16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The proportion of impervious surfaces at the landscape scale structures wild bee assemblages in a densely populated region

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Given the predicted expansion of cities throughout the world, understanding the effect of urbanization on bee fauna is a major issue for the conservation of bees. The aim of this study was to understand how urbanization affects wild bee assemblages along a gradient of impervious surfaces and to determine the influence of landscape composition and floral resource availability on these assemblages. We chose 12 sites with a proportion of impervious surfaces (soil covered by parking, roads, and buildings) ranging from 0.06% to 64.31% within a 500 m radius. We collected using pan trapping and estimated the landscape composition of the sites within a 500 m radius and the species richness of plant assemblages within a 200 m radius. We collected 1104 bees from 74 species. The proportion of impervious surfaces at the landscape scale had a negative effect on wild bee abundance and species richness, whereas local flower composition had no effect. Ground‐nesting bees were particularly sensitive to the urbanization gradient. This study provides new evidences of the impact of urbanization on bee assemblages and the proportion of impervious surfaces at the landscape scale emerged as a key factor that drives those assemblages.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bee foraging ranges and their relationship to body size.

          Bees are the most important pollinator taxon; therefore, understanding the scale at which they forage has important ecological implications and conservation applications. The foraging ranges for most bee species are unknown. Foraging distance information is critical for understanding the scale at which bee populations respond to the landscape, assessing the role of bee pollinators in affecting plant population structure, planning conservation strategies for plants, and designing bee habitat refugia that maintain pollination function for wild and crop plants. We used data from 96 records of 62 bee species to determine whether body size predicts foraging distance. We regressed maximum and typical foraging distances on body size and found highly significant and explanatory nonlinear relationships. We used a second data set to: (1) compare observed reports of foraging distance to the distances predicted by our regression equations and (2) assess the biases inherent to the different techniques that have been used to assess foraging distance. The equations we present can be used to predict foraging distances for many bee species, based on a simple measurement of body size.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems.

            Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries.

              Agri-environment schemes are an increasingly important tool for the maintenance and restoration of farmland biodiversity in Europe but their ecological effects are poorly known. Scheme design is partly based on non-ecological considerations and poses important restrictions on evaluation studies. We describe a robust approach to evaluate agri-environment schemes and use it to evaluate the biodiversity effects of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. We compared species density of vascular plants, birds, bees, grasshoppers and crickets, and spiders on 202 paired fields, one with an agri-environment scheme, the other conventionally managed. In all countries, agri-environment schemes had marginal to moderately positive effects on biodiversity. However, uncommon species benefited in only two of five countries and species listed in Red Data Books rarely benefited from agri-environment schemes. Scheme objectives may need to differentiate between biodiversity of common species that can be enhanced with relatively simple modifications in farming practices and diversity or abundance of endangered species which require more elaborate conservation measures.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                benoit.geslin@imbe.fr
                Journal
                Ecol Evol
                Ecol Evol
                10.1002/(ISSN)2045-7758
                ECE3
                Ecology and Evolution
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2045-7758
                25 August 2016
                September 2016
                : 6
                : 18 ( doiID: 10.1002/ece3.2016.6.issue-18 )
                : 6599-6615
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] CNRS, IRDInstitut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie Marine et Continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Université Avignon Université Pôle St Jérôme av. Escadrille N. Niemen 13397 Marseille Cedex 20France
                [ 2 ] CNRS, UMR 7618iEES‐Paris F‐75005 ParisFrance
                [ 3 ] INRA, UMR 406 Abeilles et EnvironnementINRA Site Agroparc F‐84914 Avignon Cedex 9France
                [ 4 ]Université Paris Diderot‐7 F‐75013 ParisFrance
                [ 5 ]Université Pierre et Marie Curie‐6 F‐75005 ParisFrance
                [ 6 ] CEREEP Ecotron ÎleDeFranceUMS CNRS 3194 Saint‐Pierre‐lès‐NemoursFrance
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Benoît Geslin, Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie Marine et Continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, Avignon Université Pôle St Jérôme av. Escadrille N. Niemen, 13397 Marseille Cedex 20, France.

                Tel: 0033 4 288 917;

                E‐mail: benoit.geslin@ 123456imbe.fr

                Article
                ECE32374
                10.1002/ece3.2374
                5058531
                27777733
                640568af-5150-4591-8b31-eb3a9927b198
                © 2016 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 15 April 2016
                : 07 July 2016
                : 15 July 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 3, Pages: 17, Words: 11790
                Funding
                Funded by: Région Ile‐de‐France
                Award ID: ASTREA 2009‐01‐22
                Categories
                Original Research
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                ece32374
                September 2016
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.9.4 mode:remove_FC converted:11.10.2016

                Evolutionary Biology
                bees,community ecology,gradient,landscape scale,urbanization
                Evolutionary Biology
                bees, community ecology, gradient, landscape scale, urbanization

                Comments

                Comment on this article