The explanation for this paradoxical result is that most flower species are pollination generalists. We conclude that although pollinator colour preferences seem to condition plant-pollinator interactions, the selective force behind these preferences has not been strong enough to mediate the appearance and maintenance of tight colour-based plant-pollinator associations.

No abstract

Large‐scale spatial variability in plant–pollinator communities (e.g. along geographic gradients, across different landscapes) is relatively well understood. However, we know much less about how these communities vary at small scales within a uniform landscape. Plants are sessile and highly sensitive to microhabitat conditions, whereas pollinators are highly mobile and, for the most part, display generalist feeding habits. Therefore, we expect plants to show greater spatial variability than pollinators. We analysed the spatial heterogeneity of a community of flowering plants and their pollinators in 40 plots across a 40‐km2 area within an uninterrupted Mediterranean scrubland. We recorded 3577 pollinator visits to 49 plant species. The pollinator community (170 species) was strongly dominated by honey bees (71.8% of the visits recorded). Flower and pollinator communities showed similar beta‐diversity, indicating that spatial variability was similar in the two groups. We used path analysis to establish the direct and indirect effects of flower community distribution and honey bee visitation rate (a measure of the use of floral resources by this species) on the spatial distribution of the pollinator community. Wild pollinator abundance was positively related to flower abundance. Wild pollinator visitation rate was negatively related to flower abundance, suggesting that floral resources were not limiting. Pollinator and flower richness were positively related. Pollinator species composition was weakly related to flower species composition, reflecting the generalist nature of flower–pollinator interactions and the opportunistic nature of pollinator flower choices. Honey bee visitation rate did not affect the distribution of the wild pollinator community. Overall, we show that, in spite of the apparent physiognomic uniformity, both flowers and pollinators display high levels of heterogeneity, resulting in a mosaic of idiosyncratic local communities. Our results provide a measure of the background of intrinsic heterogeneity within a uniform habitat, with potential consequences on low‐scale ecosystem function and microevolutionary patterns.

Pollinators are threatened worldwide and strategies and measures to support their conservation are proliferating. Among them, the approach “Farming with Alternative Pollinators” (FAP) aims to support pollinators by seeding strips of pollinator-attracting cultivated plants surrounding the crops, and simultaneously providing income to the farmer. In this study we assessed whether this approach supports pollinator diversity in agro-ecosystems and increases flower visitor diversity and abundance in faba bean fields in north-west Morocco. We tested the impact of FAP using a variety of marketable habitat enhancement plants (MHEP): flax, coriander, arugula, chia and canola. A total of 62 pollinator species were recorded, among which almost half of them are new records for the region. Most wild pollinators recorded in faba bean were digger bees (genus Anthophora) and long-horn bees (genus Eucera). MHEP shared diverse flower visitors with faba bean and hosted diverse pollinator groups that did not meet their food requirements from the main crop. The FAP approach highly increased flower visitor abundance and diversity in the whole FAP fields, however it did not generate significant pollinator spillover towards the main crop. Implications for insect conservation: our results show that the FAP approach is an effective approach to mitigate pollinator decline in agro-ecosystems.

No abstract