Pollination by insects is a key ecosystem service and important to wider ecosystem function. Most species‐level pollination networks studied have a generalised structure, with plants having several potential pollinators, and pollinators in turn visiting a number of different plant species. This is in apparent contrast to a plant's need for efficient conspecific pollen transfer.The aim of this study was to investigate the structure of pollen transport networks at three levels of biological hierarchy: community, species and individual. We did this using hoverflies in the genus Eristalis, a key group of non‐Hymenopteran pollinators.We constructed pollen transport networks using DNA metabarcoding to identify pollen. We captured hoverflies in conservation grasslands in west Wales, UK, removed external pollen loads, sequenced the pollen DNA on the Illumina MiSeq platform using the standard plant barcode rbcL, and matched sequences using a pre‐existing plant DNA barcode reference library.We found that Eristalis hoverflies transport pollen from 65 plant taxa, more than previously appreciated. Networks were generalised at the site and species level, suggesting some degree of functional redundancy, and were more generalised in late summer compared to early summer. In contrast, pollen transport at the individual level showed some degree of specialisation. Hoverflies defined as “single‐plant visitors” varied from 40% of those captured in early summer to 24% in late summer. Individual hoverflies became more generalised in late summer, possibly in response to an increase in floral resources. Rubus fruticosus agg. and Succisa pratensis were key plant species for hoverflies at our sitesOur results contribute to resolving the apparent paradox of how generalised pollinator networks can provide efficient pollination to plant species. Generalised hoverfly pollen transport networks may result from a varied range of short‐term specialised feeding bouts by individual insects. The generalisation and functional redundancy of Eristalis pollen transport networks may increase the stability of the pollination service they deliver.

Pollination is a key ecosystem service for agriculture and wider ecosystem function. However, most pollination studies focus on Hymenoptera, with hoverflies (Syrphidae) frequently treated as a single functional group. We tested this assumption by investigating pollen carried by eleven species of hoverfly in five genera, Cheilosia, Eristalis, Rhingia, Sericomyia and Volucella, using DNA metabarcoding. Hoverflies carried pollen from 59 plant taxa, suggesting they visit a wider number of plant species than previously appreciated. Most pollen recorded came from plant taxa frequently found at our study sites, predominantly Apiaceae, Cardueae, Calluna vulgaris, Rubus fruticosus agg., and Succisa pratensis, with hoverflies transporting pollen from 40% of entomophilous plant species present. Overall pollen transport network structures were generalised, similar to other pollination networks elsewhere. All hoverfly species were also generalised with few exclusive plant/hoverfly interactions. However, using the Jaccard Index, we found significant differences in the relative composition of pollen loads between hoverfly genera, except for Volucella, demonstrating some degree of functional complementarity. Eristalis and Sericomyia species had significant differences in relative pollen load composition compared to congeners. Our results demonstrate the range of pollens transported by hoverflies and the potential pollination function undertaken within this ecologically and morphologically diverse guild.

Pollination is a key ecosystem service, and appropriate management, particularly in agricultural systems, is essential to maintain a diversity of pollinator guilds. However, management recommendations frequently focus on maintaining plant communities, with the assumption that associated invertebrate populations will be sustained. We tested whether plant community, flower resources, and soil moisture would influence hoverfly (Syrphidae) abundance and species richness in floristically‐rich seminatural and floristically impoverished agricultural grassland communities in Wales (U.K.) and compared these to two Hymenoptera genera, Bombus, and Lasioglossum. Interactions between environmental variables were tested using generalized linear modeling, and hoverfly community composition examined using canonical correspondence analysis. There was no difference in hoverfly abundance, species richness, or bee abundance, between grassland types. There was a positive association between hoverfly abundance, species richness, and flower abundance in unimproved grasslands. However, this was not evident in agriculturally improved grassland, possibly reflecting intrinsically low flower resource in these habitats, or the presence of plant species with low or relatively inaccessible nectar resources. There was no association between soil moisture content and hoverfly abundance or species richness. Hoverfly community composition was influenced by agricultural improvement and the amount of flower resource. Hoverfly species with semiaquatic larvae were associated with both seminatural and agricultural wet grasslands, possibly because of localized larval habitat. Despite the absence of differences in hoverfly abundance and species richness, distinct hoverfly communities are associated with marshy grasslands, agriculturally improved marshy grasslands, and unimproved dry grasslands, but not with improved dry grasslands. Grassland plant community cannot be used as a proxy for pollinator community. Management of grasslands should aim to maximize the pollinator feeding resource, as well as maintain plant communities. Retaining waterlogged ground may enhance the number of hoverflies with semiaquatic larvae.

No abstract

Policy-makers often need to rely on experts with disparate fields of expertise when making policy choices in complex, multi-faceted, dynamic environments such as those dealing with ecosystem services. For policy-makers wishing to make evidence-based decisions which will best support pollinator abundance and pollination services, one of the problems faced is how to access the information and evidence they need, and how to combine it to formulate and evaluate candidate policies. This is even more complex when multiple factors provide influence in combination. The pressures affecting the survival and pollination capabilities of honey bees (Apis mellifera), wild bees, and other pollinators are well documented, but incomplete. In order to estimate the potential effectiveness of various candidate policy choices, there is an urgent need to quantify the effect of various combinations of factors on the pollination ecosystem service. Using high-quality experimental evidence is the most robust approach, but key aspects of the system may not be amenable to experimentation or may be prohibitive based on cost, time and effort. In such cases, it is possible to obtain the required evidence by using structured expert elicitation, a method for quantitatively characterizing the state of knowledge about an uncertain quantity. Here we report and discuss the outputs of the novel use of a structured expert elicitation, designed to quantify the probability of good pollinator abundance given a variety of weather, disease, and habitat scenarios. Evaluaci on de la respuesta de la abundancia de polinizadores a las presiones ambientales mediante el uso de elicitaci on experta estructurada A menudo los legisladores dependen de expertos en diversas areas de conocimiento para tomar decisiones sobre legislaci on en entornos complejos, multifac eticos y din amicos tales como los que tienen que ver con los servicios ecosist emicos. Los legisladores que quieren tomar decisiones basadas en evidencias que respalden mejor los servicios de polinizaci on y la abundancia de polinizadores, se enfrentan al problema de c omo acceder a la informaci on y a las evidencias que necesitan, y de c omo combinar estas para formular y evaluar futuras leyes. Esto es a un m as complejo cuando hay m ultiples factores que influyen de manera combinada. Las presiones que afectan a la supervivencia y a la capacidad polinizadora de las abejas de la miel (Apis mellifera), a las abejas silvestres y a otros polinizadores est an bien documentadas, pero de manera incompleta. Para estimar la efectividad potencial de varias opciones posibles de legislaci on, es necesario cuantificar el efecto combinado de varios factores sobre el servicio ecosist emico de polinizaci on. El uso de una evidencia experimental de alta calidad es el enfoque m as s olido, pero algunos aspectos clave del sistema podr ıan no ser susceptibles de experimentaci on o ser prohibitivos debido al coste, el tiempo y el esfuerzo. En tales casos, es posible obtener la evidencia requerida mediante el uso de la elicit...