TY - JOUR A1 - Seitz, Nicola A1 - vanEngelsdorp, Dennis A1 - Leonhardt, Sara D. T1 - Are native and non‐native pollinator friendly plants equally valuable for native wild bee communities? JF - Ecology and Evolution N2 - Bees rely on floral pollen and nectar for food. Therefore, pollinator friendly plantings are often used to enrich habitats in bee conservation efforts. As part of these plantings, non‐native plants may provide valuable floral resources, but their effects on native bee communities have not been assessed in direct comparison with native pollinator friendly plantings. In this study, we performed a common garden experiment by seeding mixes of 20 native and 20 non‐native pollinator friendly plant species at separate neighboring plots at three sites in Maryland, USA, and recorded flower visitors for 2 years. A total of 3,744 bees (120 species) were collected. Bee abundance and species richness were either similar across plant types (midseason and for abundance also late season) or lower at native than at non‐native plots (early season and for richness also late season). The overall bee community composition differed significantly between native and non‐native plots, with 11 and 23 bee species being found exclusively at one plot type or the other, respectively. Additionally, some species were more abundant at native plant plots, while others were more abundant at non‐natives. Native plants hosted more specialized plant–bee visitation networks than non‐native plants. Three species out of the five most abundant bee species were more specialized when foraging on native plants than on non‐native plants. Overall, visitation networks were more specialized in the early season than in late seasons. Our findings suggest that non‐native plants can benefit native pollinators, but may alter foraging patterns, bee community assemblage, and bee–plant network structures. KW - bee conservation KW - common garden experiment KW - exotic plants KW - non‐native plants KW - plant–bee visitation networks KW - pollinator friendly plants KW - wild bees Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-218439 VL - 10 IS - 23 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Bartomeus, Ignasi A1 - Potts, Simon G. A1 - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf A1 - Vaissiere, Bernard E. A1 - Woyciechowski, Michal A1 - Krewenka, Kristin M. A1 - Tscheulin, Thomas A1 - Roberts, Stuart P. M. A1 - Szentgyoergyi, Hajnalka A1 - Westphal, Catrin A1 - Bommarco, Riccardo T1 - Contribution of insect pollinators to crop yield and quality varies with agricultural intensification JF - PEERJ N2 - Background. Up to 75% of crop species benefit at least to some degree from animal pollination for fruit or seed set and yield. However, basic information on the level of pollinator dependence and pollinator contribution to yield is lacking for many crops. Even less is known about how insect pollination affects crop quality. Given that habitat loss and agricultural intensification are known to decrease pollinator richness and abundance, there is a need to assess the consequences for different components of crop production. Methods. We used pollination exclusion on flowers or inflorescences on a whole plant basis to assess the contribution of insect pollination to crop yield and quality in four flowering crops (spring oilseed rape, field bean, strawberry, and buckwheat) located in four regions of Europe. For each crop, we recorded abundance and species richness of flower visiting insects in ten fields located along a gradient from simple to heterogeneous landscapes. Results. Insect pollination enhanced average crop yield between 18 and 71% depending on the crop. Yield quality was also enhanced in most crops. For instance, oilseed rape had higher oil and lower chlorophyll contents when adequately pollinated, the proportion of empty seeds decreased in buckwheat, and strawberries' commercial grade improved; however, we did not find higher nitrogen content in open pollinated field beans. Complex landscapes had a higher overall species richness of wild pollinators across crops, but visitation rates were only higher in complex landscapes for some crops. On the contrary, the overall yield was consistently enhanced by higher visitation rates, but not by higher pollinator richness. Discussion. For the four crops in this study, there is clear benefit delivered by pollinators on yield quantity and/or quality, but it is not maximized under current agricultural intensification. Honeybees, the most abundant pollinator, might partially compensate the loss of wild pollinators in some areas, but our results suggest the need of landscape-scale actions to enhance wild pollinator populations. KW - biodiversity KW - pollination KW - honeybee KW - wild bees KW - agroecosystems KW - native pollinators KW - species richness KW - bee pollinators KW - wild KW - ecosystemservices KW - fruit-quality KW - oilseed rape KW - land-use KW - honey KW - patterns Y1 - 2014 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-116928 SN - 2167-9843 VL - 2 IS - e328 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Voulgari‐Kokota, Anna A1 - Ankenbrand, Markus J. A1 - Grimmer, Gudrun A1 - Steffan‐Dewenter, Ingolf A1 - Keller, Alexander T1 - Linking pollen foraging of megachilid bees to their nest bacterial microbiota JF - Ecology and Evolution N2 - Solitary bees build their nests by modifying the interior of natural cavities, and they provision them with food by importing collected pollen. As a result, the microbiota of the solitary bee nests may be highly dependent on introduced materials. In order to investigate how the collected pollen is associated with the nest microbiota, we used metabarcoding of the ITS2 rDNA and the 16S rDNA to simultaneously characterize the pollen composition and the bacterial communities of 100 solitary bee nest chambers belonging to seven megachilid species. We found a weak correlation between bacterial and pollen alpha diversity and significant associations between the composition of pollen and that of the nest microbiota, contributing to the understanding of the link between foraging and bacteria acquisition for solitary bees. Since solitary bees cannot establish bacterial transmission routes through eusociality, this link could be essential for obtaining bacterial symbionts for this group of valuable pollinators. KW - foraging patterns KW - nest microbiota KW - plant–microbe–pollinator triangle KW - pollination network KW - solitary bees KW - wild bees Y1 - 2019 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-201749 SN - 00 VL - 2019 IS - 9 ER -