival and reproduction, and indirectly, by altering resources. However, little is known about the relative importance of direct and indirect effects, particularly for species important to ecosystem functioning, like pollinators. We used structural equation modelling to test the importance of direct and indirect (via floral resources) climate effects on the interannual abundance of three subalpine bumble bee species. In addition, we used long‐term data to examine how climate and floral resources have changed over time. Over 8 years, bee abundances were driven primarily by the indirect effects of climate on the temporal distribution of floral resources. Over 43 years, aspects of floral phenology changed in ways that indicate species‐specific effects on bees. Our study suggests that climate‐driven alterations in floral resource phenology can play a critical role in governing bee population responses to global change.     

A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems

Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local‐scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high‐quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high‐quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high‐quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.     

Bee communities in restored prairies are structured by landscape and management,not local floral resources

Restored habitats require long-term management to maintain biodiversity and ensure ecosystem functions. Management strategies are often developed for plant communities, including through seeding and disturbance management, but these actions are taken with a focus on plant dynamics and with little knowledge of the effects on non-plant organisms. Wild bees are often expected to respond to such management actions via their effects on local floral resource availability, but management may also affect bees by altering survival and nesting independently of plant community responses. Working in restoration plantings within a large, actively managed tallgrass prairie preserve, we separated the effects of management and landscape context on bee community abundance and richness from the effects of these covariates on bees mediated through the abundance and richness of the local flowering plant community. We found that bees responded primarily to disturbance management (via bison) and the amount of prairie and forest habitat in the landscape, indicating that across landscapes with relatively abundant flowers and nest-sites, these landscape-level resources are more important than local floral resources for structuring bee communities. In contrast, floral communities responded to restoration age and prescribed burning. Because bees respond to different factors and at a different landscape scale than local plant communities, we conclude that management designed for plants is not sufficient for pollinators. Landscape level restoration may therefore require targeted habitat design and management to successfully restore functionally important animals.