Listmania: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Lists of Garden Plants to Help Pollinators

Garbuzov, Mihail; Ratnieks, Francis L. W.

doi:10.1093/biosci/biu150

Cited by 71 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Plethora of foliage plants, ornamental grasses, or double-flower plants which are useless for insect visitors are grown [11,16]. Currently, rock gardens are very popular and many massflowering species are recommended [17].…”

Section: Digital Signaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…To counteract the pollinator decline, the restoration and promotion of flowering plants that ensure food resources is necessary both in urban [6] and agricultural areas [7]. Cultivation of nectar and pollen plants, including ornamentals, may help pollinators [8][9][10][11][12]. Therefore, the evaluation of nectar and pollen reward is one of the ways…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nectar and pollen production in Arabis procurrens Waldst. & Kit. and Iberis sempervirens L. (Brassicaceae)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological environment in urban areas is specific in many aspects. There are evidences that ornamental plants cultivated in local urban gardens may help in conservation of pollinators. In this study, the flowering pattern, the abundance of flowering, nectar and pollen production as well as insect visitation in Arabis procurrens Waldst. & Kit. and Iberis sempervirens L. were investigated. The species were grown in the UMCS Botanical Garden in Lublin, southeastern Poland. Arabis procurrens bloomed from the middle of April until middle of May and I. sempervirens from the end of April until middle of June. In both species, most flowers opened in the morning hours (40-45% of total were opened by 8:00 h GMT + 2 h). The average sugar yield of A. procurrens was ca. 53% lower compared to I. sempervirens (mean = 1.08 g/m 2 and 2.32 g/m 2 , respectively). In both species, considerable differences in the amount of produced sugars were noted between years. The mass of pollen produced in the flowers of A. procurrens was approx. 35% lower compared to that of I. sempervirens (mean = 0.06 mg and 0.09 mg per flower, respectively). Pollen produced per unit area was correlated with the number of flowers. On average, the species produced 1.46 g (A. procurrens) and 2.54 g (I. sempervirens) of pollen per 1 m 2 . The flowers of A. procurrens attracted mainly dipterans (56.3% of total visitors), while I. sempervirens lured chiefly solitary bees (47.4% of total visitors), however in both cases, honeybees, bumblebees and lepidopterans were also recorded. The A. procurrens and I. sempervirens due to flowering in early spring period may be promoted for use in small gardens (rock or pot gardens) for both aesthetic value and as plants that support insect visitors in nectar and pollen rewards.

show abstract

Section: Digital Signaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nectar and pollen production in Arabis procurrens Waldst. & Kit. and Iberis sempervirens L. (Brassicaceae)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Greater awareness of global‐scale declines of insect pollinators has prompted nature enthusiasts to create gardens containing plants attractive to pollinators, with the potential benefit of providing resources to pollinators and promoting their conservation. Planting flowers as sources of nectar and pollen could provide food, counter habitat loss, and bolster pollinator populations by increasing connectivity between fragmented habitat patches (Goddard et al ., ; Vergnes et al ., ; Garbuzov & Ratnieks, ). Gardens can also offer resources such as caterpillar host plants for butterflies and nesting sites for native bees (Cutting & Tallamy, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Do characteristics of pollinator‐friendly gardens predict the diversity, abundance, and reproduction of butterflies?

Majewska

Sims

Wenger

et al. 2018

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollinator declines have motivated efforts to plant nectar and host plants for butterflies and other pollinators, but whether gardens promote pollinator conservation requires further investigation. We established garden plots to determine whether plant type (native vs. exotic) and weed maintenance (low or high) influence adult butterfly abundance and species richness, and the abundance and survival of immature stages of four species (monarch, queen, black swallowtail, and gulf fritillary). To assess how predator activity and mortality of immature stages might differ inside gardens compared to other suitable habitat patches, we compared caterpillar survival on sentinel host plants placed within and outside of plots. The abundance and species richness of adult butterflies (all taxa) increased with the number of flowering plants per plot, but did not depend on plant type or weeding treatment. Exotic plots had greater adult monarch and gulf fritillary abundances, greater monarch and queen egg counts, and lower black swallowtail caterpillar counts relative to native plots. The survival of immature stages (egg to instar 5) ranged from 2 to 13% and was similar across plots, except for gulf fritillary larvae, which had higher survival in exotic plots. Monarch caterpillar mortality risk was higher on sentinel plants placed inside plots, relative to those outside of plots. This study suggests that garden plots attracted a diversity of adult butterflies and supported the reproduction of focal species. Given lower immature monarch survival within versus outside of plots, further work is needed to examine natural enemy pressure within pollinator gardens.

show abstract

“…With such choice, gardeners seeking advice as to which species to plant may turn to one of the many lists of ''insect-friendly'' garden flowers that are available. However, an analysis of 15 published lists found several shortcomings, including the fact that few were based on empirical data or gave any indication as to how they were constructed (Garbuzov and Ratnieks 2014a). Overall, there is a need for recommended lists of insect-friendly flowers to be put on a firmer scientific basis (Corbet et al 2001;Garbuzov and Ratnieks 2014b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five of these are featured on the Butterfly Conservation website (2014) as ''the best plants for summer nectar''. Vickery (1998) was the only list reviewed by Garbuzov and Ratnieks (2014a) which included information on its assembly. However, even this list provides little information on how its recommendations were derived, or which butterfly species are attracted to which plants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Garden varieties: How attractive are recommended garden plants to butterflies?

Shackleton

Ratnieks

2015

J Insect Conserv

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One way the public can engage in insect conservation is through wildlife gardening, including the growing of insect-friendly flowers as sources of nectar. However, plant varieties differ in the types of insects they attract. To determine which garden plants attracted which butterflies, we counted butterflies nectaring on 11 varieties of summer-flowering garden plants in a rural garden in East Sussex, UK. These plants were all from a list of 100 varieties considered attractive to British butterflies, and included the five varieties specifically listed by the UK charity Butterfly Conservation as best for summer nectar. A total of 2659 flower visits from 14 butterfly and one moth species were observed. We performed a principal components analysis which showed contrasting patterns between the species attracted to Origanum vulgare and Buddleia davidii. The ''butterfly bush'' Buddleia attracted many nymphalines, such as the peacock, Inachis io, but very few satyrines such as the gatekeeper, Pyronia tithonus, which mostly visited Origanum. Eupatorium cannibinum had the highest Simpson's Diversity score of 0.75, while Buddleia and Origanum were lower, scoring 0.66 and 0.50 respectively. No one plant was good at attracting all observed butterfly species, as each attracted only a subset of the butterfly community. We conclude that to create a butterfly-friendly garden, a variety of plant species are required as nectar sources for butterflies. Furthermore, garden plant recommendations can probably benefit from being more precise as to the species of butterfly they attract.

show abstract

Listmania: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Lists of Garden Plants to Help Pollinators

Cited by 71 publications

References 37 publications

Nectar and pollen production in Arabis procurrens Waldst. & Kit. and Iberis sempervirens L. (Brassicaceae)

Nectar and pollen production in Arabis procurrens Waldst. & Kit. and Iberis sempervirens L. (Brassicaceae)

Do characteristics of pollinator‐friendly gardens predict the diversity, abundance, and reproduction of butterflies?

Garden varieties: How attractive are recommended garden plants to butterflies?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About