Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Interpreting realized pollen flow in terms of pollinator travel paths and land-use resistance in heterogeneous landscapes

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Widespread ecosystem change has led to declines in species world-wide. The loss of pollinators in particular constitutes a problem for ecosystem function and crop production. Understanding how landscape change affects pollinator movement, effective pollen flow, and plant and pollinator survival is therefore a global priority. In this study we investigated patterns of effective pollen flow, using wild cherry tree (Prunus avium) progeny arrays, to address two questions in three case studies: Do land-use types present different resistances to pollinator movement? Which pollinator travel path best explains the pollination data (straight lines, weighted straight lines, least cost paths or pair-wise resistance)? Trees and progeny arrays were genotyped and effective pollen flow and pollinator movement were estimated using the spatially explicit mating model. We found that pollinators did modify their travel paths in response to land-use type and arrangement, but the travel path that best described pollinator movement and the resistance rank of the land uses depended on the type and size of land-use patches and the landscape context. We propose a novel theoretical framework rooted in behavioural ecology, the resource model, for interpreting pollinator behaviour in heterogeneous landscapes. We conclude by discussing the importance and practicality of conservation and management strategies in which native and non-native land-use types together provide functional habitat and support ecosystem services across economic landscapes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen-Wardell G, Bernhardt P, Bitner R, Burquez A, Buchmann S, Cane J, Cox PA, Dalton V, Feinsinger P, Ingram M, Inouye D, Jones EC, Kennedy K, Kevan P, Koopowitz H, Medellin R, Medellin-Morales S, Nabhan GP, Pavlik B, Tepedino V, Torchio P, Walker S (1998) The potential consequences of pollinator declines on the conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields. Conserv Biol 12(1):8–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell W (1990) Searching behaviour patterns in insects. Annu Rev Entomol 35:447–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (1998) Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carvell C, Jordan WC, Bourke AFG, Pickles R, Redhead JW, Heard MS (2012) Molecular and spatial analyses reveal links between colony-specific foraging distance and landscape-level resource availability in two bumblebee species. Oikos 121(5):734–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cipriani G, Lot G, Huang WG, Marrazzo MT, Peterlunger E, Testolin R (1999) AC/GT and AG/CT micosatellite repeats in peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch): isolation, characterization and cross-species amplification in Prunus. Theor Appl Genet 99:65–72

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cottrell JE, Vaughan SP, Connolly T, Sing L, Moodley DJ, Russell K (2009) Contemporary pollen flow, characterization of the maternal ecological neighbourhood and mating patterns in wild cherry (Prunus avium L.). Heredity 103:118–128

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cranmer L, McCollin D, Ollerton J (2012) Landscape structure influences pollinator movements and directly affects plant reproductive success. Oikos 121(4):562–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirlewanger E, Capdeville G, Tauzin Y, Cosson P, Claverie J (2008) A Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) linkage map and its comparison to other Prunus species. In: Burak M, Lang GA, Gulen H, Ipek A (eds) Proceedings of the Vth international cherry symposium, vols 1 and 2, Acta Horticulturae. pp 115–126

  • Doerr VAJ, Barrett T, Doerr ED (2011) Connectivity, dispersal behaviour and conservation under climate change: a response to Hodgson et al. J Appl Ecol 48(1):143–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downey S, Iezzoni A (2000) Polymorphic DNA markers in black cherry (Prunus serotina) are identified using sequences from sweet cherry, peach, and sour cherry. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 125:76–80

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer RJ, Chan DM, Gardiakos VA, Meadows CA (2012) Pollination graphs: quantifying pollen pool covariance networks and the influence of intervening landscape on genetic connectivity in the North American understory tree, Cornus florida L. Landsc Ecol 27:239–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortuna MA, Garcia C, Guimaraes PR, Bascompte J (2008) Spatial mating networks in insect-pollinated plants. Ecol Lett 11(5):490–498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guitian P, Guitian J, Navarro L (1993) Pollen transfer and diurnal versus nocturnal pollination in Lonicera etrusca. Acta Oecol Int J Ecol 14(2):219–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagerty BE, Nussear KE, Esque TC, Tracy CR (2011) Making molehills out of mountains: landscape genetics of the Mojave Desert tortoise. Landsc Ecol 26(2):267–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges C, Miller R (1981) Pollinator flight directionality and the assessment of pollen returns. Oecologia 50:376–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs JH, Clark SJ, Denholm I, Goulson D, Stoate C, Osborne JL (2009) Pollination biology of fruit-bearing hedgerow plants and the role of flower-visiting insects in fruit-set. Ann Bot 104(7):1397–1404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jolivet C, Holtken AM, Liesebach H, Steiner W, Degen B (2012) Mating patterns and pollen dispersal in four contrasting wild cherry populations (Prunus avium L.). Eur J For Res 131:1055–1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones E, Dornhaus A (2011) Predation risk makes bees reject rewarding flowers and reduce foraging activity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:1505–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joobeur T, Periam N, Vicente M, King G, Arus P (2000) Development of a second generation linkage map for almond using RAPD and SSR markers. Genome 43:649–655

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jules ES, Shahani P (2003) A broader ecological context to habitat fragmentation: why matrix habitat is more important than we thought. J Veg Sci 14(3):459–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein EK, Carpentier FH, Oddou-Muratorio S (2011) Estimation of the whole variance of male fecundity from genotypes of progeny arrays: accuracy and limits of the Bayesian forward approach. Methods Ecol Evol 2:349–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C, Williams NM, Aizen MA, Gemmill-Herren B, LeBuhn G, Minckley R, Packer L, Potts SG, Roulston T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Vázquez DP, Winfree R, Adams L, Crone EE, Greenleaf SS, Keitt TH, Klein AM, Regetz J, Ricketts TH (2007) Pollination and other ecosystem services produced by mobile organisms: a conceptual framework for the effects of land-use change. Ecol Lett 10(4):299–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lander TA, Bebber DP, Choy CTL, Harris SA, Boshier DH (2011) The circe principle explains how resource-rich land can waylay pollinators in fragmented landscapes. Curr Biol 21(15):1302–1307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lavergne S, Thuiller W, Molina J, Debussche M (2005) Environmental and human factors influencing rare plant local occurrence, extinction and persistence: a 115-year study in the Mediterranean region. J Biogeogr 32:799–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Pianka ER (1966) On the optimal use of a patchy environment. Am Nat 100:603–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of Island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, Shah VB (2008) Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution and conservation. Ecology 89(10):2712–2724

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meagher T (1986) Analysis of paternity within natural population of Chamaelirium luteum 1. Identification of most-likely male parent. Am Nat 128:199–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79:2503–2515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohashi K, Thomson J (2005) Efficient harvesting of renewing resources. Behav Ecol 16:592–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, Kunin WE (2010) Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 25:345–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pullinger MG, Johnson CJ (2010) Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landsc Ecol 25(10):1547–1560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rands S, Whitney H (2011) Field margins, foraging distances and their impacts on nesting pollinator success. PLoS One 6(10):e25971

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ray N (2005) PATHMATRIX: a geographical information system tool to compute effective distances among samples. Mol Ecol Notes 5(1):177–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard Y, Armstrong DP (2010) Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J Appl Ecol 47(3):603–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards S, Williams N, Harder L (2009) Variation in pollination: causes and consequences for plant reproduction. Am Nat 174:382–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158(1):87–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ries L, Fletcher RJ, Battin J, Sisk TD (2004) Ecological responses to habitat edges: mechanisms, models, and variability explained. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35:491–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero G, Antiqueira P, Koricheva J (2011) A meta-analysis of predation risk effects on pollinator behaviour. PLoS One 6(6):e20689

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Russell K (2003) EUFORGEN technical guidelines for genetic conservation and use for wild cherry (Prunus avium). International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonneveld T, Tobutt KR, Robbins TP (2003) Allele-specific PCR detection of sweet cherry self-incompatibility (S) alleles S1 to S16 using consensus and allele-specific primers. Theor Appl Genet 107(6):1059–1070

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spear SF, Balkenhol N, Fortin MJ, McRae BH, Scribner K (2010) Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis. Mol Ecol 19(17):3576–3591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckel S, Grange J, Fernandez-Manjarres JF, Bilger I, Frascaria-Lacoste N, Mariette S (2006) Heterozygote excess in a self-incompatible and partially clonal forest tree species—Prunus avium L. Mol Ecol 15(8):2109–2118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckel S, Klein E, Oddou-Muratorio S, Musch B, Mariette S (2012) Microevolution of S-allele frequencies in wild cherry populations: respective impacts of negative frequency dependent selection and genetic drift. Evolution 66:486–504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Testolin R, Marrazzo T, Cipriani G, Quarta R, Verde I, Dettori MT, Pancaldi M, Sansavini S (2000) Microsatellite DNA in peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) and its use in fingerprinting and testing the genetic origin of cultivars. Genome 43:512–520

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) How should we measure landscape connectivity? Landsc Ecol 15(7):633–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Etten J (2012) Gdistance: distances and movements on geographical grids. http://r-forge.r-project.org/projects/gdistance

  • Vandermeer J, Carvajal R (2001) Metapopulation dynamics and the quality of the matrix. Am Nat 158(3):211–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan SP, Boskovic RI, Gisbert-Climent A, Russell K, Tobutt KR (2008) Characterisation of novel S-alleles from cherry (Prunus avium L.). Tree Genet Genomes 4(3):531–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winker K, Rappole J, Ramos M (1995) The use of movement data as an assay of habitat quality. Oecologia 101:211–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf S, Moritz RFA (2008) Foraging distance in Bombus terrestris L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Apidologie 39:419–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeller KA, McGarigal K, Whiteley AR (2012) Estimating landscape resistance to movement: a review. Landsc Ecol 27(6):777–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Laurent Lévèque and Bénédicte Le Guérroué for field sampling and lab genotyping for the Neuillé population. Isabelle Bilger, Stéphane Matz and the French Office National des Forêts sampled at St-Gobain, and Jérôme Grange and Sandrine Toussaint helped to acquire genetic data for this population. This work was funded by grants to T. L. by INRA (EFPA department) and to S.M. and S.S. from Cemagref, and the Office National des Forêts.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Tonya A. Lander

    Present address: The Natural History Museum London, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, UK

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INRA, UR629 Ecologie des Forêts Méditerranéennes (URFM), Domaine Saint Paul, 84914, Avignon, France

    Tonya A. Lander & Sylvie Oddou-Muratorio

  2. INRA, UR546 Biostatistique et Processus Spatiaux (BioSP), 84914, Avignon, France

    Etienne K. Klein

  3. INRA, UMR1349, Institute of Genetics, Environment and Plant Protection, Domaine de la Motte, BP 35327, 35653, Le Rheu Cedex, France

    Solenn Stoeckel

  4. INRA, UMR1202 BIOGECO, 33610, Cestas, France

    Stéphanie Mariette

  5. BIOGECO, UMR 1202, University of Bordeaux, 33400, Talence, France

    Stéphanie Mariette

  6. CGAF USC ONF-INRA, 2163 Avenue de la Pomme de Pin, CS 40001 Ardon, 45075, Orléans, France

    Brigitte Musch

Authors
  1. Tonya A. Lander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Etienne K. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Solenn Stoeckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stéphanie Mariette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brigitte Musch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sylvie Oddou-Muratorio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvie Oddou-Muratorio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lander, T.A., Klein, E.K., Stoeckel, S. et al. Interpreting realized pollen flow in terms of pollinator travel paths and land-use resistance in heterogeneous landscapes. Landscape Ecol 28, 1769–1783 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9920-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9920-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation