<p>Pollination maintains natural communities and agricultural production by allowing and/or improving fruit and seed sets. Understanding local plant-pollinator interactions is important for enhancing crop pollination. This study investigated relationships between co-flowering crops and pollinators using six crops (pumpkin, watermelon, melon, gherkin, tomato, and sweet pepper) in NE Brazil. Questions raised include: What is the network’s structural pattern? Which bee groups are shared among co-flowering crops? 3) What is the functional role of the different species within the network? Field data were collected through focal observations. The network structure was described by connectivity and modularity calculations, and the role of species. A total of 27 bee species, across 19 genera and three families, were recorded. Apidae (15 species), Halictidae (nine), and Andrenidae (three) were the families observed. The network was modular, with four modules related to floral attributes. No bee species was a network hub. <i>Paratrigona incerta</i> and <i>Ceratina</i> sp. were module hubs. <i>Paratrigona incerta</i> had the highest number of interactions, visiting all crops except pumpkin. <i>Apis mellifera</i>, although not a key pollinator, had the second-highest number of interactions, connecting to all Cucurbitaceae. We recommend promoting pollinator-friendly conservation practices, including <i>Paratrigona incerta</i> and <i>Ceratina</i> sp., and testing the management of efficient native bees for crops.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Network of interactions between bees and vegetable crops in Northeastern Brazil

  • Isabella Hevily Silva Torquato,
  • Camila Silveira Souza,
  • Daniele Regina Parizotto,
  • Cibele Cardoso Castro

摘要

Pollination maintains natural communities and agricultural production by allowing and/or improving fruit and seed sets. Understanding local plant-pollinator interactions is important for enhancing crop pollination. This study investigated relationships between co-flowering crops and pollinators using six crops (pumpkin, watermelon, melon, gherkin, tomato, and sweet pepper) in NE Brazil. Questions raised include: What is the network’s structural pattern? Which bee groups are shared among co-flowering crops? 3) What is the functional role of the different species within the network? Field data were collected through focal observations. The network structure was described by connectivity and modularity calculations, and the role of species. A total of 27 bee species, across 19 genera and three families, were recorded. Apidae (15 species), Halictidae (nine), and Andrenidae (three) were the families observed. The network was modular, with four modules related to floral attributes. No bee species was a network hub. Paratrigona incerta and Ceratina sp. were module hubs. Paratrigona incerta had the highest number of interactions, visiting all crops except pumpkin. Apis mellifera, although not a key pollinator, had the second-highest number of interactions, connecting to all Cucurbitaceae. We recommend promoting pollinator-friendly conservation practices, including Paratrigona incerta and Ceratina sp., and testing the management of efficient native bees for crops.