MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322504342 · doi:10.1111/oik.09790

The impact of plant diversity and vegetation composition on bumblebee colony fitness

2023· article· en· W4322504342 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastiaan Verbeke, Margaux Boeraeve, Sébastien Carpentier, Hans Jacquemyn, María I. Pozo

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsIONICS Mass Spectrometry (Canada)
FundersKU LeuvenFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsBiologyPollenEcologyBumblebeePollinatorForagingBombus terrestrisHabitatEcosystemPollination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current decline in pollinators may disrupt ecosystems and ecosystem services with potentially harmful effects on nature and human society. While the importance of habitat loss and fragmentation, pollution and increased disease risk in driving pollinator decline has been clearly demonstrated, the impact of resource diversity is less well understood. In this study, we investigated the effect of pollen diversity and composition on reproductive success and fitness of Bombus terrestris colonies. We asked the question whether a higher plant diversity results in a more diverse diet, lower pathogen incidence and a higher colony fitness. To answer these questions, colonies of lab‐reared bumblebees were placed in species‐poor heathlands and species‐rich semi‐natural grasslands that strongly differed in plant community composition and diversity. We examined pollen loads on the bodies of foragers and identified the plant taxa present in the realized diet via DNA metabarcoding of the ITS2 marker. Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) was used to compare peptide composition of pollen samples from both habitats. Colony fitness was assessed by counting the number of sexuals produced by the colony at the end of its cycle. At the same time, colonies were examined for parasite incidence. Pollen composition and diversity on pollinators' bodies differed significantly between bees foraging in grasslands and heathlands. Concomitantly, peptide composition differed significantly between pollen samples from grasslands and heathlands. Contrary to our prediction, colonies developed significantly better in heathland sites than in grasslands. In addition, the relationship between colony fitness and pollen diversity was weak and varied between the two habitats. Pathogen incidence was very low and not affected by habitat. Overall, our results indicate that plant diversity is not necessarily a good predictor of colony fitness, and that vegetation composition and associated differences in both the quantity and quality of pollen are more important than pollen diversity per se.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207