ArticleEcology2026
Fat-tailed dispersal shapes connectivity in a solitary bee.
Article in Ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dispersal-movement potentially leading to gene flow-is a fundamental ecological process yet notoriously difficult to measure. For solitary bees in particular, determining the spatial scale of dispersal movements and how landscape features influence connectivity is key to achieving conservation goals. Over 2 years, we marked 1698 females of the solitary bee Colletes validus at nesting sites, recaptured marked bees as they dispersed to build nests and as they foraged on flowers, and fit statistical kernels to observed movement distances. In total, we observed 349 dispersal events by 313 individual bees including 13 natal dispersal events (movement from emergence to the first nesting site) and 336 renesting dispersal events (movement among subsequent nesting sites). Solitary bee dispersal kernels were fat-tailed: Most bees made local movements (mean = 143 m), but a small proportion in the distributional tails made substantially longer movements (99% kernel quantile = 1.2 km) and the farthest dispersers were expected to move nearly 3 km. We also recorded 38 foraging movements from nests to flowers by 38 individual bees, allowing us to compare two ecologically distinct movement types. Mean foraging (131 m) and dispersal distances were similar, but upper foraging distances (99% kernel quantile = 554 m) were substantially lower than dispersal. Movement patterns also depended on landscape composition: Both foraging and dispersal movement propensity decreased with increasing inter-patch distance and number of road crossings. Our study highlights fundamental differences in the tails of foraging and dispersal in a central-place forager, demonstrates how landscape features constrain solitary bee movements, and contributes quantitative metrics on the spatial scale of movement for pollinator conservation planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.