9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Specialization in plant–pollinator networks: insights from local-scale interactions in Glenbow Ranch Provincial Park in Alberta, Canada

      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

          Background

          The occurrence and frequency of plant–pollinator interactions are acknowledged to be a function of multiple factors, including the spatio-temporal distribution of species. The study of pollination specialization by examining network properties and more recently incorporating predictors of pairwise interactions is emerging as a useful framework, yet integrated datasets combining network structure, habitat disturbance, and phylogenetic information are still scarce.

          Results

          We found that plant–pollinator interactions in a grassland ecosystem in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains are not randomly distributed and that high levels of reciprocal specialization are generated by biological constraints, such as floral symmetry, pollinator size and pollinator sociality, because these traits lead to morphological or phenological mismatching between interacting species. We also detected that landscape degradation was associated with differences in the network topology, but the interaction webs still maintained a consistently higher number of reciprocal specialization cases than expected. Evidence for the reciprocal evolutionary dependence in visitors (e.g., related pollinators visiting related plants) were weak in this study system, however we identified key species joining clustered units.

          Conclusions

          Our results indicate that the conserved links with keystone species may provide the foundation for generating local reciprocal specialization. From the general topology of the networks, plant–pollinators interactions in sites with disturbance consisted of generalized nodes connecting modules (i.e., hub and numerous connectors). Vice versa, interactions in less disturbed sites consisted of more specialized and symmetrical connections.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

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

          Plant-Animal Mutualistic Networks: The Architecture of Biodiversity

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

            Ecological networks and their fragility.

            Darwin used the metaphor of a 'tangled bank' to describe the complex interactions between species. Those interactions are varied: they can be antagonistic ones involving predation, herbivory and parasitism, or mutualistic ones, such as those involving the pollination of flowers by insects. Moreover, the metaphor hints that the interactions may be complex to the point of being impossible to understand. All interactions can be visualized as ecological networks, in which species are linked together, either directly or indirectly through intermediate species. Ecological networks, although complex, have well defined patterns that both illuminate the ecological mechanisms underlying them and promise a better understanding of the relationship between complexity and ecological stability.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions.

              Mutually beneficial interactions between flowering plants and animal pollinators represent a critical 'ecosystem service' under threat of anthropogenic extinction. We explored probable patterns of extinction in two large networks of plants and flower visitors by simulating the removal of pollinators and consequent loss of the plants that depend upon them for reproduction. For each network, we removed pollinators at random, systematically from least-linked (most specialized) to most-linked (most generalized), and systematically from most- to least-linked. Plant species diversity declined most rapidly with preferential removal of the most-linked pollinators, but declines were no worse than linear. This relative tolerance to extinction derives from redundancy in pollinators per plant and from nested topology of the networks. Tolerance in pollination networks contrasts with catastrophic declines reported from standard food webs. The discrepancy may be a result of the method used: previous studies removed species from multiple trophic levels based only on their linkage, whereas our preferential removal of pollinators reflects their greater risk of extinction relative to that of plants. In both pollination networks, the most-linked pollinators were bumble-bees and some solitary bees. These animals should receive special attention in efforts to conserve temperate pollination systems.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                svillalo@ucalgary.ca
                manu7ello@gmail.com
                jvamosi@ucalgary.ca
                Journal
                BMC Ecol
                BMC Ecol
                BMC Ecology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6785
                6 September 2019
                6 September 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 34
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7697, GRID grid.22072.35, Department of Biological Sciences, , University of Calgary, ; Calgary, AB Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2182 2255, GRID grid.28046.38, Department of Biology, , University of Ottawa, ; Ottawa, ON Canada
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2114-4121
                Article
                250
                10.1186/s12898-019-0250-z
                6731600
                31492127
                6a1e3051-584d-45d5-81f6-feaf9aa7055d
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 14 April 2019
                : 30 August 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002790, Canadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada;
                Award ID: 03891-2014
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Ecology
                plant–pollinator interaction,network ecology,specialization
                Ecology
                plant–pollinator interaction, network ecology, specialization

                Comments

                Comment on this article