View
272
Download
4
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Plant invasions: consequences forplant-pollinator interactions
Ignasi Bartomeus Roig • November 2008 • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona • CREAF•nacho@creaf.uab.es•Advisor: Montserrat Vilà •
Mack et al.(2000)Ecol Applic
Globalization Increase transport
Mack et al.(2000)Ecol Applic
Globalization Increase transport
21 million flights/day 470 million tones/day
World Bank(2002)
Intentional Unintentional
Mack et al.(2000)Ecol Applic
Globalization Increase transport
21 million flights/day 470 million tones/day
World Bank(2002)
Intentional Unintentional
Mack et al.(2000)Ecol Applic
Globalization Increase transport
21 million flights/day 470 million tones/day
World Bank(2002)
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Invasive species characteristics Reproduction system Pre-adaptations
Invaded ecosystem characteristics Empty niches Lack of natural enemies Perturbations
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Ecological impacts Competition
Economic impacts
Impacts:
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Ecological impacts Competition
Economic impacts
Impacts:
Invasion process:
Introduction
Naturalization
Invasion
Loss of Biodiversity
Ecological impacts Competition
Economic impacts
Impacts:
Invasion process:
Network
Network
Pollination: Mutualism Ecological service Endangered
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
New Interactions
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
New InteractionsMutualistic
networks
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
New InteractionsMutualistic
networks
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
Rosmarinus officinalis, Lavandula stoeachs, Cistus spp...
New InteractionsMutualistic
networks
Traveset & Richardson(2006)TrEE
Rosmarinus officinalis, Lavandula stoeachs, Cistus spp...
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Pollinator sharing
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Visits to natives
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Visits to natives
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Visits to natives
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Visits to natives
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Bjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Pollen transport
Direct effects
Impacts on native plants
Direct effects
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effectBjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Seed set
Impacts on native plants
Direct effects
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effectBjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Chittka & Schurkens(2001)Nature
Seed set
Impacts on native plants
Focal Plant studies:
Direct effects
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effectBjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Moragues & Traveset (2005)Biol Cons
Seed set
Impacts on native plants
Focal Plant studies:
Direct effects
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effectBjerkens et al.(2007)Biol Cons
Totland et al.(2006)J BotLarson et al.(2006)Biol Cons Nilsen et al.(2008)Biol Inv
Muñoz & Cavieres (2008)J Ecolet al...
Seed set
Impacts on native plants
Focal Plant studies:
Study species:
South Africa s.XIXFast clonal growthHybrid8-10 cm pollen rich flowersGardening and soil fixation
Carpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Study species:
South Africa s.XIXFast clonal growthHybrid8-10 cm pollen rich flowersGardening and soil fixation
Carpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Opuntia stricta
Central America s.XVI1.5 m high5 cm pollen rich flowersOrnamental
Study species:
South Africa s.XIXFast clonal growthHybrid8-10 cm pollen rich flowersGardening and soil fixation
Carpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Opuntia stricta
Central America s.XVI1.5 m high5 cm pollen rich flowersOrnamental
Impatiens glandulifera
Himalayas s.XX2 m highAnnual4 cm nectar and pollen rich flowers
Study species:
Breeding system & pollen limitation
Effects on plant-pollinators networks
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas!
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Objectives:
Breeding system and pollen limitation
I C
Bartomeus I, Vilà M(Submited)
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Asexual reproduction Self compatible Generalist
Baker(1967)Evolution
Breeding system and pollen limitation
New Interactions New Interactions
Parcker and Haubenask (2002)Oecologia
I C
Asexual reproduction Self compatible Generalist
Baker(1967)Evolution
Study sites:Breeding system and pollen limitation
Opuntia strictaCarpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Suehs et al.(2004)Heredity
I C
Study sites:Breeding system and pollen limitation
Opuntia strictaCarpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Suehs et al.(2004)Heredity
I C
Study sites:Breeding system and pollen limitation
Opuntia strictaCarpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Suehs et al.(2004)Heredity
I C
Kearns & Inouye(1993)
5 Treatments:
Forced out-crossing Open pollination Anemogamy Facilitated self-pollination Spontaneous self-pollination
40 flowers treatment x 3 site
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation I C
Site 1Site 2Site 3
Forced Out-crossing
Breeding system and pollen limitation
Low self-compatibility They need pollinators
I C
Breeding system and pollen limitation
Low self-compatibility They need pollinators
Slightly pollen limited Hybrid Coleoptera
I C
Breeding system and pollen limitation
Low self-compatibility They need pollinators
Slightly pollen limited Hybrid Coleoptera
I C
Efficient pollinators
Xilocopa violacea & Apis mellifera
Breeding system and pollen limitation
Low self-compatibility They need pollinators
Slightly pollen limited Hybrid Coleoptera
I C
Efficient pollinators
Xilocopa violacea & Apis mellifera
Effects on plant-pollination networks
I C
Bartomeus I, Vilà M & Santamaria L(2008)Oecologia
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Competition with natives at a community level Pollinator sharing Decrease the number of visits to natives Changes in the community structure Nestedness Centrality Strength
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networksOpuntia strictaCarpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
inix3
50x50
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
ini
inix3
x3
50x50
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
ini
inix3
x3
50x50
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
ini
inix3
x3We sample:All plant species Along all the season
50x50
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Pollinator species
53 species to natives23 species to Carpobrotus (42%)
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Pollinator species
53 species to natives23 species to Carpobrotus (42%)
7 Visits natives
Visits
27 Visits Carpobrotus
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
>70% natives increase nº visits in invaded plots (GLMM P<0.02)
Pollinator species
53 species to natives23 species to Carpobrotus (42%)
7 Visits natives
Visits
27 Visits Carpobrotus
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Pollinator species
54 species to natives17 species to Opuntia (31%)
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
19% visitsXilocopa violacea
Pollinator species
54 species to natives17 species to Opuntia (31%)
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
19% visitsXilocopa violacea
Pollinator species
54 species to natives17 species to Opuntia (31%)
6 Visits natives
Visits
44 Visits Opuntia
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
>60% natives decrease nº visits in invaded plots (GLMM P=0.04)
19% visitsXilocopa violacea
Pollinator species
54 species to natives17 species to Opuntia (31%)
6 Visits natives
Visits
44 Visits Opuntia
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Carpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
Plan
ts
Polli
nato
rsI C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
Isocline
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
N= 0.83
Isocline
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
N= 0.83
Isocline
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Nestedness
Bascompte et al.(2003)PNAS
N= 0.83
Isocline
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Nestedness2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Null model2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Nestedness
50% more nested than by random No differences in Nestedness for Carpobrotus
Invaded communities more nested than uninvaded for Opuntia.
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Null model2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Nestedness
50% more nested than by random No differences in Nestedness for Carpobrotus
Invaded communities more nested than uninvaded for Opuntia.
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
Null model2. Nestedness
Bascompte, Jordano, Melián and Olesen (2003). PNAS 100: 9383-9387
N=1
N=0.55
N=0.742, P<0.01Olesen & Elberling
I C
Centrality: Degree & Betweenness
Pajek Softweare
Centrality: Degree & Betweenness
High Degree-Centrality
Pajek Softweare
Centrality: Degree & Betweenness
High Betweenness-Centrality
Pajek Softweare
Centrality: Degree & Betweenness
High Betweenness-Centrality
Pajek Softweare
Centrality: Degree & Betweenness
High Betweenness-Centrality
DCCarpobrotus > DCnatives (0.3) (0.09) DCOpuntia > DCnatives (0.38) (0.08)
BCCarpobrotus > BCnatives (0.33) (0.08)BCOpuntia > BCnatives (0.46) (0.06)
Pajek Softweare
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Opuntia stricta
Plan
ts
Polli
nato
rs
j i
I C
Bascompte et al.(2006)Science
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Opuntia stricta
Plan
ts
Polli
nato
rs
j i
dji = nºVji/nº VjDependence of j on i:
I C
Bascompte et al.(2006)Science
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Opuntia stricta
Plan
ts
Polli
nato
rs
j i
dji = nºVji/nº VjDependence of j on i:Si = ∑ djiStrength of i:
I C
Bascompte et al.(2006)Science
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Opuntia stricta
Plan
ts
Polli
nato
rs
j i
SCarpobrotus > Snatives (6.5) (2.2) SOpuntia > Snatives (8.1) (2.1)
Strength
dji = nºVji/nº VjDependence of j on i:Si = ∑ djiStrength of i:
I C
Bascompte et al.(2006)Science
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Both invaders are generalists: Nº Pollinators Nº of visits Position in the network
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Different effects on plant comunity: Increase visits in Carpobrotus plots Decrease visits in Opuntia plots
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
I C
Bartomeus I, Bosch J & Vilà M (2008) Annals of Botany
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effect
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
CompetitionFacilitationCompetition No effect
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Shared pollinators
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Pollen loads in pollinator bodies Conspecific pollen Invasive > heterospecific native pollen
Shared pollinators
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Pollen loads in pollinator bodies Conspecific pollen Invasive > heterospecific native pollen
Pollen deposition in native plant stigmas
Proportion of invasive pollen
Shared pollinators
I C
Effects on plant-pollination networks
Carpobrotus aff. acinaciformis
I C
Carpobrotus
39% plant cover 36% of visits
Fuchsine stained gelatine
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Carpobrotus
39% plant cover 36% of visits
Fuchsine stained gelatine
5 Plant species 49% plant cover
51% of visits
10 pollinators (5 bees, 5 beetles)
76% of visits
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Carpobrotus
39% plant cover 36% of visits
Fuchsine stained gelatine
30 stigmas x species
15 pollinators x interaction
5 Plant species 49% plant cover
51% of visits
10 pollinators (5 bees, 5 beetles)
76% of visits
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Oxythyrea funestaCistus albidus
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Oxythyrea funestaCistus albidus
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Andrena sp.Cistus salvifolius
I C
Oxythyrea funestaCistus albidus
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Andrena sp.Cistus salvifolius
Cistus monspeliensis
I C
Oxythyrea funestaCistus albidus
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Andrena sp.Cistus salvifolius
Cistus monspeliensis
Lavandula stoechas Eucera sp
I C
Oxythyrea funestaCistus albidus
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Andrena sp.Cistus salvifolius
Cistus monspeliensis
Lavandula stoechas Eucera sp
I C
Sonchus tenerrimus Criptocephalus sp
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Apis melifera Bombus terrestris
Andrena sp.
Anthidium sticticum
Halictus gemmeus
Oxythyrea funesta
Cryptocephalus spMordella sp
Oedemera spp.Psilothrix sp
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Apis melifera Bombus terrestris
Andrena sp.
Anthidium sticticum
Halictus gemmeus
Oxythyrea funesta
Cryptocephalus spMordella sp
Oedemera spp.Psilothrix sp
CistusLavandula
Carpobrotus
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Apis melifera Bombus terrestris
Andrena sp.
Anthidium sticticum
Halictus gemmeus
Oxythyrea funesta
Cryptocephalus spMordella sp
Oedemera spp.Psilothrix sp
We counted 139 063 pollen grains Average: 3 pollen species per individual
CistusLavandula
Carpobrotus
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Apis melifera Bombus terrestris
Andrena sp.
Anthidium sticticum
Halictus gemmeus
Oxythyrea funesta
Cryptocephalus spMordella sp
Oedemera spp.Psilothrix sp
We counted 139 063 pollen grains Average: 3 pollen species per individual
CistusLavandula
Carpobrotus
73% carried invasive pollen
I C
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
Apis melifera Bombus terrestris
Andrena sp.
Anthidium sticticum
Halictus gemmeus
Oxythyrea funesta
Cryptocephalus spMordella sp
Oedemera spp.Psilothrix sp
We counted 139 063 pollen grains Average: 3 pollen species per individual
CistusLavandula
Carpobrotus
73% carried invasive pollen
23% of pollen was invasive
I C
Main Results
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Main Results
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Main Results
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
Main Results
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
2 pollinators (bees): Dominant heterospecific > invasive (p < 0.001)6 pollinators:Dominant heterospecific ∼ invasive2 pollinators (beetles): Invasive > dominant heterospecific (p < 0.006)
Invasive vs. heterospecific native pollenInvasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
2 pollinators (bees): Dominant heterospecific > invasive (p < 0.001)6 pollinators:Dominant heterospecific ∼ invasive2 pollinators (beetles): Invasive > dominant heterospecific (p < 0.006)
Invasive vs. heterospecific native pollenInvasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
All stigmas were covered by pollen Average: 2 pollen species
per stigma
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
36% invasive pollen
stigmas
I C
All stigmas were covered by pollen Average: 2 pollen species
per stigma
Invasive < heterospecific < conspecific (χ2, p < 0.0001)
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
36% invasive pollen
stigmas
I C
1) pollinator species sharing
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
1) pollinator species sharing
2) effective pollen transfer
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
1) pollinator species sharing
3) low invasive pollen loads
2) effective pollen transfer
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
1) pollinator species sharing
4) lower invasive pollen deposition
3) low invasive pollen loads
2) effective pollen transfer
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas I C
1) pollinator species sharing
4) lower invasive pollen deposition
3) low invasive pollen loads
2) effective pollen transfer
Invasive pollen transfer to native stigmas
...Floral constancy, morphology & temporal presentation
I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
I C
Bartomeus I, Vilà M & Setffan-Dewenter I(In preparation)
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Invasion
I C
Landscape context
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Invasion
I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Steffan-Dewenter et al.(2002)Ecology
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Steffan-Dewenter et al.(2002)Ecology
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Steffan-Dewenter et al.(2002)Ecology
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Steffan-Dewenter et al.(2002)Ecology
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Westphal et al.(2003)Ecol Lett
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Westphal et al.(2003)Ecol Lett
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Westphal et al.(2003)Ecol Lett
X 14 sites in a landscape gradientCombined effects of invasion & landscape structure
17% of natural cover71% of natural cover
GrasslandAgricultural fields
Human activity area
Landscape sites at 3000 m radii.
Forest
I C
X 14 sites in a landscape gradientCombined effects of invasion & landscape structure
17% of natural cover71% of natural cover
GrasslandAgricultural fields
Human activity area
Landscape sites at 3000 m radii.
Forest
I C
100m 100m
Before Impatiens flowering period
Raphanus sativus pots
Impatiens stands
X 14 sites in a landscape gradient
100m 100m
During Impatiens flowering peak
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
17% of natural cover71% of natural cover
GrasslandAgricultural fields
Human activity area
Landscape sites at 3000 m radii.
Forest
I C
100m 100m
Before Impatiens flowering period
Raphanus sativus pots
Impatiens stands
Log (proportion of agricultural land cover)
Log
(num
ber
of b
umbl
ebee
s visit
s)
0
1
2
21 1.5
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Before Impatiens floweringDuring Impatiens flowering
R2= 0.25; p< 0.003
I C
Log (proportion of agricultural land cover)
Log
(num
ber
of b
umbl
ebee
s visit
s)
0
1
2
21 1.5
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Before Impatiens floweringDuring Impatiens flowering
R2= 0.25; p< 0.003
I C
a a
b
c
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Before /Non-invaded
Before /Invaded
During /Non-invaded
During /Invaded
visits to natives
Numbe
r of
visi
ts t
o th
e co
mmun
ity
b
visits to invader
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
a a
b
c
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Before /Non-invaded
Before /Invaded
During /Non-invaded
During /Invaded
visits to natives
Numbe
r of
visi
ts t
o th
e co
mmun
ity
b
visits to invader
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
a a
b
c
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Before /Non-invaded
Before /Invaded
During /Non-invaded
During /Invaded
visits to natives
Numbe
r of
visi
ts t
o th
e co
mmun
ity
b
visits to invader
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
% Fruit setNº Visits
Raphanus pots
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Before /Non-invaded
Before /Invaded
During /Non-invaded
During /Invaded
I C
Nº V
isits
/%
Fru
it se
t
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
% Fruit setNº Visits
Raphanus pots
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Before /Non-invaded
Before /Invaded
During /Non-invaded
During /Invaded
I C
Nº V
isits
/%
Fru
it se
t
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
1) Social bees increase in agricultural areas before
the invasive plant flowering2) No effect on wild bees
I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
4) Native plants do not decrease visitation, nor seed set
3) Impatiens attracts mainly bumblebees
1) Social bees increase in agricultural areas before
the invasive plant flowering2) No effect on wild bees
I C
Combined effects of invasion & landscape structure
Impatiens mask off the landscape effect
4) Native plants do not decrease visitation, nor seed set
3) Impatiens attracts mainly bumblebees
1) Social bees increase in agricultural areas before
the invasive plant flowering2) No effect on wild bees
I C
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect
Carpobrotus
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effectImpatiens
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect
Opuntia
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect mask off landscape contextImpatiens
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect mask off landscape contextImpatiens
Conclusions
CompetitionFacilitation
No effect mask off landscape contextImpatiens
Conclusions
Take home message
Plant-pollinator networks are complex &the invasion outcome is difficult to predict.
However, invasive plants cause significant changes on the networks.
Thank you for your attentionAnd special Thanks to collaborators: Montse Vilà, Jordi Bosch, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter; Lab colleges: Jara Andreu, Nuria Gasso, Salva Blanch, Belén Sanchez and CREAF friends.
Recommended