Contrasting responses in community structure and phenology of migratory and non‐migratory pollinators to urbanization

Abstract

Aim Anthropogenic landscape change, such as urbanization, can affect community structure and ecological interactions. Furthermore, changes in ambient temperature and resource availability due to urbanization may affect migratory and non‐migratory species differently. However, the response of migratory species to urbanization is poorly investigated, and knowledge for invertebrates in particular is lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether there was a shift in community structure and phenology of hoverflies in urban landscapes, depending on migratory status. Location Switzerland. Methods Using a paired design, we compared urban and rural landscapes to investigate the impact of urbanization on the abundance, diversity and phenology of hoverflies. Furthermore, we tested whether migratory and non‐migratory species responded differently to urbanization. Results We observed a difference in the response of migratory and non‐migratory hoverfly communities. Although the abundance of hoverflies was higher in the rural ecosystem, driven by a high abundance of migratory species, there was no difference in species richness between the land use types. However, the community structure of non‐migratory species was significantly different between urban and rural ecosystems. The phenology of hoverflies differed between the two ecosystems, with an earlier appearance in the year of migratory species in urban landscapes. Main conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the response of migratory insect communities to urbanization. We demonstrated that migratory and non‐migratory hoverflies respond differently to urbanization. This highlights the importance of differentiating between trait and mobility groups to understand community assemblage patterns in anthropogenic landscapes. The differences in phenology supports the growing evidence that urbanization not only affects the phenology of vegetation, but also affects the higher trophic levels. Changes in the phenology and community composition of species as a result of anthropogenic landscape change may have important implications for the maintenance of key ecosystem functions, such as pollination.

Income Vulnerability of West African Farming Households to Losses in Pollination Services: A Case Study from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

“…Within West African countries urban growth and agricultural intensification can trigger changes in biodiversity leading to either a homogenization or a reduction of important insect communities affecting the ecosystem service of pollination [35][36][37][38][39]. The fact that urban farming households in Ouagadougou were highly specialized in the cultivation and marketing of crops which often rely substantially upon insect pollination and from which they earn most of their total household income, made these households vulnerable to loss of pollination services by insects.…”

Mechanisms and Consequences of Partial Migration in Insects

“…Urbanization can also increase the propensity for residency or overwintering through the provision of winter refugia or foraging resources, such as garden flowers. Luder et al (2018) demonstrated that migratory hoverflies appeared earlier in the season in urban areas compared to agricultural areas, indicating that cities may provide favorable conditions for overwintering. Warming temperatures have also led to an increase in overwintering of migratory species in the UK, such as the red admiral butterfly (Vanessa atalanta), although much of the population still immigrates to the UK each spring (Sparks et al, 2005;Fox and Dennis, 2010).…”

The relative performance of sampling methods for native bees: an empirical test and review of the literature

“…, Luder et al. ). Similarly, in arid regions, management of urban flora can extend plant bloom, with benefits to pollinators (Neil et al.…”