Pollinator community responses to the spatial population structure of wild plants: A pan-European approach |
| |
| Authors: | Anders Nielsen Jens Dauber William E Kunin Ellen Lamborn Birgit Jauker Mari Moora Simon G Potts Trond Reitan Stuart Roberts Virve Sõber Josef Settele Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter Jane C Stout Thomas Tscheulin Michalis Vaitis Daniele Vivarelli Jacobus C Biesmeijer Theodora Petanidou |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Laboratory of Biogeography and Ecology, Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, University Hill, GR-81100 Mytilene, Greece;2. Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway;3. Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biology, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway;4. Earth & Biosphere Institute, IICB, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK;5. Department of Botany, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland;6. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research, University of Reading, Reading RG66AR, UK;7. Agroecology, Department of Crop Sciences, Georg August University, D-37073 Göttingen, Germany;8. Department of Animal Ecology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32, D-35392 Giessen, Germany;9. Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Lai 40, 51005 Tartu, Estonia;10. UFZ – Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, D-06120 Halle (Saale), Germany;11. Department of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocentre, University of Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;12. Department of Evolutionary Experimental Biology (BES), University of Bologna, Via Irnerio 42, I-40126 Bologna, Italy;1. W.M. Keck Science Department, The Claremont Colleges, 925 N. Mills Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711, United States;2. Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, United States;1. Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands;2. Farming Systems Ecology, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands;3. Department of Animal Ecology, Justus Liebig University, Heinrich-Buff-Ring, Giessen, Germany;4. Institute of Entomology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, China;5. Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK;6. Institute of Apicultural Research, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China;7. School of Advanced Agricultural Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China;8. Centre for Chinese Agricultural Policy, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China;1. Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA;2. School of Ecology and Environmental Science, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China;3. Yunnan Key Laboratory of Plant Reproductive Adaptation and Evolutionary Ecology, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China;1. Biodiversity Unit, Department of Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden;2. Centre for Environment and Climate Research, Lund University, Lund, Sweden;3. Biology Department, Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, PA, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Land-use changes can alter the spatial population structure of plant species, which may in turn affect the attractiveness of flower aggregations to different groups of pollinators at different spatial scales. To assess how pollinators respond to spatial heterogeneity of plant distributions and whether honeybees affect visitation by other pollinators we used an extensive data set comprising ten plant species and their flower visitors from five European countries. In particular we tested the hypothesis that the composition of the flower visitor community in terms of visitation frequencies by different pollinator groups were affected by the spatial plant population structure, viz. area and density measures, at a within-population (‘patch’) and among-population (‘population’) scale. We found that patch area and population density were the spatial variables that best explained the variation in visitation frequencies within the pollinator community. Honeybees had higher visitation frequencies in larger patches, while bumblebees and hoverflies had higher visitation frequencies in sparser populations. Solitary bees had higher visitation frequencies in sparser populations and smaller patches. We also tested the hypothesis that honeybees affect the composition of the pollinator community by altering the visitation frequencies of other groups of pollinators. There was a positive relationship between visitation frequencies of honeybees and bumblebees, while the relationship with hoverflies and solitary bees varied (positive, negative and no relationship) depending on the plant species under study. The overall conclusion is that the spatial structure of plant populations affects different groups of pollinators in contrasting ways at both the local (‘patch’) and the larger (‘population’) scales and, that honeybees affect the flower visitation by other pollinator groups in various ways, depending on the plant species under study. These contrasting responses emphasize the need to investigate the entire pollinator community when the effects of landscape change on plant–pollinator interactions are studied. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
