Search

A striking structural pattern of pollination networks is the presence of a few highly connected species which has implications for ecological and evolutionary processes that create and maintain diversity. To understand the structure and dynamics of pollination networks we need to know which mechanisms allow the emergence of highly connected species. We investigate whether social pollinator species are highly connected in pollination networks, and whether network structure is affected by the presence of high proportions of social pollinator species. Social insects are abundant, with long activity periods and, at the highest level of social organisation, specialised foraging castes. These three attributes are likely to increase the number of interactions of social species and, consequently, their role in pollination networks. We find that social species have, on average, more prominent network roles than solitary species, a possible mechanism being the individual‐rich colonies of social insects. However, when accounting for the shared evolutionary history of pollinators, sociality is only associated with highly interactive roles in Apidae. For apid bees, our structural equation analysis shows that the effect of sociality on species network roles is an indirect result of their high levels of interaction frequency. Despite the relative importance of sociality at a species‐level, an increasing proportion of social species in pollination networks did not affect overall network structure. Our results suggest that behavioural traits may shape patterns of interaction of individual species but not the network‐level organisation of species interactions. Instead, network structure appears to be determined by more general aspects of ecological systems such as interaction intimacy, patterns of niche overlap, and species abundance distributions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biodiversity is organised into complex ecological networks of interaaing species in local ecosystems, but our knowledge about the effeas of habitat fragmentation on such systems remains limited. We consider the effects of this key driver of both local and global change on both mutualistic and antagonistic systems at different levels of biological organisation and spatiotemporal scales. There is a complex interplay of patterns and processes related to the variation and influence of spatial, temporal and biotic drivers in ecological networks. Species traits (e.g. body size, dispersal ability) play an important role in determining how networks respond to fragment size and isolation, edge shape and permeability, and the quality of the surrounding landscape matrix. Furthermore, the perception of spatial scale (e.g. environmental grain) and temporal effects (time lags, extinction debts) can differ markedly among species, network modules and trophic levels, highlighting the need to develop a more integrated perspective that considers not just nodes, but the structural role and strength of species interactions (e.g. as hubs, spatial couplers and determinants of connectance, nestedness and modularity) in response to habitat fragmentation. Many challenges remain for improving our understanding: the likely importance of specialisation, functional redundancy and trait matching has been largely overlooked. The potentially critical effects of apex consumers, abundant species and supergeneralists on network changes and evolutionary dynamics also need to be addressed in future research. Ultimately, spatial and ecological networks need to be combined to explore the effects of dispersal, colonisation, extinction and habitat fragmentation on network structure and coevolutionary dynamics. Finally, we need to embed network approaches more explicitly within applied ecology in general, because they offer great potential for improving on the current species-based or habitat-centric approaches to our management and conservation of biodiversity in the face of environmental change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]