California Native Perennials Attract Greater Native Pollinator Abundance and Diversity Than Nonnative, Commercially Available Ornamentals in Southern California.

While many factors have been implicated in global pollinator decline, habitat loss is a key driver of wild pollinator decline in both abundance and species richness. An increase in and diversification of pollinator habitat, even in urban settings, can assist in the conservation of pollinator populations. In Southern California, a highly fragmented and urbanized landscape with a rich yet threatened native pollinator fauna, the availability of food resources for native pollinators hinges largely upon the selection of ornamental plants grown in the urban landscape. To examine the pollinator attractiveness of ornamental plants in a Southern California context, we installed an experimental garden with common California native and nonnative ornamental perennials and observed floral visitation and visitor community composition for 3 yr. Our study demonstrates that while native pollinators visited common ornamental perennials native to California at a higher rate than they visited nonnative ornamentals, introduced honey bees showed no significant preference for either native or nonnative species. Native plants also received a greater diversity of visitor taxa, including a richer suite of native bees. Plant species differed dramatically in attractiveness, by as much as a factor of 12, even within the native status group. Our results suggest that including a data-driven selection of both native and non-native ornamental perennials in the urban landscape can diversify the assemblage of native pollinators, provide critical floral resources throughout the year, and reduce the impact of honey bee landscape foraging dominance by providing plants highly attractive to native pollinators and less so to honey bees.

The effect of removing numerically dominant, non-native honey bees on seed set of a native plant.

Pollination services are compromised by habitat destruction, land-use intensification, pesticides, and introduced species. How pollination services respond to such stressors depends on the capacity of pollinator assemblages to function in the face of environmental disruption. Here, we quantify how pollination services provided to a native plant change upon removal of the non-native, western honey bee (Apis mellifera)-a numerically dominant floral visitor in the native bee-rich ecosystems of southern California. We focus on services provided to clustered tarweed (Deinandra fasciculata), a native, annual forb that benefits from outcross pollination. Across five different study sites in coastal San Diego County, tarweed flowers attracted 70 insect taxa, approximately half of which were native bees, but non-native honey bees were always the most abundant floral visitor at each site. To test the ability of the native insect fauna to provide pollination services, we performed Apis removals within experimental 0.25 m2 plots containing approximately 20 tarweed plants and compared visitation and seed set between plants in removal and paired control plots (n = 16 pairs). Even though 92% of observed floral visits to control plots were from honey bees, Apis removal reduced seed production by only 14% relative to plants in control plots. These results indicate that native insect assemblages can contribute important pollination services even in ecosystems numerically dominated by introduced pollinators.

The innate responses of bumble bees to flower patterns: separating the nectar guide from the nectary changes bee movements and search time.

Nectar guides can enhance pollinator efficiency and plant fitness by allowing pollinators to more rapidly find and remember the location of floral nectar. We tested if a radiating nectar guide around a nectary would enhance the ability of naïve bumble bee foragers to find nectar. Most experiments that test nectar guide efficacy, specifically radiating linear guides, have used guides positioned around the center of a radially symmetric flower, where nectaries are often found. However, the flower center may be intrinsically attractive. We therefore used an off-center guide and nectary and compared "conjunct" feeders with a nectar guide surrounding the nectary to "disjunct" feeders with a nectar guide separated from the nectary. We focused on the innate response of novice bee foragers that had never previously visited such feeders. We hypothesized that a disjunct nectar guide would conflict with the visual information provided by the nectary and negatively affect foraging. Approximately, equal numbers of bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) found nectar on both feeder types. On disjunct feeders, however, unsuccessful foragers spent significantly more time (on average 1.6-fold longer) searching for nectar than any other forager group. Successful foragers on disjunct feeders approached these feeders from random directions unlike successful foragers on conjunct feeders, which preferentially approached the combined nectary and nectar guide. Thus, the nectary and a surrounding nectar guide can be considered a combination of two signals that attract naïve foragers even when not in the floral center.