Landscape simplification leads to loss of plant–pollinator interaction diversity and flower visitation frequency despite buffering by abundant generalist pollinators

IF 4.6 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Diversity and Distributions Pub Date : 2024-04-28 DOI:10.1111/ddi.13853
Corina Maurer, Carlos Martínez-Núñez, Christophe Dominik, Jonna Heuschele, Yicong Liu, Peter Neumann, Robert J. Paxton, Loïc Pellissier, Willem Proesmans, Oliver Schweiger, Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi, Adam Vanbergen, Matthias Albrecht
{"title":"Landscape simplification leads to loss of plant–pollinator interaction diversity and flower visitation frequency despite buffering by abundant generalist pollinators","authors":"Corina Maurer,&nbsp;Carlos Martínez-Núñez,&nbsp;Christophe Dominik,&nbsp;Jonna Heuschele,&nbsp;Yicong Liu,&nbsp;Peter Neumann,&nbsp;Robert J. Paxton,&nbsp;Loïc Pellissier,&nbsp;Willem Proesmans,&nbsp;Oliver Schweiger,&nbsp;Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi,&nbsp;Adam Vanbergen,&nbsp;Matthias Albrecht","doi":"10.1111/ddi.13853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Global change, especially landscape simplification, is a main driver of species loss that can alter ecological interaction networks, with potentially severe consequences to ecosystem functions. Therefore, understanding how landscape simplification affects the rate of loss of plant–pollinator interaction diversity (i.e., number of unique interactions) compared to species diversity alone, and the role of persisting abundant pollinators, is key to assess the consequences of landscape simplification on network stability and pollination services.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Location</h3>\n \n <p>France, Germany, and Switzerland.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We analysed 24 landscape-scale plant–pollinator networks from standardised transect walks along landscape simplification gradients in three countries. We compared the rates of species and interaction diversity loss along the landscape simplification gradient and then stepwise excluded the top 1%–20% most abundant pollinators from the data set to evaluate their effect on interaction diversity, network robustness to secondary loss of species, and flower visitation frequencies in simplified landscapes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Interaction diversity was not more vulnerable than species diversity to landscape simplification, with pollinator and interaction diversity showing similar rates of erosion with landscape simplification. We found that 20% of both species and interactions are lost with an increase of arable crop cover from 30% to 80% in a landscape. The decrease in interaction diversity was partially buffered by persistent abundant generalist pollinators in simplified landscapes, which were nested subsets of pollinator communities in complex landscapes, while plants showed a high turnover in interactions across landscapes. The top 5% most abundant pollinator species also contributed to network robustness against secondary species loss but could not prevent flowers from a loss of visits in simplified landscapes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although persistent abundant pollinators buffered the decrease in interaction diversity in simplified landscapes and stabilised network robustness, flower visitation frequency was reduced, emphasising potentially severe consequences of further ongoing land-use change for pollination services.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51018,"journal":{"name":"Diversity and Distributions","volume":"30 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddi.13853","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diversity and Distributions","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.13853","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

Global change, especially landscape simplification, is a main driver of species loss that can alter ecological interaction networks, with potentially severe consequences to ecosystem functions. Therefore, understanding how landscape simplification affects the rate of loss of plant–pollinator interaction diversity (i.e., number of unique interactions) compared to species diversity alone, and the role of persisting abundant pollinators, is key to assess the consequences of landscape simplification on network stability and pollination services.

Location

France, Germany, and Switzerland.

Methods

We analysed 24 landscape-scale plant–pollinator networks from standardised transect walks along landscape simplification gradients in three countries. We compared the rates of species and interaction diversity loss along the landscape simplification gradient and then stepwise excluded the top 1%–20% most abundant pollinators from the data set to evaluate their effect on interaction diversity, network robustness to secondary loss of species, and flower visitation frequencies in simplified landscapes.

Results

Interaction diversity was not more vulnerable than species diversity to landscape simplification, with pollinator and interaction diversity showing similar rates of erosion with landscape simplification. We found that 20% of both species and interactions are lost with an increase of arable crop cover from 30% to 80% in a landscape. The decrease in interaction diversity was partially buffered by persistent abundant generalist pollinators in simplified landscapes, which were nested subsets of pollinator communities in complex landscapes, while plants showed a high turnover in interactions across landscapes. The top 5% most abundant pollinator species also contributed to network robustness against secondary species loss but could not prevent flowers from a loss of visits in simplified landscapes.

Main Conclusions

Although persistent abundant pollinators buffered the decrease in interaction diversity in simplified landscapes and stabilised network robustness, flower visitation frequency was reduced, emphasising potentially severe consequences of further ongoing land-use change for pollination services.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
景观简化导致植物与授粉者互动多样性和花朵造访频率的损失,尽管有丰富的通类授粉者的缓冲作用
目的全球变化,尤其是地貌简化,是物种减少的主要驱动因素,可改变生态互动网络,对生态系统功能造成潜在的严重后果。因此,与物种多样性相比,了解景观简化如何影响植物与授粉者相互作用多样性(即独特相互作用的数量)的损失率,以及持续存在的丰富授粉者的作用,是评估景观简化对网络稳定性和授粉服务的影响的关键。我们比较了沿景观简化梯度的物种和互作多样性的损失率,然后逐步从数据集中剔除了前 1%-20%最丰富的传粉昆虫,以评估它们对互作多样性、网络对物种二次损失的稳健性以及简化景观中花朵的访问频率的影响。结果互作多样性并不比物种多样性更容易受到景观简化的影响,传粉昆虫和互作多样性在景观简化中的侵蚀率相似。我们发现,当景观中的耕地覆盖率从 30% 增加到 80% 时,物种和相互作用多样性都会减少 20%。简化景观中持续存在的丰富传粉昆虫(复杂景观中传粉昆虫群落的嵌套子集)部分缓冲了相互作用多样性的减少,而植物在不同景观中的相互作用则表现出很高的更替率。主要结论虽然持续丰富的传粉昆虫缓冲了简化景观中互作多样性的减少并稳定了网络的稳健性,但花朵的造访频率降低了,这强调了土地利用的进一步持续变化对授粉服务可能造成的严重后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diversity and Distributions
Diversity and Distributions 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
195
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Diversity and Distributions is a journal of conservation biogeography. We publish papers that deal with the application of biogeographical principles, theories, and analyses (being those concerned with the distributional dynamics of taxa and assemblages) to problems concerning the conservation of biodiversity. We no longer consider papers the sole aim of which is to describe or analyze patterns of biodiversity or to elucidate processes that generate biodiversity.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Cover page Contrasting Patterns of Population Genomic Structure Between Broadcast-Spawning and Brooding Corals in Southeast Asia Issue Information Non-Native, Non-Naturalised Plants Suffer Less Herbivory Than Native Plants Across European Botanical Gardens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1