The response of pollen-transport networks to landscape-scale climate variation

Polar Biology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 2253-2263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Urbanowicz ◽  
Ross A. Virginia ◽  
Rebecca E. Irwin
Polar Biology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (8) ◽  
pp. 1651-1651
Author(s):  
Christine Urbanowicz ◽  
Ross A. Virginia ◽  
Rebecca E. Irwin

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 1882-1892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Banza ◽  
Callum J. Macgregor ◽  
Anabela D. F. Belo ◽  
Richard Fox ◽  
Michael J. O. Pocock ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 1008-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Lucas ◽  
Owen Bodger ◽  
Berry J. Brosi ◽  
Col R. Ford ◽  
Dan W. Forman ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 306-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Tur ◽  
Beatriz Vigalondo ◽  
Kristian Trøjelsgaard ◽  
Jens M. Olesen ◽  
Anna Traveset

2015 ◽  
Vol 282 (1805) ◽  
pp. 20142934 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine A. Orford ◽  
Ian P. Vaughan ◽  
Jane Memmott

Bees, hoverflies and butterflies are taxa frequently studied as pollinators in agricultural and conservation contexts. Although there are many records of non-syrphid Diptera visiting flowers, they are generally not regarded as important pollinators. We use data from 30 pollen-transport networks and 71 pollinator-visitation networks to compare the importance of various flower-visiting taxa as pollen-vectors. We specifically compare non-syrphid Diptera and Syrphidae to determine whether neglect of the former in the literature is justified. We found no significant difference in pollen-loads between the syrphid and non-syrphid Diptera. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the level of specialization between the two groups in the pollen-transport networks, though the Syrphidae had significantly greater visitation evenness. Flower visitation data from 33 farms showed that non-syrphid Diptera made up the majority of the flower-visiting Diptera in the agricultural studies (on average 82% abundance and 73% species richness), and we estimate that non-syrphid Diptera carry 84% of total pollen carried by farmland Diptera. As important pollinators, such as bees, have suffered serious declines, it would be prudent to improve our understanding of the role of non-syrphid Diptera as pollinators.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Callum J. Macgregor ◽  
James J.N. Kitson ◽  
Richard Fox ◽  
Christoph Hahn ◽  
David H. Lunt ◽  
...  

AbstractMoths are globally relevant as pollinators but nocturnal pollination remains poorly understood. Plant-pollinator interaction networks are traditionally constructed using either flower-visitor observations or pollen-transport detection using microscopy. Recent studies have shown the potential of DNA metabarcoding for detecting and identifying pollen-transport interactions. However, no study has directly compared the realised observations of pollen-transport networks between DNA metabarcoding and conventional light microscopy.Using matched samples of nocturnal moths, we construct pollen-transport networks using two methods: light microscopy and DNA metabarcoding. Focussing on the feeding mouthparts of moths, we develop and provide reproducible methods for merging DNA metabarcoding and ecological network analysis to better understand species-interactions.DNA metabarcoding detected pollen on more individual moths, and detected multiple pollen types on more individuals than microscopy, but the average number of pollen types per individual was unchanged. However, after aggregating individuals of each species, metabarcoding detected more interactions per moth species. Pollen-transport network metrics differed between methods, because of variation in the ability of each to detect multiple pollen types per moth and to separate morphologically-similar or related pollen. We detected unexpected but plausible moth-plant interactions with metabarcoding, revealing new detail about nocturnal pollination systems.The nocturnal pollination networks observed using metabarcoding and microscopy were similar, yet distinct, with implications for network ecologists. Comparisons between networks constructed using metabarcoding and traditional methods should therefore be treated with caution. Nevertheless, the potential applications of metabarcoding for studying plant-pollinator interaction networks are encouraging, especially when investigating understudied pollinators such as moths.


2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Callum J. Macgregor ◽  
James J. N. Kitson ◽  
Richard Fox ◽  
Christoph Hahn ◽  
David H. Lunt ◽  
...  

Oikos ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 128 (4) ◽  
pp. 551-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan‐Hui Zhao ◽  
Amparo Lázaro ◽  
Zong‐Xin Ren ◽  
Wei Zhou ◽  
Hai‐Dong Li ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document