No evidence for environmental filtering of cavity‐nesting solitary bees and wasps by urbanization using trap nests

Abstract

Spatial patterns in biodiversity are used to establish conservation priorities and ecosystem management plans. The environmental filtering of communities along urbanization gradients has been used to explain biodiversity patterns but demonstrating filtering requires precise statistical tests to link suboptimal environments at one end of a gradient to lower population sizes via ecological traits. Here, we employ a three‐part framework on observational community data to test: (I) for trait clustering (i.e., phenotypic similarities among co‐occurring species) by comparing trait diversity to null expectations, (II) if trait clustering is correlated with an urbanization graient, and (III) if species' traits relate to environmental conditions. If all criteria are met, then there is evidence that urbanization is filtering communities based on their traits. We use a community of 46 solitary cavity‐nesting bee and wasp species sampled across Toronto, a large metropolitan city, over 3 years to test these hypotheses. None of the criteria were met, so we did not have evidence for environmental filtering. We do show that certain ecological traits influence which species perform well in urban environments. For example, cellophane bees ( Hylaeus : Colletidae) secrete their own nesting material and were overrepresented in urban areas, while native leafcutting bees ( Megachile : Megachilidae) were most common in greener areas. For wasps, prey preference was important, with aphid‐collecting ( Psenulus and Passaloecus : Crabronidae) and generalist spider‐collecting ( Trypoxylon : Crabronidae) wasps overrepresented in urban areas and caterpillar‐ and beetle‐collecting wasps ( Euodynerus and Symmorphus : Vespidae, respectively) overrepresented in greener areas. We emphasize that changes in the prevalence of different traits across urban gradients without corresponding changes in trait diversity with urbanization do not constitute environmental filtering. By applying this rigorous framework, future studies can test whether urbanization filters other nesting guilds (i.e., ground‐nesting bees and wasps) or larger communities consisting of entire taxonomic groups.

Habitat amount, temperature and biotic interactions drive community structure, life-history traits, and performance traits of cavity-nesting bees and wasps and their natural enemies in cities

“…CNBW represent an ensemble of trophic levels including pollinators (bees), predators on different insect groups (wasps), and natural enemies (parasites, cleptoparasites, parasitoids) (Staab et al, 2018). CNBW and their natural enemies are particularly interesting to monitor within urban ecosystems, as they represent bioindicators for habitat quality and environmental change, yet they remain far less studied in this setting (but see Moretti et al, 2021; Pereira-Peixoto et al, 2014; Xie et al, 2022).…”