Direct benefits and indirect costs of warm temperatures for high‐elevation populations of a solitary bee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warm temperatures are required for insect flight. Consequently, warming could benefit many high-latitude and high-altitude insects by increasing opportunities for foraging or oviposition. However, warming can also alter species interactions, including interactions with natural enemies, making the net effect of rising temperatures on population growth rate difficult to predict. We investigated the temperature-dependence of nesting activity and lifetime reproductive output over 3 yr in subalpine populations of a pollen-specialist bee, Osmia iridis. Rates of nest provisioning increased with ambient temperatures and with availability of floral resources, as expected. However, warmer conditions did not increase lifetime reproductive output. Lifetime offspring production was best explained by rates of brood parasitism (by the wasp Sapyga), which increased with temperature. Direct observations of bee and parasite activity suggest that although activity of both species is favored by warmer temperatures, bees can be active at lower ambient temperatures, while wasps are active only at higher temperatures. Thus, direct benefits to the bees of warmer temperatures were nullified by indirect costs associated with increased parasite activity. To date, most studies of climate-change effects on pollinators have focused on changing interactions between pollinators and their floral host-plants (i.e., bottom-up processes). Our results suggest that natural enemies (i.e., top-down forces) can play a key role in pollinator population regulation and should not be overlooked in forecasts of pollinator responses to climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".