Back

The impact of artificial linear features on the pollination of plant communities

Li, D.; Clements, C. F.; Memmott, J.

2025-04-08 ecology
10.1101/2025.04.02.646872 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Linear features, such as road verges, hedgerows can function as corridors for species dispersal. Previous studies showed that these features could enhance movement of pollinators such as bees, increasing pollination success of bee pollinated plants. However, it remains unclear if these effects extend to communities of plants pollinated by other pollinators. We conducted a field experiment where we measured the pollination of phytometer plant communities linked by linear features. We constructed six 30m artificial linear features in both urban and rural meadows in the Southwest UK, and placed plant communities on either end of these linear features, comparing these to phytometers without linking linear features. Plant communities were assembled with seven species known to attract different groups of insect pollinators including bees, flies, and moths. We tested self-incompatibility of plant species and used their seed set to measure pollination. We found that linear features significantly improved the pollination success of three bee pollinated species, whilst the seed production of fly and moth pollinated species were either unaffected or less affected. Overall, it is likely that linear features benefit the pollination of some plant species more than others. Our results suggest that linear features play an important role in maintaining pollination for some plant species, highlighting the importance of evaluating community-level impacts of corridors on pollination. Given the importance of bees as pollinators, linear features can provide a practical strategy to conserve and improve pollination, but where species are fly or moth pollinated, alternative strategies may need to be considered.

Published in Oecologia (predicted rank #5) · training set

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.