Key plant species to restore plant–hummingbird pollinator communities in the southern Andes of Ecuador

Abstract

The planning and implementation of restoration in the Tropical Andes have yet to incorporate functional attributes of ecosystems such as pollination. Mutualistic network approaches can be especially useful for this purpose. For example, within networks of hummingbirds and their pollinated plants, most interactions occur on a small number of plant species that are key to conserve and recover pollination functions. To identify such species, centrality metrics derived from network analysis are readily available and can be easily applied. Our study was conducted in the southern Andes of Ecuador in four vegetation types: old‐growth forest, secondary forest, hedgerows, and montane shrub. On each vegetation type, we surveyed hummingbird visitation to plants and constructed plant–hummingbird interaction networks. We calculated a centrality index for each plant species and used this index to describe the individual role of species as either key or peripheral. We also explored how different functional traits of plants, including flower abundance, morphology, and nectar characteristics, were associated with the variation in this index. We found a total of 123 unique pairwise interactions between 44 plant and 15 hummingbird species. Within each vegetation type, we identified 4–11 key plant species. A shrubby life form and abundant flowers were the main traits associated with the key role of species. This study shows a robust protocol to select plant assemblages for the recovery of plant–hummingbird communities.

Selection of Non-Crop Plant Mixes Informed by Arthropod-Plant Network Analyses for Multiple Ecosystem Services Delivery Towards Ecological Intensification of Agriculture

“…In a recent study, increased pollinator assemblages have been documented after the inclusion of central plant species in designed floral habitats [67]. Our results also corroborated the fact that centrally important plant species can potentially regulate the system stability [67][68][69] and therefore, are optimum candidates for habitat restoration. Network indices, such as nestedness and robustness, are important properties that signify the resilience of the system against environmental odds.…”

Effects of forest management on native bee biodiversity under the tallest trees in the world

“…Forest management practices might benefit from mitigating these long‐term effects by enhancing native plant species composition to provide food for native bees, for example by planting high centrality plant species such as redwood sorrel or protecting existing flower patches from trampling in public use areas with signage. The species‐level centrality indices of plants and pollinators in bipartite plant‐pollinator interaction networks can in some cases be used to inform targeted conservation efforts, as high centrality pollinators may contribute to the overall ecosystem‐level stability of pollination services (Crespo et al, 2022 ; Elle et al, 2012 ; González et al, 2010 ; Ramos‐Jiliberto et al, 2009 ). High‐centrality and highly abundant bee species in OG forests, such as Lasioglossum sp.…”

“…Our results suggests that there are potential long-term negative effects of historic clear-cutting on bee biodiversity in mature works can in some cases be used to inform targeted conservation efforts, as high centrality pollinators may contribute to the overall ecosystem-level stability of pollination services (Crespo et al, 2022;Elle et al, 2012;González et al, 2010;Ramos-Jiliberto et al, 2009).…”

Hummingbird diversity in a fragmented tropical landscape in the Chocó biogeographic zone

“…Mist netting may cause a potential bias in sample collection as understory‐subcanopy species are more likely to be captured than canopy species (Barlow et al, 2007). However, this potential bias may not be strong for hummingbirds in lowland tropical forests because most hummingbirds visit substantially more species in the understory‐subcanopy, such as flowering shrubs, than in the canopy (Bawa, 1990; Bawa et al, 1985; Crespo et al, 2022). Also, comparisons of mist netting and point count methods have resulted in similar estimates of hummingbird diversity (Blake & Loiselle, 2001; Whitman et al, 1997).…”