Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36311409›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2022

Increasing flower species richness in agricultural landscapes alters insect pollinator networks: Implications for bee health and competition.

Vincent Doublet, Toby Doyle, Isobel Refoy, Sophie Hedges, Claire Carvell, Mark J F Brown, Lena Wilfert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Shift in virus composition in honeybees (Royal Society open science · 2024
    Article
  11. Conservation measures or hotspots of disease transmission? Agri-environment schemes can reduce disease prevalence in pollinator communities.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Vincent DoubletCollege of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Penryn UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-1222
Toby DoyleCollege of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Penryn UK.
Isobel RefoyCollege of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Penryn UK.
Sophie HedgesCollege of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Penryn UK.
Claire CarvellUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Wallingford UK.
Mark J F BrownDepartment of Biological Sciences Royal Holloway University of London Egham UK.
Lena WilfertCollege of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Penryn UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological restoration programs are established to reverse land degradation, mitigate biodiversity loss, and reinstate ecosystem services. Following recent agricultural intensification that led to a decrease in flower diversity and density in rural areas and subsequently to the decline of many insects, conservation measures targeted at pollinators have been established, including sown wildflower strips (WFS) along field margins. Historically successful in establishing a high density of generalist bees and increasing pollinator diversity, the impact of enhanced flower provision on wider ecological interactions and the structure of pollinator networks has been rarely investigated. Here, we tested the effects of increasing flower species richness and flower density in agricultural landscapes on bee-plant interaction networks. We measured plant species richness and flower density and surveyed honeybee and bumblebee visits on flowers across a range of field margins on 10 UK farms that applied different pollinator conservation measures. We found that both flower species richness and flower density significantly increased bee abundance, in early and late summer, respectively. At the network level, we found that higher flower species richness did not significantly alter bee species' generality indices, but significantly reduced network connectance and marginally reduced niche overlap across honeybees and bumblebee species, a proxy for insect competition. While higher connectance and niche overlap is believed to strengthen network robustness and often is the aim for the restoration of pollinator networks, we argue that carefully designed WFS may benefit bees by partitioning their foraging niche, limiting competition for resources and the potential for disease transmission via shared floral use. We also discuss the need to extend WFS and their positive effects into spring when wild bee populations are established.

Indexed as

connectanceflower diversityniche overlappollinator networksrestorationwildflower margins

Identifiers

PMID36311409
PMCPMC9608809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.