Species traits and network structure predict the success and impacts of pollinator invasions

Nature Communications

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Valdovinos, Fernanda S ^a   Berlow, Eric L ^b   Moisset De Espanés, Pablo ^c,d   Ramos Jiliberto, Rodrigo ^e,f   Vázquez, Diego P ^g,h   Martinez, Neo D ⁱ  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b Vibrant Data Inc   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^d Instituto de Dinamica Celular y Biotecnolog a   (Chile)

^e UNIVERSIDAD MAYOR   (Chile)

^f PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE VALPARAÍSO   (Chile)

^g LABORATORIO DE ENTOMOLOGÍA   (Argentina)

^h UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE CUYO   (Argentina)

ⁱ The University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL INVASION; DIETARY OVERLAP; FORAGING EFFICIENCY; INTRODUCED SPECIES; NATIVE SPECIES; PLANT; PLANT-POLLINATOR INTERACTION; POPULATION DYNAMICS;

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; CONSUMER; DIET; FORAGER; FORAGING; NATIVE SPECIES; NONHUMAN; PLANT; POLLINATION; POLLINATOR; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SPECIES; SPECIES INVASION; SPECIES RICHNESS; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; BEE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLASSIFICATION; ECOSYSTEM; FLOWER; INSECT; PARASITOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; BEES; ECOSYSTEM; FLOWERS; INSECTA; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PLANTS; POLLINATION; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 85048005089     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04593-y     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Thompson, J. N. The Coevolutionary Process (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1994).
2. Potts, S. G. et al. Safeguarding pollinators and their values to human wellbeing. Nature 540, 220-229 (2016).
3. Ollerton, J. Pollinator diversity: distribution, ecological function, and conservation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 353-376 (2017).
4. Goulson, D., Nicholls, E., Botías, C. & Rotheray, E. L. Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science 347, 1255957 (2015).
5. Sakai, A. K. et al. The population biology of invasive species. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 32, 305-332 (2001).
6. Ghazoul, J. Flowers at the front line of invasion? Ecol. Entomol. 27, 638-640 (2002).
7. Traveset, A. & Richardson, D. M. Biological invasions as disruptors of plant reproductive mutualisms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 208-216 (2006).
8. Vilà, M. et al. Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: a meta-analysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 14, 702-708 (2011).
9. Romanuk, T. N. et al. Predicting invasion success in complex ecological networks. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 1743-1754 (2009).
10. Romanuk, T. N., Zhou, Y., Valdovinos, F. S. & Martinez, N. D. Chapter fiverobustness trade-offs in model food webs: invasion probability decreases while invasion consequences increase with connectance. Adv. Ecol. Res. 56, 263-291 (2017).
11. Goulson, D. Effects of introduced bees on native ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34, 1-26 (2003).
12. Russo, L. Positive and negative impacts of non-native bee species around the world. Insects 7, 69 (2016).
13. Paini, D. R. Impact of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on native bees: a review. Austral Ecol. 29, 399-407 (2004).
14. Paini, D. R. & Roberts, J. D. (2005). Commercial honey bees (Apis mellifera) reduce the fecundity of an Australian native bee (Hylaeus alcyoneus). Biol. Conserv. 123, 103-112 (2004).
15. Goulson, D. & Sparrow, K. R. Evidence for competition between honeybees and bumblebees; effects on bumblebee worker size. J. Insect Conserv. 13, 177-181 (2009).
16. Cane, J. H. & Tepedino, V. J. Gauging the effect of honey bee pollen collection on native bee communities. Conserv. Lett. 10, 205-210 (2017).
17. Herbertsson, L., Lindström, S. A., Rundlöf, M., Bommarco, R. & Smith, H. G. Competition between managed honeybees and wild bumblebees depends on landscape context. Basic Appl. Ecol. 17, 609-616 (2016).
18. Torné-Noguera, A., Rodrigo, A., Osorio, S. & Bosch, J. Collateral effects of beekeeping: impacts on pollen-nectar resources and wild bee communities. Basic Appl. Ecol. 17, 199-209 (2016).
19. Donovan, B. J. Interactions between native and introduced bees in New Zealand. N. Z. J. Ecol. 3, 104-116 (1980).
20. Roubik, D. W. in The conservation of bees (eds Matheson, A., Buchmann, S. L., O'Toole, C., Westrich, P., Williams, I. H.) 173-182 (Academic Press, London, 1996).
21. Roubik, D. W. & Wolda, H. Do competing honey bees matter? Dynamics and abundance of native bees before and after honey bee invasion. Popul. Ecol. 43, 53-62 (2001).
22. Gross, C. L. & Mackay, D. Honeybees reduce fitness in the pioneer shrub Melastoma affine (Melastomataceae). Biol. Conserv. 86, 169-178 (1998).
23. Rymer, P. D., Whelan, R. J., Ayre, D. J., Weston, P. H. & Russell, K. G. Reproductive success and pollinator effectiveness differ in common and rare Persoonia species (Proteaceae). Biol. Conserv. 123, 521-532 (2005).
24. Bruckman, D. & Campbell, D. R. Floral neighborhood influences pollinator assemblages and effective pollination in a native plant. Oecologia 176, 465-476 (2014).
25. Sáez, A., Morales, C. L., Ramos, L. Y. & Aizen, M. A. Extremely frequent bee visits increase pollen deposition but reduce drupelet set in raspberry. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 1603-1612 (2014).
26. Chamberlain, S. A. & Schlising, R. A. Role of honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in the pollination biology of a California native plant, Triteleia laxa (Asparagales: Themidaceae). Environ. Entomol. 37, 808-816 (2014).
27. Junker, R. R., Bleil, R., Daehler, C. C. & Blüthgen, N. Intra-floral resource partitioning between endemic and invasive flower visitors: consequences for pollinator effectiveness. Ecol. Entomol. 35, 760-767 (2010).
28. Sanguinetti, A. & Singer, R. B. Invasive bees promote high reproductive success in Andean orchids. Biol. Conserv. 175, 10-20 (2014).
29. Hung, K.-L. J., Kingston, J. M., Albrecht, M., Holway, D. A. & Kohn, J. R. The worldwide importance of honey bees as pollinators in natural habitats. Proc. R. Soc. B 285, 20172140 (2018).
30. Huryn, V. M. B. Ecological impacts of introduced honey bees. Q. Rev. Biol. 72, 275-297 (1997).
31. Bascompte, J. & Jordano, P. Plant-animal mutualistic networks: the architecture of biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38, 567-593 (2007).
32. Bastolla, U. et al. The architecture of mutualistic networks minimizes competition and increases biodiversity. Nature 458, 1018 (2009).
33. Valdovinos, F. S., Moisset de Espanés, P., Flores, J. D. & Ramos-Jiliberto, R. Adaptive foraging allows the maintenance of biodiversity of pollination networks. Oikos 122, 907-917 (2013).
34. Valdovinos, F. S. et al. Niche partitioning due to adaptive foraging reverses effects of nestedness and connectance on pollination network stability. Ecol. Lett. 19, 1277-1286 (2016).
35. Vanbergen, A. J., Espíndola, A. & Aizen, M. A. Risks to pollinators and pollination from invasive alien species. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 16 (2018).
36. Morales, C. L., Arbetman, M. P., Cameron, S. A. & Aizen, M. A. Rapid ecological replacement of a native bumble bee by invasive species. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11, 529-534 (2013).
37. Aizen, M. A. et al. When mutualism goes bad: density-dependent impacts of introduced bees on plant reproduction. New Phytol. 204, 322-328 (2014).
38. McGill, B. J., Enquist, B. J., Weiher, E. & Westoby, M. Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 178-185 (2006).
39. Thèbault, E. & Fontaine, C. Stability of ecological communities and the architecture of mutualistic and trophic networks. Science 329, 853-856 (2010).
40. Almeida-Neto, M., Guimaraes, P., Guimaraes, P. R., Loyola, R. D. & Ulrich, W. A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117, 1227-12 (2008).
41. Jordano, P., Bascompte, J. & Olesen, J. M. Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant-animal interactions. Ecol. Lett. 6, 69-81 (2003).
42. Williams, R. J. & Martinez, N. D. Simple rules yield complex food webs. Nature 409, 180-183 (2000).
43. Jaccard, P. Nouvelles researches sur la distribution florale. Bull. Soc. Vaud. Sci. Nat. 44, 223-270 (1908).
44. Horn, H. S. Measurement of "overlap" in comparative ecological studies. Am. Nat. 100, 419-424 (1966).
45. Berlow, E. L. et al. Simple prediction of interaction strengths in complex food webs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 187-191 (2009).
46. Sall, J., Lehman, A., Stephens, M. L., & Creighton, L. JMP®Start Statistics: A Guide to Statistics and Data Analysis Using JMP®, 5th Edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute (2012).
47. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2017).
48. Ainhoa Magrach, Juan P. González-Varo, Mathieu Boiffier, Montserrat Vilà, Ignasi Bartomeus, (2017) Honeybee spillover reshuffles pollinator diets and affects plant reproductive success. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 1299-1307