MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407573397 · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2025.e03489

Non-native plants in road verges attract pollinators despite associated declines in native flowers

2025· article· en· W4407573397 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Massimo Martini, Emily Kaul, Jason Gibbs, Kyle Bobiwash

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Conservation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsPollinatorNative plantGeographyIntroduced speciesBiologyBotanyPollinationPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marginal habitats are increasingly recognized for their potential value in pollinator conservation. Road verges, which cover extensive areas, provide abundant floral resources and contribute to habitat heterogeneity and connectivity in homogeneous landscapes. However, road verges are also hotspots for the establishment and dispersal of non-native plants, raising doubts on their suitability to support diverse pollinator populations. We sampled flowering plants and visiting insects in roadsides of southeastern Manitoba, Canada, and leveraged datasets of bee communities from surrounding areas and Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) to compare pollinator communities across habitats. Plant communities in road verges were dominated by a subset of abundant non-native species and were disproportionately visited by generalist pollinators. Non-native plant abundance was negatively correlated with native plant richness and abundance in the verges but positively associated with bee richness and abundance. Landscape context and scale also influenced pollinators. We found strong differences in pollinator richness, abundance, and community composition at larger (ecozone) scales, with local landscape composition and configuration also contributing significantly, albeit to a lesser extent. Road verge bee communities were distinct and less even than those in surrounding areas and WMAs, and exhibited a markedly higher proportion of polylectic to oligolectic individuals. These findings suggest that road verges can support generalist pollinators but are less suitable for specialists, highlighting their potential to maintain pollination services in heavily disturbed or densely-forested landscapes while also revealing limitations in harboring representatively diverse and even communities. • Road verges act as habitat for many pollinator species in a variety of landscapes. • Non-native flowering plants in road verges are negatively associated with native plants. • Road verges host uneven pollinator communities dominated by generalist bee species. • Road verges may help preserve pollination services in disturbed landscapes by supporting generalist bee populations.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and ConservationSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207