Bee community responses to a gradient of oak savanna restoration practices |
| |
Authors: | Mitchell C. Lettow Lars A. Brudvig Christie A. Bahlai Jason Gibbs Robert P. Jean Douglas A. Landis |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, 578 Wilson Road, East Lansing, MI 48824, U.S.A.;2. Department of Plant Biology, Michigan State University, 612 Wilson Road, East Lansing, MI 48824, U.S.A.;3. Department of Integrative Biology, Michigan State University, 288 Farm Lane, East Lansing, MI 48824, U.S.A.;4. Department of Entomology, University of Manitoba, 12 Dafoe Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, Canada;5. Environmental Solutions & Innovations, Inc., 1811 Executive Dr., Suites C‐D, Indianapolis, IN 46241, U.S.A. |
| |
Abstract: | North American Midwestern oak (Quercus spp.) savannas are rare fire‐dependent ecosystems that can support high levels of biodiversity and are the focus of considerable restoration effort due to widespread fire suppression. Due to the predominance of understory forbs in oak savannas, many of which require insect pollination, restoration practices should be evaluated for their potential impacts on pollinator communities. We evaluated bee community responses during the first 2 years of experimental restoration of fire‐suppressed oak savanna in southern Michigan. We used unmanaged references and two different restoration methods (burning only and burning with thinning) to examine the effects of restoration intensity on the abundance, diversity, and functional groups of bees. We found that thinning and burning rapidly increased bee abundance, richness, and Shannon's diversity, relative to unmanaged references, whereas burn‐only restoration largely failed to do so. Thinning and burning also resulted in a distinct bee community after two seasons, while bee communities in burn‐only restoration plots were similar to those from unmanaged references. Differences in bee diversity and community structure between treatments may be due to the influence of restoration on nesting resources, which is reflected in the differential captures of various nesting guilds. Overall, oak savanna restoration by thinning and burning had positive effects on bee diversity, while burning alone only increased bee abundance. We thus illustrate how restoration strategies that typically target plants have broader‐reaching biodiversity benefits. Although restoring savannas through burning alone may eventually shift bee communities, coupling thinning with burning will influence pollinator communities over the shorter term. |
| |
Keywords: | biodiversity canopy thinning functional group Michigan pollinator prescribed fire |
|
|