Effect of green infrastructure on restoration of pollination networks and plant performance in semi-natural dry grasslands across Europe
Data files
Jan 19, 2024 version files 16.78 KB
-
bipartite_networks_fungreen.zip
14.61 KB
-
README.md
2.17 KB
Abstract
Agricultural intensification, afforestation and land abandonment are major drivers of biodiversity loss in semi-natural grasslands across Europe. Reversing these losses requires the reinstatement of plant-animal interactions such as pollination. Here we assessed the differences in species composition and patterns of plant-pollinator interactions in ancient and restored grasslands and how these patterns are influenced by landscape connectivity, across three European regions (Belgium, Germany and Sweden). We evaluated the differences in pollinator community assemblage, abundance, and interaction network structure between 24 ancient and restored grasslands. We then assessed the effect of surrounding landscape functional connectivity (i.e. green infrastructure, GI) on these variables and tested possible consequences on the reproduction of two model plants, Lotus corniculatus and Salvia pratensis. Neither pollinator richness nor species composition differed between ancient and restored grasslands. A high turnover of interactions across grasslands was detected but was mainly due to replacement of pollinator and plant species. The impact of grassland restoration was consistent across various pollinator functional groups, whereas the surrounding GI had differential effects. Notably, bees, butterflies, beetles, and dipterans (excluding hoverflies) exhibited the most significant responses to GI variations. Interestingly, networks in restored grasslands were more specialised (i.e. less functionally redundant) than in ancient ones and also showed a higher number of insect visits to habitat-generalist plant species. Landscape connectivity had a similar effect, with habitat-specialist plant species receiving fewer visits at higher GI values. Fruit set in S. pratensis and L. corniculatus was unaffected by grassland type or GI. However, the fruit set in the specialist S. pratensis increased with the number of pollinator visits, indicating a positive correlation between pollinator activity and reproductive success in this particular species. Synthesis and applications. Our findings provide evidence of the necessity to enhance ecosystem functions while avoiding biotic homogenization. Restoration programs should aim at increasing landscape connectivity which influences plant communities, pollinator assemblages, and their interaction patterns. To avoid generalist species taking over from specialists in restored grasslands, we suggest reinforcing the presence of specialist species in the latter, for instance by means of introductions, as well as increasing the connectivity to source populations.
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.fbg79cp2t
Description of the Data and File Structure
Within this dataset, you’ll find a collection of 24 bipartite matrices, each corresponding to a specific study plot. These matrices provide pollination networks in semi-natural dry grasslands across Europe. Each matrix represents the plants in rows and their pollinators in columns. Each cell in the matrix represents the number of visits by each pollinator.
Variables Naming and abbreviations: Row and column names of each matrix contain the acronym of the scientific name of each species. Three letters for the genus and three letters for the species. In cases where taxonomic identification to species has not been achieved, the identified genus or family is indicated. The full scientific name of each species can be found in Appendices 2 and 3 of the supporting information of the associated article by Traveset et al. (2024) in the Journal of Applied Ecology.
File Naming Convention: The files are named following a consistent pattern for easy identification. They start with the country name, providing geographical context, followed by the unique plot code. This naming convention not only facilitates efficient organization but also allows users to quickly locate data relevant to a specific region or parcel.
Relationships Between Matrices: Each bipartite matrix encapsulates the interactions between species within a distinct study plot. These matrices collectively contribute to a holistic understanding of how green infrastructure influences the restoration of pollination networks across diverse European landscapes.
Referencing Additional Information: For detailed insights into the species and parcel characteristics, users are encouraged to refer to the associated article by Traveset et al. (2024) in the Journal of Applied Ecology. The article serves as a comprehensive guide, providing context, methodologies, and additional details that enhance the interpretation and utilization of the dataset.
We sampled plant-pollinator interactions five times at each of the 24 focal grasslands throughout the main flowering periods of 2018. We shifted geographically with the flowering period (May 3rd-June 6th-in Germany, June 14th-July 8th in Belgium and July 10th-August 9th in Sweden), from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on sunny days with low wind, and above 15ºC. We gathered flower visitation data along three parallel linear transects (80m long and 3m wide) over 45 min (15 min per transect). We recorded the identity and number of insect contacts to flowers, considering only those (i.e. potential pollination events) when an insect clearly touched the flower reproductive organs.