Pacific Northwest native plants and native cultivars, part I: pollinator visitation.

IF 1.8 3区 农林科学 Q2 ENTOMOLOGY
Jen J-M Hayes, Nicole C Bell, Lincoln R Best, Svea R Bruslind, Devon O Johnson, Mallory E Mead, Tyler S Spofford, Gail A Langellotto
{"title":"Pacific Northwest native plants and native cultivars, part I: pollinator visitation.","authors":"Jen J-M Hayes, Nicole C Bell, Lincoln R Best, Svea R Bruslind, Devon O Johnson, Mallory E Mead, Tyler S Spofford, Gail A Langellotto","doi":"10.1093/ee/nvae126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Planting native flora is a popular conservation strategy for pollinators. When searching for native plants, consumers may encounter cultivars of native plants, which can have different phenotypic traits than plants found in wild populations (\"wild-type native plants\"). Previous research evaluating pollinator visitation to wild-type native plants and native cultivars has yielded mixed results, in terms of whether their visitation rates are similar or distinct. We established a garden experiment in Corvallis, Oregon, to examine pollinator visitation and utilization of Pacific Northwest native plant species and cultivars. Over 3 years, we collected and observed bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea), butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea), and syrphid flies (Diptera: Syrphidae) to understand (i) if plant pairs had different visitation rates, (ii) whether any pollinators were associated with differential visitation, and (iii) if specialist taxa preferred wild types over cultivars. Pollinator visitation rates varied by plant and pollinator groupings, but in comparisons between native plant and cultivar pairs, native plants were preferred 37.2% of the time (n = 29 comparisons), cultivars 7.7% of the time (n = 6), and there was no difference in 55.1% of comparisons (n = 43). Our pollinator community data found native plants had greater observed total pollinator richness (except for 1 tie) and bee richness than cultivars, though predicted richness varied. Specialist bees were collected more often from wild types. Cultivars with high visitation rates were minimally developed selections, as opposed to interspecific hybrids. Our results join a growing body of literature in suggesting wild-type native and minimally developed plants should be emphasized for supporting pollinator fauna.</p>","PeriodicalId":11751,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Entomology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Entomology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvae126","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Planting native flora is a popular conservation strategy for pollinators. When searching for native plants, consumers may encounter cultivars of native plants, which can have different phenotypic traits than plants found in wild populations ("wild-type native plants"). Previous research evaluating pollinator visitation to wild-type native plants and native cultivars has yielded mixed results, in terms of whether their visitation rates are similar or distinct. We established a garden experiment in Corvallis, Oregon, to examine pollinator visitation and utilization of Pacific Northwest native plant species and cultivars. Over 3 years, we collected and observed bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea), butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea), and syrphid flies (Diptera: Syrphidae) to understand (i) if plant pairs had different visitation rates, (ii) whether any pollinators were associated with differential visitation, and (iii) if specialist taxa preferred wild types over cultivars. Pollinator visitation rates varied by plant and pollinator groupings, but in comparisons between native plant and cultivar pairs, native plants were preferred 37.2% of the time (n = 29 comparisons), cultivars 7.7% of the time (n = 6), and there was no difference in 55.1% of comparisons (n = 43). Our pollinator community data found native plants had greater observed total pollinator richness (except for 1 tie) and bee richness than cultivars, though predicted richness varied. Specialist bees were collected more often from wild types. Cultivars with high visitation rates were minimally developed selections, as opposed to interspecific hybrids. Our results join a growing body of literature in suggesting wild-type native and minimally developed plants should be emphasized for supporting pollinator fauna.

太平洋西北地区本地植物和本地栽培品种,第一部分:传粉者访问。
种植本地植物是保护授粉昆虫的常用策略。在寻找本地植物时,消费者可能会遇到本地植物的栽培品种,它们的表型特征可能与野生种群中的植物("野生型本地植物")不同。以前对传粉昆虫访问野生型本地植物和本地栽培品种的情况进行评估的研究结果不一,不知道它们的访问率是相似还是不同。我们在俄勒冈州科瓦利斯市建立了一个花园实验,考察授粉昆虫对西北太平洋本地植物物种和栽培品种的访问和利用情况。在 3 年时间里,我们收集并观察了蜜蜂(膜翅目:Apoidea)、蝴蝶(鳞翅目:Papilionoidea)和蚜蝇(双翅目:Syrphidae),以了解:(i) 植物配对是否有不同的拜访率;(ii) 是否有授粉昆虫与不同的拜访率有关;(iii) 与栽培品种相比,专业类群是否更喜欢野生类型。传粉昆虫的访问率因植物和传粉昆虫群落而异,但在本地植物和栽培品种配对之间的比较中,37.2%的时间(n = 29 次比较)更喜欢本地植物,7.7%的时间(n = 6 次比较)更喜欢栽培品种,55.1%的比较(n = 43 次比较)没有差异。我们的传粉昆虫群落数据发现,与栽培品种相比,本地植物观察到的传粉昆虫总丰富度(1 次并列除外)和蜜蜂丰富度更高,但预测的丰富度有所不同。从野生植物中采集到的特种蜜蜂更多。访问率高的栽培品种都是最小开发的选育品种,而不是种间杂交品种。我们的研究结果与越来越多的文献一起表明,应重视野生型本地植物和最小发展型植物,以支持授粉动物群落。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Entomology
Environmental Entomology 生物-昆虫学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
97
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Environmental Entomology is published bimonthly in February, April, June, August, October, and December. The journal publishes reports on the interaction of insects with the biological, chemical, and physical aspects of their environment. In addition to research papers, Environmental Entomology publishes Reviews, interpretive articles in a Forum section, and Letters to the Editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信