Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 547–555 | Cite as

Pollinator dispersal in an agricultural matrix: opposing responses of wild bees and hoverflies to landscape structure and distance from main habitat

  • Frank Jauker
  • Tim Diekötter
  • Franziska Schwarzbach
  • Volkmar Wolters
Research Article

Abstract

Semi-natural habitats provide essential resources for pollinators within agricultural landscapes and may help maintain pollination services in agroecosystems. Yet, whether or not pollinators disperse from semi-natural habitat elements into the adjacent agricultural matrix may to a large extent depend on the quality of this matrix and the corresponding pollinator-specific life history traits. To investigate the effects of matrix quality on the distance decay of wild bees and hoverflies, six transects along vegetated field tracks originating at a large semi-natural main habitat and leading into the adjacent agricultural matrix were established in the Wetterau Region, central Hesse, Germany. Species richness of wild bees did not change with distance from the main habitat in landscapes with sufficient grassland cover in the surrounding landscape, but significantly declined when semi-natural grasslands where scarce and isolated in the adjacent agricultural matrix. Abundance of wild bees declined with distance regardless of matrix quality. Species richness of hoverflies did not decline with increasing distance in any landscape. Abundance even increased with distance to the main habitat independently of matrix quality. Thus, our data show that taxa of the pollinator guild may perceive landscapes quite differently. Because of their differing dispersal modes and resource requirements as compared to wild bees, hoverflies may play an important role in maintaining pollination services in agricultural landscapes unsuitable for bee species. Our results highlight the need for considering these taxon-specific differences when predicting the effect of landscape structure on pollinators.

Keywords

Apidae Syrphidae Landscape context Distribution patterns 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Yann Clough, Birgit Meyer, and an anonymous referee for valuable comments on the manuscript. Dean Anderson provided valuable help with the spatial autocorrelation procedures. Ulrich Frommer (Apidae) and Paul-Walter Lohr (Syrphidae) helped to identify dubious species. This work was supported by a doctoral scholarship from the German Environmental Foundation (DBU) to F. Jauker.

Supplementary material

10980_2009_9331_MOESM1_ESM.doc (2.9 mb)
(DOC 3014 kb)

References

  1. Bengtsson J, Angelstam JP, Elmqvist T et al (2003) Reserves, resilience, and dynamic landscapes. Ambio 32:389–396. doi: 10.1639/0044-7447(2003)032[0389:RRADL]2.0.CO;2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00011-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Billeter R, Liira J, Bailey D et al (2008) Indicators for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: a pan-European study. J Appl Ecol 45:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brosi BJ, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (2007) Bee community shifts with landscape context in a tropical countryside. Ecol Appl 17:418–430. doi: 10.1890/06-0029 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgio G, Sommaggio D (2007) Syrphids as landscape indicators in Italian agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 120:416–422. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.10.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cane JH (2001) Habitat fragmentation and native bees: a premature verdict? Conserv Ecol 5: art. no. 3 [online]. http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art3/
  7. Cane J, Minckley RL, Kervin LJ et al (2006) Complex responses within a desert bee guild (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) to urban habitat fragmentation. Ecol Appl 16:632–644. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[0632:CRWADB]2.0.CO;2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collinge SK (2000) Effects of grassland fragmentation on insect species loss, colonization, and movement patterns. Ecology 81:2211–2226Google Scholar
  9. Costanza R, d’Arge R, deGroot R et al (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services, and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260. doi: 10.1038/387253a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Debinski DM, Holt RD (2000) A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conserv Biol 14:342–355. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98081.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dennis RHL, Shreeve TG, van Dyck H (2003) Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12387.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duelli P, Obrist MK (2003) Regional biodiversity in an agricultural landscape: the contribution of seminatural habitat islands. Basic Appl Ecol 4:129–138. doi: 10.1078/1439-1791-00140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ewers RM, Didham RK (2006) Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 81:117–142. doi: 10.1017/S1464793105006949 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fontaine C, Dajoz I, Meriguet J et al (2006) Functional diversity of plant-pollinator interaction webs enhances the persistence of plant communities. PLoS Biol 4:129–135. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fortin M-J, Dale M (2005) Spatial Analysis. A guide for ecologists, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Frommer U (2001) Bestandsaufnahme der Bienenfauna im mittleren Hessen (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Naturwiss Ver Darmstadt Ber 24:129–191Google Scholar
  17. Gathmann A, Tscharntke T (2002) Foraging ranges of solitary bees. J Anim Ecol 71:757–764. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00641.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ghazoul J (2005) Buzziness as usual? Questioning the global pollination crisis. Trends Ecol Evol 20:367–373. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.026 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haddad NM, Bowne DR, Cunningham A et al (2003) Corridor use by diverse taxa. Ecology 84:609–615. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0609:CUBDT]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Haila Y (2002) A conceptual genealogy of fragmentation research: from island biogeography to landscape ecology. Ecol Appl 12:321–334Google Scholar
  21. Hayter KE, Cresswell JE (2006) The influence of pollinator abundance on the dynamics and efficiency of pollination in agricultural Brassica napus: implications for landscape-scale gene dispersal. J Appl Ecol 43:1196–1202. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01219.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hendrickx F, Maelfait JP, van Wingerden W et al (2007) How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes. J Appl Ecol 44:340–351. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01270.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jauker F, Wolters V (2008) Hover flies are efficient pollinators of oilseed rape. Oecologia 156:819–823. doi: 10.1007/s00442-008-1034-x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kleijn D, van Langevelde F (2006) Interacting effects of landscape context and habitat quality on flower visiting insects in agricultural landscapes. Basic Appl Ecol 7:214–301. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2005.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein AM, Vaissiere BE, Cane JH et al (2007) Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. P R Soc Lond B Biol 274:303–313. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3721 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kremen C, Williams NM, Bugg RL et al (2004) The area requirements of an ecosystem service: crop pollination by native bee communities in California. Ecol Lett 7:1109–1119. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00662.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kruess A, Tscharntke T (1994) Habitat fragmentation, species loss, and biological control. Science 264:1581–1584. doi: 10.1126/science.264.5165.1581 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meyer B, Jauker F, Steffan-Dewenter I (2008) Contrasting resource-dependent responses of hoverfly richness and density to landscape structure. Basic Appl Ecol. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2008.01.001 Google Scholar
  29. Morandin LA, Winston ML, Abbott VA et al (2007) Can pastureland increase wild bee abundance in agriculturally intense areas? Basic Appl Ecol 8:117–124. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2006.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ockinger E, Smith HG (2007) Semi-natural grasslands as population sources for pollinating insects in agricultural landscapes. J Appl Ecol 44:50–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01250.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pauw A (2007) Collapse of a pollination web in small conservation areas. Ecology 88:1759–1769. doi: 10.1890/06-1383.1 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pimm SL, Raven P (2000) Biodiversity—Extinction by numbers. Nature 403:843–845. doi: 10.1038/35002708 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99. doi: 10.1086/320863 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ricketts TH, Regetz J, Steffan-Dewenter I et al (2008) Landscape effects on crop pollination services: aere there general patterns? Ecol Lett 11:499–515. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01157.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roland J, Keyghobadi N, Fownes S (2000) Alpine Parnassius butterfly dispersal: effects of landscape and population size. Ecology 81:1642–1653Google Scholar
  36. Sadeghi H, Gilbert F (2000) Aphid suitability and its relationship to oviposition preference in predatory hoverflies. J Anim Ecol 69:771–784. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00433.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sawada M (1999) ROOKCASE: an Excel 97/2000 visual basic (VB) add-in for exploring global and local spatial autocorrelation. Bull Ecol Soc Am 80:231–234. doi: 10.1890/0012-9623(1999)080[0231:TT]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schweiger O, Musche M, Bailey D et al (2007) Functional richness of local hoverfly communities (Diptera, Syrphidae) in response to land use across temperate Europe. Oikos 116:461–472. doi: 10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.15372.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Speight MCD (2006) Species accounts of European Syrphidae (Diptera), Ferrara 2006. In: Speight MCD, Castella E, Sarthou J-P, Monteil C (eds) Syrph the Net on CD, Issue 5. The database of European Syrphidae. Syrph the Net Publications, DublinGoogle Scholar
  40. Steffan-Dewenter I (2003) Importance of habitat area and landscape context for species richness of bees and wasps in fragmented orchard meadows. Conserv Biol 17:1036–1044. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01575.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Steffan-Dewenter I, Münzenberg U, Bürger C et al (2002) Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds. Ecology 83:1421–1432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Steffan-Dewenter I, Potts SG, Packer L (2005) Pollinator diversity and crop pollination services are at risk. Trends Ecol Evol 20:651–652. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.09.004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thomas CD, Kunin E (1999) The spatial structure of populations. J Anim Ecol 68:647–657. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.1999.00330.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) How should we measure landscape connectivity? Landscape Ecol 15:633–641. doi: 10.1023/A:1008177324187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Townsend PA, Levey DJ (2005) An experimental test whether habitat corridors affect pollen transfer. Ecology 86:466–475. doi: 10.1890/03-0607 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tscharntke T, Brandl R (2004) Plant-insect interactions in fragmented landscapes. Annu Rev Entomol 49:405–430. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.49.061802.123339 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A et al (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8:857–874. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tylianakis JM, Tscharntke T, Klein AM (2006) Diversity, ecosystem function, and stability of parasitoid host interactions across a tropical habitat gradient. Ecology 87:3047–3057. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[3047:DEFASO]2.0.CO;2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Underwood AJ (2002) Experiments in ecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Wagner HH, Fortin M-J (2005) Spatial analysis of landscapes: concepts and statistics. Ecology 86:1975–1987. doi: 10.1890/04-0914 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Watling JI, Donnelly MA (2006) Fragments as islands: a synthesis of faunal responses to habitat patches. Conserv Biol 20:1016–1025. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00482.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Jauker
    • 1
  • Tim Diekötter
    • 1
  • Franziska Schwarzbach
    • 1
  • Volkmar Wolters
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Animal EcologyJustus Liebig UniversityGiessenGermany

Personalised recommendations