Dataset Information

Going native? Flower use by bumblebees in English urban gardens.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

Although urban gardens provide opportunities for pollinators in an otherwise inhospitable environment, most garden plants are not native to the recipient biogeographical region and their value to local pollinators is disputed. This study tested the hypothesis that bumblebees foraging in English urban gardens preferentially visited sympatric Palaearctic-range plants over species originating outside their native range.

Methods

Twenty-seven surveys of flower availability and bumblebee visitation (Bombus spp.) were conducted over a 3-month summer period. Plants were categorized according to whether they were native British, Palaearctic or non-Palaearctic in origin. A phylogeny of the 119 plant species recorded was constructed and the relationship between floral abundance and the frequency of pollinator visits investigated by means of phylogenetically independent contrasts. Differentiation in utilization of plant species by the five bumblebee species encountered was investigated using niche overlap analyses.

Key results

There was conflicting evidence for preferential use of native-range Palaearctic plant species by bumblebees depending on which plants were included in the analysis. Evidence was also found for niche partitioning between species based on respective preferences for native and non-native biogeographical range plants. Two bumblebees (Bombus terrestris and B. pratorum) concentrated their foraging activity on non-Palaearctic plants, while two others (B. hortorum and B. pascourum) preferred Palaearctic species.

Conclusions

The long-running debate about the value of native and non-native garden plants to pollinators probably stems from a failure to properly consider biogeographical overlap between plant and pollinator ranges. Gardeners can encourage pollinators without consideration of plant origin or bias towards 'local' biogeographical species. However, dietary specialist bumblebees seem to prefer plants sympatric with their own biogeographical range and, in addition to the cultivation of these species in gardens, provision of native non-horticultural ('weed') species may also be important for pollinator conservation.

SUBMITTER: Hanley ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3962246 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Going native? Flower use by bumblebees in English urban gardens.

Hanley Mick E ME Awbi Amanda J AJ Franco Miguel M

Annals of botany 20140318 5

<h4>Background and aims</h4>Although urban gardens provide opportunities for pollinators in an otherwise inhospitable environment, most garden plants are not native to the recipient biogeographical region and their value to local pollinators is disputed. This study tested the hypothesis that bumblebees foraging in English urban gardens preferentially visited sympatric Palaearctic-range plants over species originating outside their native range.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty-seven surveys of flower avail ...[more]

PMID: 24647914

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is a lack of data on resources used and food produced at urban farms. This hampers attempts to quantify the environmental impacts of urban agriculture or craft policies for sustainable food production in cities. To address this gap, we used a citizen science approach to collect data from 72 urban agriculture sites, representing three types of spaces (urban farms, collective gardens, individual gardens), in five countries (France, Germany, Poland, United Kingdom, and United States). We answered three key questions about urban agriculture with this unprecedented dataset: (1) What are its land, water, nutrient, and energy demands? (2) How productive is it relative to conventional agriculture and across types of farms? and (3) What are its contributions to local biodiversity? We found that participant farms used dozens of inputs, most of which were organic (e.g., manure for fertilizers). Farms required on average 71.6 L of irrigation water, 5.5 L of compost, and 0.53 m2 of land per kilogram of harvested food. Irrigation was lower in individual gardens and higher in sites using drip irrigation. While extremely variable, yields at well-managed urban farms can exceed those of conventional counterparts. Although farm type did not predict yield, our cluster analysis demonstrated that individually managed leisure gardens had lower yields than other farms and gardens. Farms in our sample contributed significantly to local biodiversity, with an average of 20 different crops per farm not including ornamental plants. Aside from clarifying important trends in resource use at urban farms using a robust and open dataset, this study also raises numerous questions about how crop selection and growing practices influence the environmental impacts of growing food in cities. We conclude with a research agenda to tackle these and other pressing questions on resource use at urban farms.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13593-022-00859-4.

Project description:Public interest in ecological landscaping and gardening is fueling a robust market for native plants. Most plants available to consumers through the horticulture trade are cultivated forms that have been selected for modified flowers or foliage, compactness, or other ornamental characteristics. Depending on their traits, some native plant cultivars seem to support pollinators, specialist insect folivores, and insect-based vertebrate food webs as effectively as native plant species, whereas others do not. There is particular need for information on whether native cultivars can be as effective as true or "wild-type" native species for supporting specialist native insects of conservation concern. Herein we compared the suitability of native milkweed species and their cultivars for attracting and supporting one such insect, the iconic monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.), as well as native bees in urban pollinator gardens. Wild-type Asclepias incarnata L. (swamp milkweed) and Asclepias tuberosa L. (butterfly milkweed) and three additional cultivars of each that vary in stature, floral display, and foliage color were grown in a replicated common garden experiment at a public arboretum. We monitored the plants for colonization by wild monarchs, assessed their suitability for supporting monarch larvae in greenhouse trials, measured their defensive characteristics (leaf trichome density, latex, and cardenolide levels), and compared the proportionate abundance and diversity of bee families and genera visiting their blooms. Significantly more monarch eggs and larvae were found on A. incarnata than A. tuberosa in both years, but within each milkweed group, cultivars were colonized to the same extent as wild types. Despite some differences in defense allocation, all cultivars were as suitable as wild-type milkweeds in supporting monarch larval growth. Five bee families and 17 genera were represented amongst the 2,436 total bees sampled from blooms of wild-type milkweeds and their cultivars in the replicated gardens. Bee assemblages of A. incarnata were dominated by Apidae (Bombus, Xylocopa spp., and Apis mellifera), whereas A. tuberosa attracted relatively more Halictidae (especially Lasioglossum spp.) and Megachilidae. Proportionate abundance of bee families and genera was generally similar for cultivars and their respective wild types. This study suggests that, at least in small urban gardens, milkweed cultivars can be as suitable as their parental species for supporting monarch butterflies and native bees.

Dataset Information

Going native? Flower use by bumblebees in English urban gardens.

Background and aims

Methods

Key results

Conclusions

Publications

Going native? Flower use by bumblebees in English urban gardens.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets