Bommarco, Riccardo
- Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Research article2014Peer reviewedOpen access
Carvalheiro LG, Biesmeijer JC, Benadi G, Fruend J, Stang M, Bartomeus I, Kaiser-Bunbury CN, Baude M, Gomes SIF, Merckx V, Baldock KCR, Bennett ATD, Boada R, Bommarco R, Cartar R, Chacoff N, Danhardt J, Dicks LV, Dormann CF, Ekroos J, Henson KSE, Holzschuh A, Junker RR, Lopezaraiza-Mikel M, Memmott J, Montero-Castano A, Nelson IL, Petanidou T, Power EF, Rundlof M, Smith HG, Stout JC, Temitope K, Tscharntke T, Tscheulin T, Vila M, Kunin WE
Co-flowering plant species commonly share flower visitors, and thus have the potential to influence each other's pollination. In this study we analysed 750 quantitative plant-pollinator networks from 28 studies representing diverse biomes worldwide. We show that the potential for one plant species to influence another indirectly via shared pollinators was greater for plants whose resources were more abundant (higher floral unit number and nectar sugar content) and more accessible. The potential indirect influence was also stronger between phylogenetically closer plant species and was independent of plant geographic origin (native vs. non-native). The positive effect of nectar sugar content and phylogenetic proximity was much more accentuated for bees than for other groups. Consequently, the impact of these factors depends on the pollination mode of plants, e.g. bee or fly pollinated. Our findings may help predict which plant species have the greatest importance in the functioning of plant-pollination networks.
Facilitation; floral traits; flower density; flower resources; indirect interactions; interspecific competition; morphological similarity; nectar; phylogenetic distance; plant-pollinator networks
Ecology Letters
2014, Volume: 17, number: 11, pages: 1389-1399
SDG15 Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
Ecology
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12342
https://res.slu.se/id/publ/64924