Spatiotemporal patterns of forest pollinator diversity across the southeastern United States

IF 4.6 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Diversity and Distributions Pub Date : 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1111/ddi.13869
Michael Ulyshen, Cory Adams, Jacqui Adams, Susan B. Adams, Mickey Bland, Don C. Bragg, Chuck Burdine, Mac A. Callaham Jr, Richard Chaney, Gregg Chapman, Patsy Clinton, Cinnamon Dixon, Jacob Floyd, Phillip Jordan, Tara Keyser, Stephanie Laseter, Rachel Mallinger, Virginia McDaniel, Bryan Mudder, C. Dana Nelson, Katherine Odanaka, A. Christopher Oishi, Shawna Reid, Samm Reynolds, Kevin Robertson, Daniel Saenz, Mary Anne Sayer, Nathan Schiff, Brian Scholtens, Joel Scott, Martin Spetich, Melanie K. Taylor, John L. Willis, Andrew D. Young
{"title":"Spatiotemporal patterns of forest pollinator diversity across the southeastern United States","authors":"Michael Ulyshen,&nbsp;Cory Adams,&nbsp;Jacqui Adams,&nbsp;Susan B. Adams,&nbsp;Mickey Bland,&nbsp;Don C. Bragg,&nbsp;Chuck Burdine,&nbsp;Mac A. Callaham Jr,&nbsp;Richard Chaney,&nbsp;Gregg Chapman,&nbsp;Patsy Clinton,&nbsp;Cinnamon Dixon,&nbsp;Jacob Floyd,&nbsp;Phillip Jordan,&nbsp;Tara Keyser,&nbsp;Stephanie Laseter,&nbsp;Rachel Mallinger,&nbsp;Virginia McDaniel,&nbsp;Bryan Mudder,&nbsp;C. Dana Nelson,&nbsp;Katherine Odanaka,&nbsp;A. Christopher Oishi,&nbsp;Shawna Reid,&nbsp;Samm Reynolds,&nbsp;Kevin Robertson,&nbsp;Daniel Saenz,&nbsp;Mary Anne Sayer,&nbsp;Nathan Schiff,&nbsp;Brian Scholtens,&nbsp;Joel Scott,&nbsp;Martin Spetich,&nbsp;Melanie K. Taylor,&nbsp;John L. Willis,&nbsp;Andrew D. Young","doi":"10.1111/ddi.13869","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Efforts to understand how pollinating insect diversity is distributed across large geographic areas are rare despite the importance of such work for conserving regional diversity. We sought to relate the diversity of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea), hover flies (Diptera: Syrphidae), and butterflies (Lepidoptera) to ecoregion, landscape context, canopy openness, and forest composition across southeastern U.S. forests.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Location</h3>\n \n <p>Nineteen experimental forests across nine states in the southeastern U.S.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We established 5–7 plots on each experimental forest. In each, we sampled pollinators monthly (March–September) using coloured pan traps, and collected data on local forest characteristics. We used the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) to quantify surrounding landcover at different spatial scales.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Bee richness was negatively correlated with both the amount of conifer (pine) forest and the extent of wetlands in the surrounding landscape but was positively correlated with canopy openness. Hover flies and butterflies were less sensitive to landscape context and stand conditions. Pollinator communities differed considerably among ecoregions, with those of the Central Appalachian and Coastal Plain ecoregions being particularly distinct. Bee richness and abundance peaked 2 months earlier in Central Appalachia than in the Coastal Plain and Southeastern Mixed Forest ecoregions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our findings reveal ecoregional differences in pollinator communities across the southeastern U.S. and highlight the importance of landscape context and local forest conditions to this diverse fauna. The closed broadleaf forests of Appalachia and the open conifer-dominated forests of the Coastal Plain support particularly distinct pollinator communities with contrasting seasonality. Our results suggest pine forests may reduce pollinator diversity in regions historically dominated by broadleaf forests. However, efforts to create more open canopies can help improve conditions for pollinators in planted pine forests. Research exploring associations between forest pollinators and different broadleaf tree taxa is needed to better anticipate the impacts of various management activities.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51018,"journal":{"name":"Diversity and Distributions","volume":"30 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddi.13869","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diversity and Distributions","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.13869","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

Efforts to understand how pollinating insect diversity is distributed across large geographic areas are rare despite the importance of such work for conserving regional diversity. We sought to relate the diversity of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea), hover flies (Diptera: Syrphidae), and butterflies (Lepidoptera) to ecoregion, landscape context, canopy openness, and forest composition across southeastern U.S. forests.

Location

Nineteen experimental forests across nine states in the southeastern U.S.

Methods

We established 5–7 plots on each experimental forest. In each, we sampled pollinators monthly (March–September) using coloured pan traps, and collected data on local forest characteristics. We used the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) to quantify surrounding landcover at different spatial scales.

Results

Bee richness was negatively correlated with both the amount of conifer (pine) forest and the extent of wetlands in the surrounding landscape but was positively correlated with canopy openness. Hover flies and butterflies were less sensitive to landscape context and stand conditions. Pollinator communities differed considerably among ecoregions, with those of the Central Appalachian and Coastal Plain ecoregions being particularly distinct. Bee richness and abundance peaked 2 months earlier in Central Appalachia than in the Coastal Plain and Southeastern Mixed Forest ecoregions.

Main Conclusions

Our findings reveal ecoregional differences in pollinator communities across the southeastern U.S. and highlight the importance of landscape context and local forest conditions to this diverse fauna. The closed broadleaf forests of Appalachia and the open conifer-dominated forests of the Coastal Plain support particularly distinct pollinator communities with contrasting seasonality. Our results suggest pine forests may reduce pollinator diversity in regions historically dominated by broadleaf forests. However, efforts to create more open canopies can help improve conditions for pollinators in planted pine forests. Research exploring associations between forest pollinators and different broadleaf tree taxa is needed to better anticipate the impacts of various management activities.

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
美国东南部森林授粉者多样性的时空模式
了解授粉昆虫的多样性如何在大地理区域内分布的工作很少见,尽管这些工作对保护区域多样性非常重要。我们试图将蜜蜂(膜翅目:Apoidea)、食蚜蝇(双翅目:Syrphidae)和蝴蝶(鳞翅目)的多样性与美国东南部森林的生态区域、景观环境、树冠开阔度和森林组成联系起来。我们在每个实验林中建立了 5-7 个地块,每月(3 月至 9 月)使用彩色盘式诱捕器对传粉昆虫进行采样,并收集当地森林特征的数据。蜜蜂的丰富度与周围景观中针叶林(松树)的数量和湿地的范围呈负相关,但与树冠的开阔度呈正相关。食蚜蝇和蝴蝶对景观环境和林分条件的敏感度较低。不同生态区的传粉昆虫群落差异很大,阿巴拉契亚中部生态区和沿海平原生态区的传粉昆虫群落尤为明显。我们的研究结果揭示了美国东南部传粉昆虫群落的生态区差异,并强调了景观环境和当地森林条件对这一多样化动物群落的重要性。阿巴拉契亚的郁闭阔叶林和沿海平原以针叶树为主的开阔森林支持着具有截然不同季节性的传粉昆虫群落。我们的研究结果表明,在历史上以阔叶林为主的地区,松树林可能会减少传粉昆虫的多样性。不过,努力营造更开阔的树冠有助于改善人工松林中传粉昆虫的生存条件。需要对森林传粉昆虫与不同阔叶树类之间的关系进行研究,以便更好地预测各种管理活动的影响。
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