Climate and human influence shape the interactive role of the honeybee in pollination networks beyond its native distributional range

Cruz, Carlos Pinilla; Luna, Pedro; Guevara, Roger; Hinojosa-Díaz, Ismael A.; Villalobos, Fabricio; Dáttilo, Wesley

doi:10.1016/j.baae.2022.06.009

Cited by 10 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, it is anticipated that the effects of climate change can generate diverse impacts on regional and continental scales (e.g., Pokhrel et al., 2021). However, when spatial scales are synthesized the most articles included were performed to local scale (37.1%), followed by landscape (27%) and regional studies (19%) and with a limited representation (<8%) of continental (i.e., Abou‐Shaara et al., 2021; Abou‐Shaara & Al‐Khalaf, 2022; Abou‐Shaara & Darwish, 2021; Piot et al., 2022) or global scales studies (i.e., Cornelissen et al., 2019; Cruz et al., 2022; Hosni et al., 2022; Hung et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2021; Tihelka et al., 2021). Likewise, temporal effects of climate have been measured mainly in the short‐term (53.9% articles), followed by the long‐term (25.8%), and with a minor proportion in the mid‐term (5.6%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, most studies were based on weather data, as well as experimental indoor and outdoor environments (e.g., Butolo et al., 2021; Jaworski et al., 2022; Maluf et al., 2022; Martín‐Hernández et al., 2009). It is important also to note that several studies only declare the environmental variables employed but do not provide details on the temporal scales considered in their analysis (e.g., Cánovas et al., 2014; Cruz et al., 2022; Hung et al., 2018). In this sense, the current insight on the impacts of climate change has been studied mainly on short‐term measures (or weather indicators) and not on long‐term scales such as climate normal values (>30 years, e.g., Gordo et al., 2010; Rogers et al., 2022; Langowska et al., 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advances and knowledge gaps on climate change impacts on honey bees and beekeeping: A systematic review

Zapata‐Hernández,

Gajardo‐Rojas,

Calderón‐Seguel

et al. 2024

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Western honey bee Apis mellifera is a managed species that provides diverse hive products and contributing to wild plant pollination, as well as being a critical component of crop pollination systems worldwide. High mortality rates have been reported in different continents attributed to different factors, including pesticides, pests, diseases, and lack of floral resources. Furthermore, climate change has been identified as a potential driver negatively impacting pollinators, but it is still unclear how it could affect honey bee populations. In this context, we carried out a systematic review to synthesize the effects of climate change on honey bees and beekeeping activities. A total of 90 articles were identified, providing insight into potential impacts (negative, neutral, and positive) on honey bees and beekeeping. Interest in climate change's impact on honey bees has increased in the last decade, with studies mainly focusing on honey bee individuals, using empirical and experimental approaches, and performed at short‐spatial (<10 km) and temporal (<5 years) scales. Moreover, environmental analyses were mainly based on short‐term data (weather) and concentrated on only a few countries. Environmental variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind were widely studied and had generalized negative effects on different biological and ecological aspects of honey bees. Food reserves, plant‐pollinator networks, mortality, gene expression, and metabolism were negatively impacted. Knowledge gaps included a lack of studies at the apiary and beekeeper level, a limited number of predictive and perception studies, poor representation of large‐spatial and mid‐term scales, a lack of climate analysis, and a poor understanding of the potential impacts of pests and diseases. Finally, climate change's impacts on global beekeeping are still an emergent issue. This is mainly due to their diverse effects on honey bees and the potential necessity of implementing adaptation measures to sustain this activity under complex environmental scenarios.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances and knowledge gaps on climate change impacts on honey bees and beekeeping: A systematic review

Zapata‐Hernández,

Gajardo‐Rojas,

Calderón‐Seguel

et al. 2024

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bees were slightly more specialised than flies in the observed networks (Weiner et al., 2011), but showed a strong variation in specialisation between genera. Honeybees focussed on the most abundant pollen and nectar sources (Geslin et al., 2017), thereby occupying a central network position (high closeness) and had a higher species strength than other bee taxa (Cruz et al., 2022). Because of their dominance, managed honeybees may compete with and reduce connectance among wild species (Aizen et al., 2008; Mallinger et al., 2017) and rewire or disrupt plant‐pollinator networks (Magrach et al., 2017; Prendergast & Ollerton, 2022a).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urbanisation and agricultural intensification modulate plant–pollinator network structure and robustness

Proesmans,

Felten,

Laurent

et al. 2024

Functional Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land use change is a major pressure on pollinator abundance, diversity and plant–pollinator interactions. Far less is known about how land‐use alters the structure of plant–pollinator networks and their robustness to plant–pollinator coextinctions. We analysed the structure of plant–pollinator networks sampled in 12 landscapes along an urbanisation and agricultural intensity gradient, from early spring to late summer 2021, and used a stochastic coextinction model to correlate plant–pollinator coextinction risk with network structure (species and network‐level metrics) and landscape context. Networks in intensively managed (i.e., agricultural and urban) landscapes had a lower risk of initiating a coextinction cascade, while networks in less intensively managed landscapes may be less robust. Network structure modulated the frequency and severity of coextinctions and species loss, while the strength of species interactions increased robustness. Urban networks were more species rich and symmetrical due to the high diversity of ornamental plants, while intensively managed agricultural landscapes had smaller, more tightly connected and nested networks. Network structure modulated the frequency of extinctions, which was decreased by greater linkage density, interaction asymmetry and interaction dependence in the networks, while once an extinction occurred, nestedness and linkage density propagated the degree of the coextinction cascade and species loss. At the species level, species strength was inversely correlated with extinction risk, implying that generalist species with a high number of interactions with specialists had the lowest extinction risk. An interplay between land‐use and network structure affects community robustness to coextinctions with implications for pollination services and plant reproduction. Land‐use change or other global change pressures by reorganising species interactions can alter communities and their potential functioning. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

“…Because the four‐centrality metrics correlated positively with PC1 (Figure S3, see also Salavaty et al, 2020), the highest positive values were associated with those species that are more central in a network. For convenience when interpreting the PC1 values and ranking species from 0 (more peripheral) to the highest positive value (more central), PC1 values were rescaled to nonzero, positive‐only values by adding up the absolute value of the minimum score plus a millesimal unit to each centrality value (Cruz et al, 2022). As such, all PC1 values were greater than zero while keeping the original order and distance among them (Dáttilo et al, 2022).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Species‐level drivers of avian centrality within seed‐dispersal networks across different levels of organisation

Moulatlet

Dáttilo

Villalobos

2023

Journal of Animal Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bird–plant seed‐dispersal networks are structural components of ecosystems. The role of bird species in seed‐dispersal networks (from less [peripheral] to more connected [central]), determines the interaction patterns and their ecosystem services. These roles may be driven by morphological and functional traits as well as evolutionary, geographical and environmental properties acting at different spatial extents. It is still unknown if such drivers are equally important in determining species centrality at different network levels, from individual local networks to the global meta‐network representing interactions across all local networks. Using 308 networks covering five continents and 11 biogeographical regions, we show that at the global meta‐network level species' range size was the most important driver of species centrality, with more central species having larger range sizes, which would facilitate the interaction with a higher number of plants and thus the maintenance of seed‐dispersal interactions. At the local network level, body mass was the only driver with a significant effect, implying that local factors related to resource availability are more important at this level of network organisation than those related to broad spatial factors such as range sizes. This could also be related to the mismatch between species‐level traits, which do not consider intraspecific variation, and the local networks that can depend on such variation. Taken together, our results show that the drivers determining species centrality are relative to the levels of network organisation, suggesting that prediction of species functional roles in seed‐dispersal interactions requires combined local and global approaches.

show abstract

Climate and human influence shape the interactive role of the honeybee in pollination networks beyond its native distributional range

Cited by 10 publications

References 44 publications

Advances and knowledge gaps on climate change impacts on honey bees and beekeeping: A systematic review

Advances and knowledge gaps on climate change impacts on honey bees and beekeeping: A systematic review

Urbanisation and agricultural intensification modulate plant–pollinator network structure and robustness

Species‐level drivers of avian centrality within seed‐dispersal networks across different levels of organisation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About