» Articles » PMID: 36311409

Increasing Flower Species Richness in Agricultural Landscapes Alters Insect Pollinator Networks: Implications for Bee Health and Competition

Overview
Journal Ecol Evol
Date 2022 Oct 31
PMID 36311409
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Ecological restoration programs are established to reverse land degradation, mitigate biodiversity loss, and reinstate ecosystem services. Following recent agricultural intensification that led to a decrease in flower diversity and density in rural areas and subsequently to the decline of many insects, conservation measures targeted at pollinators have been established, including sown wildflower strips (WFS) along field margins. Historically successful in establishing a high density of generalist bees and increasing pollinator diversity, the impact of enhanced flower provision on wider ecological interactions and the structure of pollinator networks has been rarely investigated. Here, we tested the effects of increasing flower species richness and flower density in agricultural landscapes on bee-plant interaction networks. We measured plant species richness and flower density and surveyed honeybee and bumblebee visits on flowers across a range of field margins on 10 UK farms that applied different pollinator conservation measures. We found that both flower species richness and flower density significantly increased bee abundance, in early and late summer, respectively. At the network level, we found that higher flower species richness did not significantly alter bee species' generality indices, but significantly reduced network connectance and marginally reduced niche overlap across honeybees and bumblebee species, a proxy for insect competition. While higher connectance and niche overlap is believed to strengthen network robustness and often is the aim for the restoration of pollinator networks, we argue that carefully designed WFS may benefit bees by partitioning their foraging niche, limiting competition for resources and the potential for disease transmission via shared floral use. We also discuss the need to extend WFS and their positive effects into spring when wild bee populations are established.

Citing Articles

Host ecology and phylogeny shape the temporal dynamics of social bee viromes.

Doublet V, Doyle T, Carvell C, Brown M, Wilfert L Nat Commun. 2025; 16(1):2207.

PMID: 40044660 PMC: 11882784. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-57314-7.


The trypanosomatid (Kinetoplastida: Trypanosomatidae) parasites in bees: A review on their environmental circulation, impacts and implications.

Tiritelli R, Cilia G, Gomez-Moracho T Curr Res Insect Sci. 2025; 7:100106.

PMID: 39925747 PMC: 11803887. DOI: 10.1016/j.cris.2025.100106.


Species traits, landscape quality and floral resource overlap with honeybees determine virus transmission in plant-pollinator networks.

Maurer C, Schauer A, Yanez O, Neumann P, Gajda A, Paxton R Nat Ecol Evol. 2024; 8(12):2239-2251.

PMID: 39367259 PMC: 11618065. DOI: 10.1038/s41559-024-02555-w.


No evidence for competition over floral resources between winter-active parasitoids and pollinators in agroecosystems.

Alford L, Roudine S, Valsami D, Fontaine-Guenel T, Namintraporn T, Guedon A Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):2239.

PMID: 38278827 PMC: 10817971. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-52146-9.


Shift in virus composition in honeybees () following worldwide invasion by the parasitic mite and virus vector .

Doublet V, Oddie M, Mondet F, Forsgren E, Dahle B, Furuseth-Hansen E R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(1):231529.

PMID: 38204792 PMC: 10776227. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.231529.


References
1.
Valdovinos F, Brosi B, Briggs H, Moisset de Espanes P, Ramos-Jiliberto R, Martinez N . Niche partitioning due to adaptive foraging reverses effects of nestedness and connectance on pollination network stability. Ecol Lett. 2016; 19(10):1277-86. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12664. View

2.
Kaiser-Bunbury C, Mougal J, Whittington A, Valentin T, Gabriel R, Olesen J . Ecosystem restoration strengthens pollination network resilience and function. Nature. 2017; 542(7640):223-227. DOI: 10.1038/nature21071. View

3.
Scheper J, Holzschuh A, Kuussaari M, Potts S, Rundlof M, Smith H . Environmental factors driving the effectiveness of European agri-environmental measures in mitigating pollinator loss--a meta-analysis. Ecol Lett. 2013; 16(7):912-20. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12128. View

4.
Menz M, Phillips R, Winfree R, Kremen C, Aizen M, Johnson S . Reconnecting plants and pollinators: challenges in the restoration of pollination mutualisms. Trends Plant Sci. 2010; 16(1):4-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.09.006. View

5.
Furst M, McMahon D, Osborne J, Paxton R, Brown M . Disease associations between honeybees and bumblebees as a threat to wild pollinators. Nature. 2014; 506(7488):364-6. PMC: 3985068. DOI: 10.1038/nature12977. View