Development of a Pollination Service Measurement (PSM) method using potted plant phytometry

Abstract

The value of pollination to human society is not limited to agricultural production, but also in the sustainability of ecosystems and the services that they provide. Seed set can be used as a comparative measure of pollination effectiveness, with minimum variability expected when other resources are not limiting. Six species of self-incompatible fall asters (Symphyotrichum) were used to evaluate pollination service at 12 sites across a spectrum of expected levels of pollination. Seed set per inflorescence was generally lower at sites with lower pollinator numbers and diversity, although as expected pollinator assemblage characteristics were highly variable within and between sites. However, rankings of sites showed consistency of response across phytometer species and between years; the summed ranks across multiple species appears to have as the greatest value in Pollination Service Measurement (PSM). Abundance, richness, and Shannon diversity of pollinator assemblages were highly autocorrelated and showed variable relationships with seed set depending on plant species and temporal scale of pollinator assemblage assessment. Use of seed set to directly measure pollination service at a site was consistent and cost effective when compared to less certain and more labour-intensive methods of pollinator collection and identification, and shows promise for implementation in pollination monitoring and bioassessment practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Albrecht, M., Duelli, P., Müller, C., Kleijn, D., & Schmidt, B. (2007). The Swiss agri-environment scheme enhances pollinator diversity and plant reproductive success in nearby intensively managed farmland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 813–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allan, J. D., Erickson, D. L., & Fay, J. (1997). The influence of catchment land use on stream integrity across multiple spatial scales. Freshwater Biology, 37, 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Artz, D. R., & Waddington, K. D. (2006). The effects of neighbouring tree islands on pollinator density and diversity, and on pollination of a wet prairie species, Asclepias lanceolata (Apocynaceae). Journal of Ecology, 94, 597–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bosch, M., & Waser, N. M. (2001). Experimental manipulation of plant density and its effect on pollination and reproduction of two confamilial montane herbs. Oecologia, 126, 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brittain, C., Bommarco, R., Vighi, M., Barmaz, S., Settele, J., & Potts, S. G. (2010a). The impact of an insecticide on insect flower visitation and pollination in an agricultural landscape. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 12, 259–266.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brittain, C., Bommarco, R., Vighi, M., Settele, J., & Potts, S. G. (2010b). Organic farming in isolated landscapes does not benefit flower-visiting insects and pollination. Biological Conservation, 143, 1860–1867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Callicott, J. B., Crowder, L. B., & Mumford, K. (1999). Current normative concepts in conservation. Conservation Biology, 13, 22–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell, D. R. (1985). Pollinator sharing and seed set of Stellaria pubera: competition for pollination. Ecology, 66, 544–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chmielewski, J. G., & Semple, J. C. (2003). The biology of Canadian weeds. 125. Symphyotrichum ericoides (L.) Nesom (Aster ericoides L.) and S. novae-angliae (L.) Nesom (A. novae-angliae L.). Canadian Journal of Plant Sciences, 83, 1017–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Colwell, R. (2013). EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples; 2009. http://purl.oclc.org/estimates.

  11. Costanza, R. (2012). Ecosystem health and ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering, 45, 24–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dauber, J., Biesmeijer, J. C., Gabriel, D., Kunin, W. E., Lamborn, E., Meyer, B., Nielsen, A., Potts, S. G., Roberts, S. P. M., Sober, V., Settele, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Stout, J. C., Teder, T., Tscheulin, T., Vivarelli, D., & Petanidou, T. (2010). Effects of patch size and density on flower visitation and seed set of wild plants: a pan-European approach. Journal of Ecology, 98, 188–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fontaine, C., Dajoz, I., Meriguet, J., & Loreau, M. (2006). Functional diversity of plant–pollinator interaction webs enhances the persistence of plant communities. PLOS Biology, 4, 129–135.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Frund, J., Dormann, C. F., Holzchuh, A., & Tscharntke, T. (2013). Bee diversity effects on pollination depend on functional complementarity and niche shifts. Ecology, 94, 2042–2054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Greenleaf, S. S., & Kremen, C. (2006). Wild bee species increase tomato production and respond differently to surrounding land use in northern California. Biological Conservation, 133, 81–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hennig, E. I., & Ghazoul, J. (2011). Plant–pollinator interactions within the urban environment. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 13, 37–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Karr, J. R. (1981). Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries, 6, 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kjohl, M., Nielsen, A., & Stenseth, N. C. (2011). Potential effects of climate change on crop pollination. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kunin, W. E. (1997). Population size and density effects in pollination: pollinator foraging and plant reproductive success in experimental arrays of Brassica kaber. Journal of Ecology, 85, 225–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lazaro, A., & Totland, O. (2010). Local floral composition and the behaviour of pollinators: attraction to and foraging within experimental patches. Ecological Entomology, 35, 652–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liss, K. N., Mitchell, M. G. E., MacDonald, G. K., Mahajan, S. L., Josée Méthot, J., Jacob, A. L., Maguire, D. Y., Metson, G. S., Ziter, C., Dancose, K., Martins, K., Terrado, M., & Bennett, E. M. (2013). Variability in ecosystem service measurement: a pollination service case study. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 11, 414–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mader, E., Spivak, M., & Evans, E. (2010). Managing alternative pollinators: a handbook for beekeepers, growers, and conservationists. Ithaca: Natural Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service Cooperative Extension.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McKinney, A. M., & Goodell, K. (2010). Shading by invasive shrub reduces seed production and pollinator services in a native herb. Biological Invasions, 12, 2751–2763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Neyland, R., Hoffman, B.J., Meyer, H.A., & Lowenfeld, R. (1999). Initial investigation into the reproductive biology of the antelope-horn milkweed, Asclepias viridis Walter (Asclepiadaceae). Proceedings of the Louisiana Academy of Sciences

  25. Ollerton, J., Winfree, R., & Tarrant, S. (2011). How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos, 120, 321–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sahli, H. F., & Conner, J. K. (2007). Visitation, effectiveness, and efficiency of 15 genera of visitors to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum (Brassicaceae). American Journal of Botany, 94, 203–209.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Schulke, B., & Waser, N. M. (2001). Long-distance pollinator flights and pollen dispersal between populations of Delphinium nuttallianum. Oecologia, 127, 239–245.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schwartz, M. W., Brigham, C. A., Hoeksma, J. D., Lyons, K. G., Mills, M. H., & van Mantgem, P. J. (2000). Linking biodiversity to ecosystem function: implications for conservation ecology. Oecologia, 122, 297–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sperling, C. D., & Lortie, C. J. (2010). The importance of urban backgardens on plant and invertebrate recruitment: a field microcosm experiment. Urban Ecosystems, 13, 223–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Spigler, R. B., & Chang, S. M. (2009). Pollen limitation and reproduction varies with population size in experimental populations of Sabatia angularis (Gentianaceae). Botany, 87, 330–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Steffan-Dewenter, I., Munzenberg, U., Burger, C., Thies, C., & Tscharntke, T. (2002). Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds. Ecology, 83, 1421–1432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Townsend, C. R., Arbuckle, C. J., Crowl, T. A., & Scarsbrook, M. R. (1997). The relationship between land use and physicochemistry, food resources and macroinvertebrate communities in tributaries of the Taieri River, New Zealand; a hierarchically scaled approach. Freshwater Biology, 37, 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Trant, A. J., Herman, T. B., & Good-Avila, S. V. (2010). Effects of anthropogenic disturbance on the reproductive ecology and pollination service of Plymouth gentian (Sabatia kennedyana Fern.), a lakeshore plant species at risk. Plant Ecology, 210, 241–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Woodcock, T., Tucker, R., Mihuc, T., Evans, C., Allen, J., Mihuc, J., & Allen, E. (2008). Effects of forest management on vegetation community structure in the Adirondack uplands (New York, USA). Applied Vegetation Science, 11, 509–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wyatt, R. (1976). Pollination and fruit set in Asclepias: a reappraisal. American Journal of Botany, 63, 845–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

These experiments were funded by Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (CESI), Information and Indicators Division, Environment Canada. Field and laboratory assistance was provided by E. Bowley, D. Naylor, C. Irvine, J. Pomezanski, and M. Tungate. The authors are grateful to S. Dumesh, A. Young, C. Sheffield, S. Cardinal, S. Colla, N. da Silva, M. Rightmyer, and G. Rowe for providing specimen identifications. The authors are also grateful for support from R. Wildfong and K. Fellows (Seeds of Diversity), and R. Tschanz (University of Guelph, School of Environmental Sciences greenhouse). Access to sites was provided by the City of Guelph, Nelson Aggregate, Rare Charitable Research Reserve, Cherryvale Organic Farm, University of Guelph Honey Bee Research Centre, and participants in the Norfolk County Alternative Land Use Services (ALUS) program. We thank the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for support of the Canadian Pollination Initiative (NSERC-CANPOLIN). This is CANPOLIN publication #85.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas S. Woodcock.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 Occurrence of bee taxa at the study sites
Table 5 Occurrence of syrphid taxa at the study sites

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woodcock, T.S., Pekkola, L.J., Dawson, C. et al. Development of a Pollination Service Measurement (PSM) method using potted plant phytometry. Environ Monit Assess 186, 5041–5057 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-3758-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sustainability
  • Ecosystem service
  • Pollinator conservation
  • Biomonitoring
  • Symphyotrichum