IGNASI BARTOMEUS
QUI MENJA A QUI?
LES INVASIONS BIOLÒGIQUES COM UNA PEÇA DISRUPTIVA DE LES XARXES TRÒFIQUES
TEXT
SOSPITOSOS HABITUALS:
B = Ocells M = MamÃfers R = Reptils Doherty et al 2016
QUI MENJA QUI?
QUI MENJA QUI?
TEXT
Polinizadores
Plantas
Bartomeus et al. 2008, 2010, 2016
Plantas
Polinizadores
Plantas
Polinizadores
Planta invasora
Bartomeus et al. 2008, 2010, 2016
Plantas
Polinizadores
Plantas
Polinizadores
Planta invasora
Bartomeus et al. 2008, 2010, 2016
Plantas
Polinizadores
Plantas
Polinizadores
Planta invasora
Bartomeus et al. 2008, 2010, 2016
Plantas
Polinizadores
Plantas
Polinizadores
Planta invasora
Bartomeus et al. 2008, 2010, 2016
(a)
no. species per module
14
12
10
8 (b)
6 uninvaded
a
Figure 4. Mean (+1 s.e.) module size ( module) of modules of uninvaded pla modules of invaded networks not conta and modules of invaded networks conta
Figure 3. Example of the modular structure of (a) an uninvaded plant –
Of the 469 native plant an in both the uninvaded and the in pair, 111 species (23.7%) show invasion, with plants showing mo Albretch al. 2012 tors (19.2%) (x21 Âźet7:65, p Âź 0.00
(a)
no. species per module
14
12
10
8 (b)
6 uninvaded
a
Figure 4. Mean (+1 s.e.) module size ( module) of modules of uninvaded pla modules of invaded networks not conta and modules of invaded networks conta
Figure 3. Example of the modular structure of (a) an uninvaded plant –
Of the 469 native plant an in both the uninvaded and the in pair, 111 species (23.7%) show invasion, with plants showing mo Albrecht et7:65, al. 2012 tors (19.2%) (x21 Âź p Âź 0.00
QUI MENJA QUI?
Varroa destructor
Nosema bombi
Fig. 1. Summary of Bombus individuals surveyed from 382 collection locations for eight target species, including h current sightings (pie charts) and associated photographs of hypothesized declining western B. occidentalis (A (G), and B. terricola (H); stable species are represented by the western B. bifarius (B) and B. vosnesenskii (C), and th (F). Sizes of the pie charts indicate total number of individuals surveyed at each location; size of the orange seg target species collected at that site (some locations are pooled across sites for visual clarity; for detailed data, ref represents the modeled distribution of each target species from unique presence localities obtained from natu Niche Models). Photograph A (B. occidentalis) taken by D. Ditchburn, B (B. bifarius) by L. Solter, C (B. vosnesenskii) b E (B. bimaculatus) by J. WhitďŹ eld, F (B. impatiens) by J. Lucier, G (B. afďŹ nis) by J. James-Heinz, and H (B. terricola 2 of 6 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1014743108
Cameron et al. 2016
Fig. 1. Summary of Bombus individuals surveyed from 382 collection locations for eight target species, including h current sightings (pie charts) and associated photographs of hypothesized declining western B. occidentalis (A (G), and B. terricola (H); stable species are represented by the western B. bifarius (B) and B. vosnesenskii (C), and th (F). Sizes of the pie charts indicate total number of individuals surveyed at each location; size of the orange seg target species collected at that site (some locations are pooled across sites for visual clarity; for detailed data, ref represents the modeled distribution of each target species from unique presence localities obtained from natu Niche Models). Photograph A (B. occidentalis) taken by D. Ditchburn, B (B. bifarius) by L. Solter, C (B. vosnesenskii) b E (B. bimaculatus) by J. WhitďŹ eld, F (B. impatiens) by J. Lucier, G (B. afďŹ nis) by J. James-Heinz, and H (B. terricola 2 of 6 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1014743108
Nosema bombi
Cameron et al. 2016
QUI MENJA QUI?
75% depen de polinitzadors
Klein et al. 2007
pollinator abundance
400
total 29% decrease
300 200
exotic 150% increase native 87% decrease
100 0 0.4
0.6 0.8 proportion agriculture
1.0
Figure 3. The relationship between aggregate pollinator abundance and theet al 2017 Stavert
pollinator abundance
400
total 29% decrease
300 200
exotic 150% increase native 87% decrease
100 0 0.4
0.6 0.8 proportion agriculture
1.0
Figure 3. The relationship between aggregate pollinator abundance and theet al 2017 Stavert
pollinator abundance
400
total 29% decrease
300 200
exotic 150% increase native 87% decrease
100 0 0.4
0.6 0.8 proportion agriculture
1.0
Figure 3. The relationship between aggregate pollinator abundance and theet al 2017 Stavert
QUI MENJA QUI?
Other Orange grove Orange Woodland grove Woodland
c)
c)
After
Orange Orangegrove grove Woodland Woodland
After
Other Woodland
Other Other
Woodland
Woodland Woodland
Honeybee Honeybeespillover spillover
Orange grove Orange Woodland grove Woodland Other
Woodland Other
Woodland
Change in network structure Change structure Cambios en in la network estructura de la red
Honeybee spillover Honeybee spillover
high competition low apparent competition Altaapparent competencia high apparent competition low apparent competition Change in network Change structure in network structure Baja competencia
Baja de lowequidad interaction high apparent competition high apparent competition low interaction evenness interacciones evenness
Plant reproductive success
Alta segregaciรณn de nicho
high interaction highequidad interaction Alta evenness de evenness interacciones
high interaction evenness
{
{{
high link density high link density Alta densidad de high link density high link density low niche low niche interacciones low niche lowsegregation niche segregation segregation segregation Baja segregaciรณn
{
{
{{
high niche high niche high niche segregation high niche segregation segregation segregation
Plant reproductive lant reproductive success success
low link density link density Bajalow densidad de low link density low link density interacciones
high interaction evenness
{
low interaction evenness
Plant reproductive success
low interaction evenness
low apparent competition low apparent competition
de nicho
Magrach et al. 2017
10
0
10
20
30
40 km
Low grove cover
Other Orange grove Orange Woodland grove Woodland b
c)
c)
High grove cover
After
After
N=8
Other Other
Woodland
Other
Orange grove Orange Woodland grove Woodland Other
Woodland Woodland Woodland
N=9
Honeybee spillover Honeybee After spillover
Woodland
Low grove cover N=9
During Orange Orangegrove grove Woodland Woodland Orange grove
Other Woodland
N=8
Woodland Other
Woodland
Woodland Other Woodland Change in network structure Change structure Cambios en in la network estructura de la red Orange grove
c
Honeybee spillover Honeybee spilloverAfter
high competition low apparent competition Altaapparent competencia high apparent competition low apparent competition Change in network Change structure in network structure Baja competencia Orange grove Woodland Other Woodland Baja de lowequidad interaction high apparent competition high apparent competition low apparent competition low apparent competition low interaction evenness interacciones Honeybee spillover evenness
low interaction evenness
high interaction evenness
Change in network structure High apparent competition
High interaction evenness
Plant reproductive success
Low link density
Alta segregaciรณn High niche de nicho segregation
High Low Grove cover
{{
high link density high link density Alta densidad de high link density high link density low niche low niche interacciones low niche lowsegregation niche segregation segregation segregation Baja segregaciรณn
{
{
{{
high niche high niche high niche segregation high niche segregation segregation segregation
Plant reproductive lant reproductive success success Exito reproductivo โ จ Plant reproductive Plant reproductive success plantas success
{
Low interaction low link density evenness link density Bajalow densidad de low link density low link density interacciones
high interaction evenness
Low apparent competition
{
low interaction evenness
high interaction highequidad interaction Alta evenness de evenness interacciones
High link density Low niche segregation
de nicho
Magrach et al. 2017
High
Low Landscape type
C. crispus no. pollen tubes
e
High
Low Landscape type
80 Quantile 0.1 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.9
60
40
20
0
10
20
Honeybee visits
on for the two most abundant plant species. a, Scatter plot showing the effect of Magrach et al. 2017 or each of ten mother C. salvifolius plants in woodlands surrounded by high (orange)
QUI MENJA QUI?