Honey bees are the dominant diurnal pollinator of native milkweed in a large urban park
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In eastern North America, the field milkweed, Asclepias syriaca L. (Asclepiadaceae), is used in planting schemes to promote biodiversity conservation for numerous insects including the endangered monarch butterfly, Danaus plexippus (Linnaeus) (Nymphalidae). Less is known about its pollinators, and especially in urban habitats where it is planted often despite being under increasing pressure from invasive plant species, such as the related milkweed, the dog‐strangling vine (DSV), Vincetoxicum rossicum (Kleopow) Barbar. (Asclepiadaceae). During the A. syriaca flowering period in July 2016, we surveyed bees in open habitats along a DSV invasion gradient and inspected 433 individuals of 25 bee species in 12 genera for pollinia: these were affixed to bees that visited A. syriaca for nectar and contain pollen packets that are vectored (e.g., transferred) between flowers. Of all bees sampled, pollinia were found only on the nonindigenous honeybee, Apis mellifera (43% of all bees identified), as well as one individual bumblebee, Bombus impatiens Cresson. Pollinia were recorded from 45.2% of all honeybees collected. We found no relationship between biomass of DSV and biomass of A. syriaca per site. There was a significant positive correlation between A. syriaca biomass and the number of pollinia, and the proportion vectored. No relationship with DSV biomass was detected for the number of pollinia collected by bees but the proportion of vectored pollinia declined with increasing DSV biomass. Although we find no evidence of DSV flowers attracting potential pollinators away from A. syriaca and other flowering plants, the impacts on native plant–pollinator mutualisms relate to its ability to outcompete native plants. As wild bees do not appear to visit DSV flowers, it could be altering the landscape to one which honeybees are more tolerant than native wild bees.
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 | 0.001 | 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".