Alpine Rhododendron population contractions lead to spatial distribution mismatch with their pollinators under climate change

The effect of global climate change on plant-pollinator interaction is not limited to changes in phenology and richness within communities but also includes the spatial mismatch caused by the inconsistency of geographical distribution changes. Subsequently, the pollinator interaction network may be remodeled or even disrupted. In this study, we simulated the suitable habitat niche of 15 Rhododendron species and their eight pollinator species as well as their overlapping versus geographical mismatch under the current and three future climate change scenarios in 2090s, using MaxEnt. Results showed that the suitable habitat of all Rhododendron species would decrease in 2090s. In particular, 10, 8, and 13 Rhododendron-pollinator assemblages would have a reduced spatial match region under the climate change scenarios, mainly due to the contraction of the suitable habitat of Rhododendron species. The results provide novel insights into the response of plant-pollinator interactions to global warming, useful to prioritize conservation actions of alpine plant ecosystems.

Specialization in plant-pollinator networks: insights from local-scale interactions in Glenbow Ranch Provincial Park in Alberta, Canada

Background

The occurrence and frequency of plant–pollinator interactions are acknowledged to be a function of multiple factors, including the spatio-temporal distribution of species. The study of pollination specialization by examining network properties and more recently incorporating predictors of pairwise interactions is emerging as a useful framework, yet integrated datasets combining network structure, habitat disturbance, and phylogenetic information are still scarce.

Results

We found that plant–pollinator interactions in a grassland ecosystem in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains are not randomly distributed and that high levels of reciprocal specialization are generated by biological constraints, such as floral symmetry, pollinator size and pollinator sociality, because these traits lead to morphological or phenological mismatching between interacting species. We also detected that landscape degradation was associated with differences in the network topology, but the interaction webs still maintained a consistently higher number of reciprocal specialization cases than expected. Evidence for the reciprocal evolutionary dependence in visitors (e.g., related pollinators visiting related plants) were weak in this study system, however we identified key species joining clustered units.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that the conserved links with keystone species may provide the foundation for generating local reciprocal specialization. From the general topology of the networks, plant–pollinators interactions in sites with disturbance consisted of generalized nodes connecting modules (i.e., hub and numerous connectors). Vice versa, interactions in less disturbed sites consisted of more specialized and symmetrical connections.