Alien invasive species have strategies that can maintain fitness in a variety of environments. This flexibility is associated with environmental tolerance in several traits, such as allocation of resources to shoots versus roots, clonal versus sexual reproduction, and survival of seedlings. These traits were explored in the chandelier plant (Kalanchoe delagoensis Eckl. & Zeyh.), which has invasive populations in several countries. Light and water tolerance and herbicide treatments were tested on plantlet survival. Plantlet survival in the most extreme cases (full sunlight and no watering) was close to 30%, whereas in less severe conditions (water and shaded), it was close to 100%. Stress conditions triggered the onset of plantlet production from the margin of leaves, which increased clonality. Biomass was allocated primarily to aboveground structures. Although all herbicides resulted in high plantlet mortality (>85%), only 2,4-D and glyphosate+2,4-D amine achieved the maximum recorded mortality a few days after the chemical application. The high tolerance of K. delagoensis plantlets to varying conditions shows that under stress, plantlet production is enhanced as survival of established individuals decreases. Biomass is primarily aboveground, which can potentially alter nitrogen and carbon in poor arid environments, and the proportion of the biomass assigned to belowground roots increased with an increase in sunlight received. Even though the chemical treatments 2,4-D and glyphosate+2,4-D amine have been shown to be the only effective treatments, the 2,4-D treatment may be the most viable (cost+quantity) to reduce the propagation of K. delagoensis. Plantlets have become the main reason for population persistence, partially due to the plant’s environmental tolerance and ability to reproduce asexually in short time periods. Susceptibility of plantlets to the two herbicides presents a means to adequately manage invasions of K. delagoensis in Mexico.

Pathogens and parasites of solitary bees have been studied for decades, but the microbiome as a whole is poorly understood for most taxa. Comparative analyses of microbiome features such as composition, abundance, and specificity, can shed light on bee ecology and the evolution of host–microbe interactions. Here we study microbiomes of ground-nesting cellophane bees (Colletidae: Diphaglossinae). From a microbial point of view, the diphaglossine genus Ptiloglossa is particularly remarkable: their larval provisions are liquid and smell consistently of fermentation. We sampled larval provisions and various life stages from wild nests of Ptiloglossa arizonensis and two species of closely related genera: Caupolicana yarrowi and Crawfordapis luctuosa. We also sampled nectar collected by P. arizonensis. Using 16S rRNA gene sequencing, we find that larval provisions of all three bee species are near-monocultures of lactobacilli. Nectar communities are more diverse, suggesting ecological filtering. Shotgun metagenomic and phylogenetic data indicate that Ptiloglossa culture multiple species and strains of Apilactobacillus, which circulate among bees and flowers. Larval lactobacilli disappear before pupation, and hence are likely not vertically transmitted, but rather reacquired from flowers as adults. Thus, brood cell microbiomes are qualitatively similar between diphaglossine bees and other solitary bees: lactobacilli-dominated, environmentally acquired, and non-species-specific. However, shotgun metagenomes provide evidence of a shift in bacterial abundance. As compared with several other bee species, Ptiloglossa have much higher ratios of bacterial to plant biomass in larval provisions, matching the unusually fermentative smell of their brood cells. Overall, Ptiloglossa illustrate a path by which hosts can evolve quantitatively novel symbioses: not by acquiring or domesticating novel symbionts, but by altering the microenvironment to favor growth of already widespread and generalist microbes.

Effectively promoting the stability and quality of ecosystem services involves the successful management of domesticated species and the control of introduced species. In the pollinator literature, interest and concern regarding pollinator species and pollinator health dramatically increased in recent years. Concurrently, the use of loaded terms when discussing domesticated and non-native species may have increased. As a result, pollinator ecology has inherited both the confusion associated with invasion biology’s lack of a standardized terminology to describe native, managed, or introduced species as well as loaded terms with very strong positive or negative connotations. The recent explosion of research on native bees and alternative pollinators, coupled with the use of loaded language, has led to a perceived divide between native bee and managed bee researchers. In comparison, the bird literature discusses the study of managed (poultry) and non-managed (all other birds) species without an apparent conflict with regard to the use of terms with strong connotations or sentiment. Here, we analyze word usage when discussing non-managed and managed bee and bird species in 3614 ecological and evolutionary biology papers published between 1990 and 2019. Using time series analyses, we demonstrate how the use of specific descriptor terms (such as wild, introduced, and exotic) changed over time. We then conducted co-citation network analyses to determine whether papers that share references have similar terminology and sentiment. We predicted a negative language bias towards introduced species and positive language bias towards native species. We found an association between the term invasive and bumble bees and we observed significant increases in the usage of more ambiguous terms to describe non-managed species, such as wild. We detected a negative sentiment associated with the research area of pathogen spillover in bumble bees, which corroborates the subjectivity that language carries. We recommend using terms that acknowledge the role of human activities on pathogen spillover and biological invasions. Avoiding the usage of loaded terms when discussing managed and non-managed species will advance our understanding and promote effective and productive communication across scientists, general public, policy makers and other stake holders in our society.

1. The maintenance of interactions between plants and their floral visitors depends on factors such as resource variability, seasonality, and population dynamics. Changes in water availability along with different types and levels of anthropogenic disturbance may influence how plants and pollinators interact, especially in arid environments.2. In a semi-arid area of the southernmost Chihuahuan Desert (Mexico), we surveyed bee-plant interactions in the dry and rainy season at sites that differed in disturbance type. We used a mutualistic network approach to analyse our data.3. We collected 946 bee individuals belonging to 32 bee species, almost a third of the total richness previously reported for Querétaro state. We detected a strong impact of seasonality on the structure of ecological interactions, with more complex and robust interactions among bee and plant species in the rainy season. 4. We did not find statistical support for a relationship among disturbance, nestedness, or niche overlap. We did find disturbance negatively affected plant robustness to secondary extinctions. 5. Four plants: Echinocactus platyacanthus, Opuntia stenopetala, Senna wislizeni var.painteri and Cylindropuntia imbricata comprised the core species that were primarily responsible for the resilience of the bee communities. The following bees conformed the generalist core of species: Diadasia rinconis, Lasioglossum (Dialictus) sp. 1, Apis mellifera, and Augochlorella pomoniella.6. Overall, network nestedness and robustness differed significantly between seasons but not among sites with different levels of disturbance.