Climate warming affects the phenology, local abundance and large-scale distribution of plants and pollinators. Despite this, there is still limited knowledge of how elevated temperatures affect plant-pollinator mutualisms and how changed availability of mutualistic partners influences the persistence of interacting species. Here we review the evidence of climate warming effects on plants and pollinators and discuss how their interactions may be affected by increased temperatures. The onset of flowering in plants and first appearance dates of pollinators in several cases appear to advance linearly in response to recent temperature increases. Phenological responses to climate warming may therefore occur at parallel magnitudes in plants and pollinators, although considerable variation in responses across species should be expected. Despite the overall similarities in responses, a few studies have shown that climate warming may generate temporal mismatches among the mutualistic partners. Mismatches in pollination interactions are still rarely explored and their demographic consequences are largely unknown. Studies on multi-species plant-pollinator assemblages indicate that the overall structure of pollination networks probably are robust against perturbations caused by climate warming. We suggest potential ways of studying warming-caused mismatches and their consequences for plant-pollinator interactions, and highlight the strengths and limitations of such approaches.

No abstract

Knowledge about plant-plant interactions for pollinator service at the plant community level is still scarce, although such interactions may be important to seed production and hence the population dynamics of individual plant species and the species compositions of communities. An important step towards a better understanding of pollination interactions at the community level is to assess if the variation in floral traits among plant species explain the variation in flower visitation frequency among those species. We investigated the relative importance of various floral traits for the visitation frequency of all insects, and bumblebees and flies separately, to plant species by measuring the visitation frequency to all insect-pollinated species in a community during an entire flowering season. Visitation frequency was identified to be strongly positive related to the visual display area and the date of peak flowering of plant species. Categorical variables, such as flower form and symmetry, were important to the visitation frequency of flies only. We constructed floral similarity measures based on the species' floral traits and found that the floral similarity for all species' traits combined and the continuous traits separately were positively related to individual visitation frequency. On the other hand, plant species with similar categorical floral traits did not have similar visitation frequencies. In conclusion, our results show that continuous traits, such as flower size and/or density, are more important for the variation in visitation frequency among plant species than thought earlier. Furthermore, differences in visitation frequency among pollinator groups give a poor support to the expectations derived from the classical pollination syndromes.

The pollination syndrome hypothesis has provided a major conceptual framework for how plants and pollinators interact. However, the assumption of specialization in pollination systems and the reliability of floral traits in predicting the main pollinators have been questioned recently. In addition, the relationship between ecological and evolutionary specialization in pollination interactions is still poorly understood. We used data of 62 plant species from three communities across southern Norway to test: (1) the relationships between floral traits and the identity of pollinators, (2) the association between floral traits (evolutionary specialization) and ecological generalization, and (3) the consistency of both relationships across communities. Floral traits significantly affected the identity of pollinators in the three communities in a way consistent with the predictions derived from the pollination syndrome concept. However, hover flies and butterflies visited flowers with different shapes in different communities, which we mainly attribute to among-community variation in pollinator assemblages. Interestingly, ecological generalization depended more on the community-context (i.e. the plant and pollinator assemblages in the communities) than on specific floral traits. While open yellow and white flowers were the most generalist in two communities, they were the most specialist in the alpine community. Our results warn against the use of single measures of ecological generalization to question the pollination syndrome concept, and highlight the importance of community comparisons to assess the pollination syndromes, and to understand the relationships between ecological and evolutionary specialization in plant-pollinator interactions.

1. Does the diversity and abundance of one trophic level affect another? Several studies at the landscape level have found a positive relationship between the diversity of floral resources and the diversity and abundance of pollinators. However, little is known about the relationship between these trophic levels on a smaller spatial scale, and the importance of blossom density relative to plant species richness in predicting abundance and richness of different flower visitor groups.2. This study used a small-scale approach to investigate how, and if, the diversity and abundance of floral resources in study plots affected the visitation activity of different flower visitor groups. During 201 observation periods between late May and midAugust 2003, 3682 visits were observed. Bumblebees (60%), muscoids (17%), syrphids (9%), and beetles (5%) were the most abundant flower visitors.3. Regression analysis was used to investigate the relationship between blossom density and plant species richness with visitation activity, including the probability of presence in plots, the visits within plots, and the visitor richness of the most abundant pollinator groups.4. The activity of beetles, bumblebees, and muscoids was positively predicted by the variation in blossom density, while syrphid activity was better predicted by plant species richness. Overall, the models for beetles and bumblebees explained much more of the variation in activity compared with the models for the dipterans, and blossom density was a better predictor of both flower visitor richness and activity than was plant species richness.