References
Hubbell, S. P. The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography (Princeton Univ. Press, 2001).
Wills, C. et al. Nonrandom processes maintain diversity in tropical forests. Science 311, 527–531 (2006).
Chesson, P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 31, 343–366 (2000).
Ollerton, J. Pollinator diversity: distribution, ecological function, and conservation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 353–376 (2017).
Vamosi, J. C. et al. Pollination decays in biodiversity hotspots. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 956–961 (2006).
Bennett, J. M. et al. Land use and pollinator dependency drives global patterns of pollen limitation in the Anthropocene. Nat. Commun. 11, 3999 (2020).
Potts, S. G. et al. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 345–353 (2010).
Vamosi, J. C., Magallon, S., Mayrose, I., Otto, S. P. & Sauquet, H. Macroevolutionary patterns of flowering plant speciation and extinction. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 69, 685–706 (2018).
Ollerton, J., Winfree, R. & Tarrant, S. How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120, 321–326 (2011).
Rodger, J. G. et al. 2021 Widespread vulnerability of plant seed production to pollinator decline. Sci. Adv. (in the press).
Pimm, S. L., Jones, H. L. & Diamond, J. On the risk of extinction. Am. Nat. 132, 757–785 (1988).
Sargent, R. D. & Ackerly, D. D. Plant–pollinator interactions and the assembly of plant communities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 123–130 (2008).
Benadi, G. & Pauw, A. Frequency dependence of pollinator visitation rates suggests that pollination niches can allow plant species coexistence. J. Ecol. 106, 1892–1901 (2018).
Bruno, J. F., Stachowicz, J. J. & Bertness, M. D. Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 119–125 (2003).
Benadi, G., Bluthgen, N., Hovestadt, T. & Poethke, H. J. Population dynamics of plant and pollinator communities: stability reconsidered. Am. Nat. 179, 157–168 (2012).
Moeller, D. A. Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology 85, 3289–3301 (2004).
Bergamo, P. J., Susin Streher, N., Traveset, A., Wolowski, M. & Sazima, M. Pollination outcomes reveal negative density-dependence coupled with interspecific facilitation among plants. Ecol. Lett. 23, 129–139 (2020).
Barrett, S. C. H. The evolution of plant sexual diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 274–284 (2002).
Ashman, T. L. & Arceo-Gómez, G. Toward a predictive understanding of the fitness costs of heterospecific pollen receipt and its importance in co-flowering communities. Am. J. Bot. 100, 1061–1070 (2013).
Moreira-Hernández, J. I. & Muchhala, N. Importance of pollinator-mediated interspecific pollen transfer for angiosperm evolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 50, 191–217 (2019).
Ashman, T. L. et al. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85, 2408–2421 (2004).
Tur, C., Saez, A., Traveset, A. & Aizen, M. A. Evaluating the effects of pollinator-mediated interactions using pollen transfer networks: evidence of widespread facilitation in south Andean plant communities. Ecol. Lett. 19, 576–586 (2016).
Levin, D. A. & Anderson, W. W. Competition for pollinators between simultaneously flowering species. Am. Nat. 104, 455–467 (1970).
Ashman, T. L., Alonso, C., Parra-Tabla, V. & Arceo-Gómez, G. Pollen on stigmas as proxies of pollinator competition and facilitation: complexities, caveats and future directions. Ann. Bot. 125, 1003–1012 (2020).
Lloyd, D. G. Some reproductive factors affecting the selection of self-fertilization in plants. Am. Nat. 113, 67–79 (1979).
Sargent, R. D. & Otto, S. P. The role of local species abundance in the evolution of pollinator attraction in flowering plants. Am. Nat. 167, 67–80 (2006).
Adler, P. B., Fajardo, A., Kleinhesselink, A. R. & Kraft, N. J. B. Trait-based tests of coexistence mechanisms. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1294–1306 (2013).
Armbruster, W. S. The specialization continuum in pollination systems: diversity of concepts and implications for ecology, evolution and conservation. Funct. Ecol. 31, 88–100 (2017).
Minnaar, C., Anderson, B., de Jager, M. L. & Karron, J. D. Plant–pollinator interactions along the pathway to paternity. Ann. Bot. 123, 225–245 (2019).
Kantsa, A. et al. Disentangling the role of floral sensory stimuli in pollination networks. Nat. Commun. 9, 1041 (2018).
Fang, Q. & Huang, S. Q. A directed network analysis of heterospecific pollen transfer in a biodiverse community. Ecology 94, 1176–1185 (2013).
Baldwin, B. G. Origins of plant diversity in the California floristic province. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 45, 347–369 (2014).
Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., Melian, C. J. & Olesen, J. M. The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9383–9387 (2003).
Thomson, J. D., Fung, H. F. & Ogilvie, J. E. Effects of spatial patterning of co-flowering plant species on pollination quantity and purity. Ann. Bot. 123, 303–310 (2019).
Rezende, E. L., Lavabre, J. E., Guimaraes, P. R., Jordano, P. & Bascompte, J. Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks. Nature 448, 925–928 (2007).
Song, C. L., Rohr, R. P. & Saavedra, S. Why are some plant–pollinator networks more nested than others? J. Anim. Ecol. 86, 1417–1424 (2017).
Hegland, S. J., Nielsen, A., Lazaro, A., Bjerknes, A. L. & Totland, O. How does climate warming affect plant–pollinator interactions? Ecol. Lett. 12, 184–195 (2009).
Ohlemuller, R. et al. The coincidence of climatic and species rarity: high risk to small-range species from climate change. Biol. Lett. 4, 568–572 (2008).
Arceo-Gómez, G., Kaczorowski, R. L. & Ashman, T.-L. A network approach to understanding patterns of coflowering in diverse communities. Int. J. Plant Sci. 179, 569–582 (2018).
Koski, M. H. et al. Plant–flower visitor networks in a serpentine metacommunity: assessing traits associated with keystone plant species. Arthropod Plant Interact. 9, 9–21 (2015).
Arceo-Gómez, G. et al. Patterns of among- and within-species variation in heterospecific pollen receipt: the importance of ecological generalization. Am. J. Bot. 103, 396–407 (2016).
Chao, A. et al. Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol. Monogr. 84, 45–67 (2014).
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, https://www.R-project.org/ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019).
Arceo-Gómez, G., Alonso, C., Ashman, T.-L. & Parra-Tabla, V. Variation in sampling effort affects the observed richness of plant–plant interactions via heterospecific pollen transfer: implications for interpretation of pollen transfer networks. Am. J. Bot. 105, 1601–1608 (2018).
Hayes, R. A., Cullen N., Kaczorowski R. L., O’Neill E. M. & Ashman T-L. A community-wide description and key of pollen from co-flowering plants of the serpentine seeps of Mclaughlin Reserve. Madrono (in the press).
Dafni, A. Pollination Ecology: a Practical Approach (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992).
McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Waste NOT, want not: why rarefying microbiome data is inadmissible. PLoS Comp. Biol. 10, e1003531 (2014).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Qian, H. & Jin, Y. An updated megaphylogeny of plants, a tool for generating plant phylogenies and an analysis of phylogenetic community structure. J. Plant Ecol. 9, 233–239 (2016).
Zanne, A. E. et al. Three keys to the radiation of angiosperms into freezing environments. Nature 506, 89–92 (2014).
Hinchliff, C. E. et al. Synthesis of phylogeny and taxonomy into a comprehensive tree of life. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 12764–12769 (2015).
Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).
Michonneau, F., Brown, J. W. & Winter, D. J. rotl: an R package to interact with the Open Tree of Life data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1476–1481 (2016).
Revell, L. J. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 217–223 (2012).
Le, S., Josse, J. & Husson, F. FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis. J. Stat. Softw. 25, 1–18 (2008).
Dormann, C. F., Gruber, B. & Fruend, J. Introducing the bipartite package: analysing ecological networks. R News 8, 8–11 (2008).
Feinsinger, P., Spears, E. E. & Poole, R. W. A simple measure of niche breadth. Ecology 62, 27–32 (1981).
Horn, H. S. Measurement of "overlap" in comparative ecological studies. Am. Nat. 100, 419–424 (1966).
Almeida-Neto, M., Guimaraes, P., Guimaraes, P. R., Loyola, R. D. & Ulrich, W. A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117, 1227–1239 (2008).
Csardi, G. & Nepusz, T. The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal 1695, 1–9 (2006).
Patefield, W. Algorithm AS 159: an efficient method of generating random R × C tables with given row and column totals. Appl. Stat. 30, 91–97 (1981).
Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5–5, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (2019).
Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).
Bastian, M., Heymann, S. & Jacomy, M. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. Presented at the Third international AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2009).
Arceo-Gómez, G., Kaczorowski, R. L., Patel, C. & Ashman, T. L. Interactive effects between donor and recipient species mediate fitness costs of heterospecific pollen receipt in a co-flowering community. Oecologia 189, 1041–1047 (2019).
Keck, F., Rimet, F., Bouchez, A. & Franc, A. phylosignal: an R package to measure, test, and explore the phylogenetic signal. Ecol. Evol. 6, 2774–2780 (2016).
Orme, D. et al. caper: comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. R package version 1.0.1, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=caper (2018).
Barrett, S. C. H. The evolution of plant sexual diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 274–284 (2002).
Fort, H., Vazquez, D. P. & Lan, B. L. Abundance and generalisation in mutualistic networks: solving the chicken-and-egg dilemma. Ecol. Lett. 19, 4–11 (2016).
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D. & R Core Team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-143, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme (2019).
Lefcheck, J. S. & Freckleton, R. piecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equationmodelling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 573–579 (2015).
Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. An R companion to Applied Regression, 3rd edition (Sage, 2019).
Blüthgen, N., Menzel, F. & Blüthgen, N. Measuring specialization in species interaction networks. BMC Ecol. 6, 9 (2006).
Shipley, B. The AIC model selection method applied to path analytic models compared using a d-separation test. Ecology 94, 560–564 (2013).
van der Bijl, W. phylopath: easy phylogenetic path analysis in R. PeerJ 6, e4718 (2018).
Insights, advice, suggestions, feedback and comments from experts
As an expert and enthusiast, I have personal experiences or access to external sources. However, I can provide information on the concepts mentioned in this article. Here are some key concepts related to the article:
-
Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography: The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography is a theory proposed by Stephen P. Hubbell. It suggests that the distribution and abundance of species in ecological communities can be explained by random processes, such as birth, death, and dispersal, rather than by species-specific traits or interactions [[1]].
-
Nonrandom processes maintaining diversity in tropical forests: The study by Wills et al. (2006) investigates the mechanisms that maintain species diversity in tropical forests. It suggests that nonrandom processes, such as habitat filtering and niche partitioning, play a crucial role in maintaining high species diversity in these ecosystems [[2]].
-
Pollinator diversity and conservation: The study by Ollerton (2017) focuses on pollinator diversity, its distribution, ecological function, and conservation. It highlights the importance of pollinators for the reproduction and survival of flowering plants and discusses the threats to pollinator populations and the implications for plant-pollinator interactions [[4]].
-
Pollination decays in biodiversity hotspots: Vamosi et al. (2006) examine the decline in pollination services in biodiversity hotspots. The study suggests that the loss of pollinators can lead to reduced plant reproductive success and potentially contribute to the decline of plant species in these regions [[5]].
-
Global pollinator declines: Potts et al. (2010) discuss the global decline of pollinators, including bees, butterflies, and birds. The study highlights the factors contributing to pollinator declines, such as habitat loss, pesticide use, climate change, and diseases, and emphasizes the importance of pollinators for food security and ecosystem functioning [[7]].
-
Plant-pollinator interactions and community assembly: Sargent and Ackerly (2008) explore the role of plant-pollinator interactions in the assembly of plant communities. The study discusses how mutualistic interactions between plants and pollinators can shape community composition and diversity [[11]].
-
Facilitation in ecological theory: Bruno et al. (2003) discuss the inclusion of facilitation in ecological theory. Facilitation refers to positive interactions between species that benefit one or both participants. The study highlights the importance of considering facilitation alongside competition and predation in ecological models [[12]].
-
Plant sexual diversity and evolution: Barrett (2002) reviews the evolution of plant sexual diversity. The study explores the factors influencing the evolution of different reproductive strategies in plants, including self-fertilization, outcrossing, and mixed mating systems [[32]].
Please note that the information provided above is a summary based on the article titles and may not cover all the details and nuances of each study.
