Winfree, R. | Search bioRxiv

bioRxiv2021

Pollinator habitat plantings benefit wild, native bees, but do not necessarily favor rare species

O_LIInstalling pollinator habitat is a ubiquitous conservation tool, but little is known about which pollinator taxa require support, or which benefit from habitat installations. C_LIO_LIWe studied the response of rare and common bees to pollinator habitat enhancement. We used independent regional datasets to designate bee species as common or rare based on their rank according to one of three metrics: a) site occurrence frequency, b) local relative abundance, and c) geographic range size. We asked whether the abundance or richness of rare and common bees were greater in pollinator habitat, relative to old-field controls. Because we used an arbitrary, quantile-based cutoff to categorize species rarity, we conducted sensitivity analysis and controlled for rarity classification errors with a null model. With this null model, we determined whether rare and/or common species responded to pollinator habitat disproportionately, compared to the expectation for typical bee species. C_LIO_LIWe found that the number of individuals and of species designated as rare based on local relative abundance was greater in pollinator habitat enhancements. The number of individuals from bee species designated as rare based on site occurrence was lower in pollinator habitat enhancements, but the number of species was not clearly different between habitat types. We did not find a clear positive nor negative effect of habitat enhancement for species designated rare based on geographic range size. For all three rarity metrics, common species increased in abundance and richness in pollinator habitat relative to controls. Null models indicated that in most cases, neither rare nor common species disproportionately benefited from pollinator habitat. C_LIO_LISynthesis and Applications: Our results suggest that pollinator habitat can lead to an increase in the abundance and richness of bees, including species that are rare and that are common. However, rare species appeared to respond differently than typical species, and depending on how species were classified as rare, could display muted or even negative responses to habitat enhancement. Targeting rare species with specific floral resources or unique habitat types may lead to better outcomes for rare and threatened species. C_LI

ecology↗

bioRxiv2018

Male and female bees show large differences in floral preference

O_LIIntraspecific variation in foraging niche can drive food web dynamics and ecosystem processes. Field studies and theoretical analysis of plant-pollinator interaction networks typically focus on the partitioning of the floral community between pollinator species, with little attention paid to intraspecific variation among plants or foraging bees. In other systems, male and female animals exhibit different, cascading, impacts on interaction partners. Although the foraging ecology of male bees is little known, we expect foraging preferences to differ between male and female bees, which could strongly impact plant-pollinator interaction outcomes.\nC_LIO_LIWe designed an observational study to evaluate the strength and prevalence of sexually dimorphic foraging preferences in bees.\nC_LIO_LIWe observed bees visiting flowers in semi-natural meadows in New Jersey, USA. To detect differences in flower use against a shared background resource availability, we maximized the number of interactions observed within narrow spatio-temporal windows. To distinguish observed differences in bee use of flower species, which can reflect abundance patterns and sampling effects, from underlying differences in bee preferences, we analyzed our data with both a permutation-based null model and random effects models.\nC_LIO_LIWe found that the diets of male and female bees of the same species were often as dissimilar as the diets of bees of different species. Furthermore, we demonstrate differences in preference between male and female bees, and identify plant species that are particularly attractive to each sex. We show that intraspecific differences in preference can be robustly identified within interactions between hundreds of species, without precisely quantifying resource availability, and despite high phenological turnover.\nC_LIO_LIGiven the large differences in flower use and preference between male and female bees, ecological sex differences should be integrated into studies of bee demography, plant pollination, and coevolutionary relationships between flowers and insects.\nC_LI

ecology↗