@phdthesis{Classen2014,
  author    = {Claßen, Alice},
  title     = {Diversity, traits and ecosystem services of pollinators along climate and land use gradients on Mount Kilimanjaro},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-101292},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Since more than two centuries naturalists are fascinated by the profound changes in biodiversity observed along climatic gradients. Although the theories explaining changes in the diversity and the shape of organisms along climatic gradients belong to the foundations of modern ecology, our picture on the spatial patterns and drivers of biodiversity is far from being complete. Ambiguities in theory and data are common and past work has been strongly concentrated on plants and vertebrates. In the last two decades, interest in the fundamental processes structuring diversity along climatic gradients gained new impetus as they are expected to improve our understanding about how ecosystems will respond to global environmental changes. Global temperatures are rising faster than ever before; natural habitats are transformed into agricultural land and existing land use systems get more and more intensified to meet the demands of growing human populations. The fundamental shifts in the abiotic and biotic environment are proclaimed to affect ecosystems all over the world; however, precise predictions about how ecosystems respond to global changes are still lacking. We investigated diversity, traits and ecosystem services of wild bees along climate and land use gradients on Mount Kilimanjaro (Tanzania, East Africa). Wild bees play a major role in ecosystems, as they contribute to the reproduction and performance of wild and crop plants. Their responsiveness to environmental changes is therefore of high ecological and economic importance. Temperature and energy resources have often been suggested to be the main determinants of global and local species richness, but the mechanisms behind remain poorly understood. In the study described in chapter II we analyzed species richness patterns of wild bees along climate and land use gradients on Mount Kilimanjaro and disentangled the factors explaining most of the changes in bee richness. We found that floral resources had a weak but significant effect on pollinator abundance, which in turn was positively related to species richness. However, temperature was the strongest predictor of species richness, affecting species richness both directly and indirectly by positively influencing bee abundances. We observed higher levels of bee-flower-interactions at higher temperatures, independently of flower and bee abundances. This suggests that temperature restricts species richness by constraining the exploitation of resources by ectotherms. Current land use did not negatively affect species richness. We conclude that the richness of bees is explained by both temperature and resource availability, whereas temperature plays the dominant role as it limits the access of ectotherms to floral resources and may accelerate ecological and evolutionary processes that drive the maintenance and origination of diversity. Not only species numbers, but also morphological traits like body size are expected to be shaped by both physiological and energetic constraints along elevational gradients. Paradoxically, Bergmann´s rule predicts increases of body sizes in cooler climates resulting from physiological constraints, while species-energy theory suggests declines in the mean body size of species caused by increased extinction probabilities for large-bodied species in low-energy habitats. In chapter III we confronted this ambiguity with field data by studying community-wide body size variation of wild bees on Mt. Kilimanjaro. We found that along a 3680 m elevational gradient bee individuals became on average larger within species, while large species were increasingly absent from high-elevational communities. This demonstrates, on the one hand, how well-established, but apparently contrasting ecological theories can be merged through the parallel consideration of different levels of biological organization. On the other hand it signals that the extinction risk in the course of environmental change is not equally distributed among species within a community. Land use intensification is known to threaten biodiversity, but the consequences for ecosystem services are still a matter of debate. In chapter IV, we experimentally tested the single and combined contributions of pest predators and pollinators to coffee production along a land use intensification gradient on Mount Kilimanjaro. We found that pest predation increased fruit set by on average 9\%, while pollination increased fruit weight of coffee by on average 7.4\%. Land use had no significant effect on both ecosystem services. However, we found that in coffee plantations with most intensified land use, pollination services were virtually exclusively provided by the honey bee (Apis mellifera). The reliance on a single pollinator species is risky, as possible declines of that species may directly lower pollination services, resulting in yield losses. In contrast, pollination services in structurally complex homegardens were found to be provided by a diverse pollinator community, increasing the stability of pollination services in a long term. We showed that on Mount Kilimanjaro pollinator communities changed along elevational gradients in terms of species richness (chapter II) and trait composition (chapter III). Temperature and the temperature-mediated accessibility of resources were identified as important predictors of these patterns, which contributes to our fundamental understanding about the factors that shape ectothermic insect communities along climatic gradients. The strong temperature-dependence of pollinators suggests that temperature shifts in the course of global change are likely to affect pollinator communities. Pollinators might either profit from rising temperatures, or shift to higher elevations, which could result in related biotic attrition in the lowland with consequences for the provision of ecosystem services in cropping systems. Up to now, land use intensification had no significant impact on the diversity of pollinator communities and their ecosystem services. Pollinators might profit from the strong landscape heterogeneity in the region and from the amount of flower resources in the understory of cropping systems. However,progressing homogenization of the landscape and the pronounced application of pesticides could result in reduced diversity and dominance of single species, as we already found in sun coffee plantations. Such shifts in community compositions could threaten the stability of ecosystem services within cropping and natural systems in a long term.},
  subject      = {Kilimandscharo},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Kindeketa2014,
  author    = {Kindeketa, William Joseph},
  title     = {Pollination in wild plant communities along altitudinal and land use gradients Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-100136},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {1. Pollination of sexually reproducing plants requires pollen transfer agents, which can be biotic, abiotic or a combination of biotic and abiotic agents. The dominance of one of pollination system in wild plant communities depends on climatic factors and/or degrees of anthropogenic influences, which have effects on pollinator diversity and pollination function. Anthropogenic activities and climate change are also considered as main causes of ongoing invasion of invasive species into wild and managed habitats which can bring up competition for pollinators with possible negative consequences for the reproduction of co-occurring native plant species. 2. The study aimed to determine pollination systems and pollination limitation of invasive and native plant communities in natural savannah between 870 - 1130 m and semi-natural (managed) grassland between 1300 - 1750 m above sea level; effects of flower density and pollinator abundance on seed production of cross-pollinated and self-pollinated plants; and relationships of bee abundance and the proportion of cross- pollinated plants at the southern slope of Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. 3. Pollinator-exclusion, open pollination and supplemental hand-pollination treatments were applied to 27 plant species in savannah and grassland habitats. Flowers were counted in each clusters based upon their species. Pollinators were sampled by using pan traps. Information-theory-based multi-model averaging and generalized linear mixed effects models were used to identify and analyze the effects of flower density, pollinator abundance, pollination treatments and habitat types on seed production. Regression models were used to determine relationships of altitude with bee abundance, and with proportion of cross-pollinated plants. 4. My results show that mean seed numbers of native plants were significantly lower in pollinator-exclusion treatments than in open-pollination treatments, indicating their reliance on pollinators for reproductive success. In contrast, seed numbers of invasive plants were similar in pollinator-exclusion and open-pollination treatments, demonstrating an ability of reproduction without pollinators. Despite of higher levels of self-pollination in invasive plants, supplemental hand-pollination treatments revealed pollen limitation in grassland and marginally in savannah habitats. There were no significant difference in seed numbers between supplemental hand pollination and open pollination treatments of native plant communities in savannah and grassland, which indicates no pollination limitation in the studied ecological system for native communities. Besides, grassland plants produced comparatively more seeds than savannah plants, however seeds in grasslands were lighter than those of the savannah which may be due to nutrient limitation in grassland. 5. I found 12 cross-pollinated and 15 self-pollinated plants along altitudinal gradient after comparing seeds from pollinator-excluded and open-pollinated experiments. I also found that proportions of cross-pollinated plants and bee abundance simultaneously decreased with increasing altitude. All cross-pollinated plants were native and grew in savannah habitats, with an exception of one species. 6. Neither effects of focal flower density nor a significant interaction between focal flower densities and bee abundance for self-pollinated plants were observed. However, there were effects of focal flower densities and interactions of flower density with bee abundance for cross-pollinated plants. Non-focal flower density has no significant effects on seed production of cross-pollinated and self-pollinated plants. 7. The results show that native plants depend more on cross-pollination than invasive plants, despite of most native plants in managed habitat (grassland) rely on self-pollination for reproduction. The tendency of having more cross-pollinated plants in natural savannah which are in low altitude coincides with other finding that the cross-pollinated plants and bee abundance simultaneously decrease with increasing altitude. Therefore, our findings support the hypotheses that self-fertilization of flowering plants increases with increasing altitude, and pollinator limitation is most pronounced in managed or disturbed habitats. Despite of reduction of pollinators in grassland, only invasive plants experience pollen limitation, which may be due to poor integration with available pollinator networks. 8. I also found bee abundance and flower density are not the main pollination factors required by self-pollinated plants during reproduction. However, focal flower density, which influences pollinator diversity, is more applicable to cross-pollinated plants. Climate change and anthropogenic activities in natural habitats are factors that influence pollinator abundance and functioning, which lead to a shift of mating systems in plant communities so as to assure their reproduction.},
  subject      = {Best{\"a}ubungs{\"o}kologie},
  language  = {en}
}