Search

Many nature‐based solutions (NBS), including urban greenspaces, urban agriculture and agroforestry, depend upon animal‐pollinated plants to sequester carbon or to provide other ecosystem services. Thus, long‐term success of these solutions also depends upon resilient pollinator communities. Despite their importance to functioning communities, a literature search revealed that 0%–3% of papers on NBS and related topics considered pollinators or pollination. Pollinators were more likely to be considered in the subgroup of papers on NBS related to agricultural production, where 12.5% considered pollination. Conservation of species interactions is essential to conservation of biodiversity and the sustained benefits of NBS. By applying our understanding of the ecology of plant‐pollinator mutualisms to the implementation of NBS, we can promote their functioning under future climatic conditions. In particular, we point to the need to identify keystone plants and pollinators, those species that contribute most to biodiversity maintenance, community stability and ecosystem function, and to leverage these species and their interactions in NBS and conservation efforts. We further advocate for the use of phylogenetic trait‐based analyses to understand the characteristics associated with keystoneness. Synthesis: Resilience of pollination services rests upon the responses of keystone species and their partners, and the likelihood that they continue to express traits that confer mutual benefit under future climates. By understanding the traits of species of outsized importance to their communities, we gain insight into the mechanisms underlying the resilience of pollination services and the NBS that rely on those services in a changing world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change is affecting species and their mutualists and can lead to the weakening or loss of important interspecific interactions. Through independent shifts in partner phenology and distribution, climatic stress can separate mutualists temporally or spatially, leading to alterations in partner functional traits and fitness. Here, we explored the effects of the loss of microbial mutualists on legume germination success and phenology. In particular, we assessed the effects of mutualism loss via soil sterilization, increased drought, and introduction to novel soils found beyond the current distributions of two focal legume species in subalpine environments. Through common garden experiments in controlled environments, we found evidence that soil sterilization (and consequent microbial absence) and dry soils caused species‐specific phenological delays of 2–5 weeks in germination, likely as a result of interaction loss between legumes and specialized germination‐promoting soil microbes, such as mutualistic rhizobia. Delays in germination caused by a mismatch between legumes and beneficial microbes could negatively affect legume fitness through increased plant–plant competition later in the season. Additionally, we found evidence of the presence of beneficial microbes beyond the current elevational range of one of our focal legumes, which may allow for expansion of the leading edge, although harsh abiotic factors in the alpine may hinder this. Alterations in the strength of soil microbe‐legume mutualisms may lead to reduced fitness and altered demography for both soil microbes and legumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growing concern about the influence of climate change on flowering plants, pollinators, and the mutualistic interactions between them has led to a recent surge in research. Much of this research has addressed the consequences of warming for phenological and distributional shifts. In contrast, relatively little is known about the physiological responses of plants and insect pollinators to climate warming and, in particular, how these responses might affect plant-pollinator interactions. Here, we summarize the direct physiological effects of temperature on flowering plants and pollinating insects to highlight ways in which plant and pollinator responses could affect floral resources for pollinators, and pollination success for plants, respectively. We also consider the overall effects of these responses on plant-pollinator interaction networks. Plant responses to warming, which include altered flower, nectar, and pollen production, could modify floral resource availability and reproductive output of pollinating insects. Similarly, pollinator responses, such as altered foraging activity, body size, and life span, could affect patterns of pollen flow and pollination success of flowering plants. As a result, network structure could be altered as interactions are gained and lost, weakened and strengthened, even without the gain or loss of species or temporal overlap. Future research that addresses not only how plant and pollinator physiology are affected by warming but also how responses scale up to affect interactions and networks should allow us to better understand and predict the effects of climate change on this important ecosystem service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]