Abstract
AbstractPollinating insects are essential for food production. Both bee and non-bee pollinators are undergoing dramatic declines due to land use intensification and its consequences on native ecosystems. While interactions between crops and bee pollinators are well studied, our understanding of the pollination service provided by non-bee flower visitors including flies, ants, beetles and others is still limited. Moreover, the effects of landscape urbanization and changes in floral and nesting resource availability on the network structure of pollinators with both cultivated and wild plants have been poorly studied. We assessed which common bee and non-bee flower visitor groups dominate the interactions with both wild (e.g. Trifolium pratense, Taraxacum officinales) and cultivated plants (e.g. Fragaria ananassa, Cucurbita pepo) in urban community gardens in Berlin and Munich and explored how these interactions between flower visitor groups and plants change over the growing season. We further investigated the effect of changes in urbanization surrounding community gardens, and the availability of floral and nesting resources within gardens on the complexity (i.e. nestedness, linkage density, connectance) of interaction networks. We observed 20 focal plant species and 13 common bee and non-bee flower visitor groups in 30 urban community gardens. We found that dominant plant visitors changed over the growing season, with non-bee flower visitors including ants and flies as dominant early season visitors, and bee pollinators as important visitors later in the season. Nestedness of the flower visitor network increased with increases in floral richness in community gardens, while neither floral abundance nor the impervious surface surrounding the community gardens, garden size or the availability of nesting resources in gardens strongly influenced the flower visitor networks. Our findings suggest that high floral richness in community gardens may ensure the complexity and, thus, the stability of flower visitor networks. Findings further suggest that the role of non-bee flower visitors should be considered for pollination service provision especially in the shoulder seasons. Finally, our results emphasize that urban gardeners play a key role in mediating flower visitor interactions through their gardening practices.
Funder
Technische Universität München
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference113 articles.
1. Aguilar R, Ashworth L, Galetto L, Aizen MA (2006) Plant reproductive susceptibility to habitat fragmentation: review and synthesis through a meta-analysis. Ecol Lett 9(8):968–980
2. Affouard A, Joly A, Lombardo J, Champ J, Goeau H, Chouet M, Gresse H, Botella C, Bonnet P (2023) Pl@ntNet automatically identified occurrences. v1.8. Pl@ntNet. Dataset/Occurrence. https://ipt.plantnet.org/resource?r=queries&v=1.8. Accessed 25 Aug 2022
3. Albrecht M, Schmid B, Hautier Y, Müller CB (2012) Diverse pollinator communities enhance plant reproductive success. Proc Royal Soc b: Biol Sci 279(1748):4845–4852
4. Almeida‐Neto M R, Guimarães Jr P M, Lewinsohn T (2007) On nestedness analyses: Rethinking matrix temperature and anti‐nestedness. Oikos. 116(4):716–22
5. Armar-Klemesu M (2000) Urban agriculture and food security nutrition and health. Thematic Paper 4. In: N. Bakker, M. Dubbeling, S. Gündel, U. Sabel-Koschella, and H. Zeeuw (ed) Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Fefdafing, Germany: DSE, pp 99–118
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献