Bee communities in restored prairies are structured by landscape and management, not local floral resources

Griffin, Sean R.; Bruninga‐Socolar, Bethanne; Gibbs, Jason

doi:10.1016/j.baae.2020.12.004

Cited by 24 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even if a species has low local abundance, it may still benefit from pollinator plantings if it occurs frequently across the landscape. This echoes findings elsewhere that benefits of pollinator habitat enhancement are greatest in landscapes regions with intermediate cover of natural and seminatural habitat, and are therefore likely to contain source populations able to exploit additional resources (Grab et al 2020;Griffin et al 2021;McCullough et al 2021, but see Lane et al 2020.…”

Section: Rare Bee Species Exhibit Atypical Responses To Habitat Enhancementssupporting

confidence: 73%

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

Cariveau

Roswell

Harrison

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Installing pollinator habitat is a ubiquitous conservation tool, but little is known about which pollinator taxa require support, or which benefit from habitat installations. We 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. We 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. Synthesis 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.

show abstract

Section: Rare Bee Species Exhibit Atypical Responses To Habitat Enhancementssupporting

confidence: 73%

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

Cariveau

Roswell

Harrison

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The question of how bee communities in restorations are influenced by the surrounding landscape is an ongoing subject of study. Work by Griffin et al (2021) suggests that natural land cover types (e.g. prairie, forest) are more important than the local floral community in organizing the bee community in certain prairie restorations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in bee community composition between restored and remnant prairies are more strongly linked to forb community differences than landscape differences

Lane

Portman

Herron-Sweet

et al. 2021

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Grassland restoration is an important tool for conserving bee biodiversity within agricultural landscapes. Restorations foster increases in local bee abundance and α-diversity; however, these measures are insufficient for understanding whether remnant communities are being conserved. We compared native bee α-diversity, β-diversity and community composition between restored and remnant prairies in Minnesota, USA. We then investigated two potential drivers of bee community dissimilarity between restored and remnant prairies: proportion of agricultural land surrounding a restoration and differences in floral community between restored and remnant prairies.

show abstract

“…In these taxa, older sites were more likely to be colonized by dispersal-limited species (56,62). This suggests that considering landscape connectivity and habitat patch isolation may help predict animal community responses to restoration (87,88). Second, effective restoration requires understanding animal habitat requirements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of management outweigh effects of plant diversity on restored animal communities in tallgrass prairies

Guiden

Barber

Blackburn

et al. 2021

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A primary goal of ecological restoration is to increase biodiversity in degraded ecosystems. However, the success of restoration ecology is often assessed by measuring the response of a single functional group or trophic level to restoration, without considering how restoration affects multitrophic interactions that shape biodiversity. An ecosystem-wide approach to restoration is therefore necessary to understand whether animal responses to restoration, such as changes in biodiversity, are facilitated by changes in plant communities (plant-driven effects) or disturbance and succession resulting from restoration activities (management-driven effects). Furthermore, most restoration ecology studies focus on how restoration alters taxonomic diversity, while less attention is paid to the response of functional and phylogenetic diversity in restored ecosystems. Here, we compared the strength of plant-driven and management-driven effects of restoration on four animal communities (ground beetles, dung beetles, snakes, and small mammals) in a chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie, where sites varied in management history (prescribed fire and bison reintroduction). Our analyses indicate that management-driven effects on animal communities were six-times stronger than effects mediated through changes in plant biodiversity. Additionally, we demonstrate that restoration can simultaneously have positive and negative effects on biodiversity through different pathways, which may help reconcile variation in restoration outcomes. Furthermore, animal taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity responded differently to restoration, suggesting that restoration plans might benefit from considering multiple dimensions of animal biodiversity. We conclude that metrics of plant diversity alone may not be adequate to assess the success of restoration in reassembling functional ecosystems.

show abstract

Bee communities in restored prairies are structured by landscape and management, not local floral resources

Cited by 24 publications

References 47 publications

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

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

Differences in bee community composition between restored and remnant prairies are more strongly linked to forb community differences than landscape differences

Effects of management outweigh effects of plant diversity on restored animal communities in tallgrass prairies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About