Pollen load diversity and foraging niche overlap in a pollinator community of the rare Dictamnus albus L.
- 193 Downloads
Bees collect pollen as an important resource for offspring development while acting as pollen vectors for the plants visited. Foraging preferences of pollinators together with plant species availability shape the web of interactions at the local scale. In this study, we focused on the bee pollinator community of a population of the rare protected perennial herb Dictamnus albus, with the aim to characterise the pollen preferences and the foraging niche overlap among species through time. Bees were sampled during four consecutive years in a natural population of D. albus, throughout the blooming period of the plant species. We performed an analysis of insect pollen loads to investigate the interactions with the study species and the co-flowering plants in the area, and to evaluate the degree of foraging overlap among pollinators. Over the study years, all bee species showed a high fidelity to D. albus (60–80%), even if some taxa preferentially collected pollen from other flowering species. The foraging niche overlap in the pollinator community decreased together with an increased diversity of co-flowering plant species. The results obtained indicate that bees preferentially forage on D. albus in the studied area, but that co-flowering species contribute to complement their diet and likely reduce competition for foraging resources. It appears therefore important to maintain a high diversity of co-flowering plants to preserve the diversity in the studied pollinator community of D. albus.
KeywordsBees Conservation Dictamnus albus Entomopalynology Pollinators Resource use
This work was performed within the Life + Project PP-ICON (Plant-Pollinator CONservation approach: a demonstrative proposal – LIFE09/NAT/IT000212) funded by the European Union. We thank the “Ente di gestione per i Parchi e la Biodiversità – Emilia Orientale” for permitting work in the field, and Elisa Monterastelli and the students that helped with field work and data collection.
- Bortolotti L, Bogo G, de Manincor N, Fisogni A, Galloni M (2016) Integrated conservation of bee pollinators of a rare plant in a protected area near Bologna, Italy. Conserv Evid 13:51–56Google Scholar
- Krebs CJ (2014) Ecological methodology. https://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~krebs/books.html. Accessed 16 Sept 2016
- Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2016) Vegan: community ecology package. R package ver. 2.3-5Google Scholar
- Pawlikowski T (2010) Pollination activity of bees (Apoidea: Apiformes) visiting the flowers of Tilia cordata Mill. and Tilia tomentosa Moench in an urban environment. J Apic Sci 54:73–79Google Scholar
- Persano Oddo L, Ricciardelli D’Albore G (1989) Nomenclatura melissopalinologica. Apicoltura 5:63–72Google Scholar
- Pinzauti M, Rondinini T, Niccolini L, Felicioli A (2002) Investigation of the germinating potential of pollen transported by some bees. Insect Soc Life 4:107–114Google Scholar
- Quaranta M (1998) The diet of five common species of bumblebees (Bombus Latr.: Hymenoptera, Apidae) in natural conditions. Insect Soc Life 2:151–155Google Scholar
- Quiroz-Garcia DL, Martinez-Hernandez E, Palacios-Chavez R, Galindo-Miranda NE (2001) Nest provisions and pollen foraging in three species of solitary bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) from Jalisco, Mexico. J Kans Entomol Soc 74:61–69Google Scholar
- Roulston TH, Goodell K (2011) The role of resources and risks in regulating wild bee populations. Ann Rev Entomol 56:293–312. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120709-144802 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wickham H, Chang W (2016) An implementation of the grammar of graphics. R package ver. 2.1.0Google Scholar