Trophic interaction and diversity of cavity-nesting bees and wasps (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) in Atlantic forest fragments and in adjacent matrices

Abstract

The Brazilian Atlantic Forest is on the list of the 35 world hotspots with priority for conservation because it is home to one of the most diversified and threatened fauna and flora in the world. We studied the diversity and the food webs of cavity-nesting bees and wasps and their natural enemies (parasitoids and kleptoparasites) in three Atlantic forest fragments and adjacent matrices. Although the species composition in the forest fragments was different from the adjacent matrices, the alpha diversity stayed constant. Since the structure of the interaction networks between these species has not been altered with habitat simplification, we conclude that these relations are not shaped by recent environmental changes, but by phylogenetic relations established at a more remote time.

Landscape Structure Effects on Bee and Wasp Assemblages in a Semiarid Buffer Zone

“…In all the trap-nests we inserted ten bamboo internodes with 2-4 mm, 30 with 5-10mm, 30 with 11-15mm and 5 with 16-20 mm of diameter. A larger number of internodes with a diameter between 5 and 15 mm was used since this is the preferred size range of many species (Fricke 1991;Tylianakis et al 2005;Nascimento & Garofalo 2014;Rubene et al 2015;Nether et al 2019). Three trap-nests were placed at each of two sampling points in each landscape (see details in the section bellow), always under a tree for protection against sun and rain.…”

Multi-trophic communities re-establish with canopy cover and microclimate in a subtropical forest biodiversity experiment

“…In young regrowth forests, communities of bees and wasps changed with increasing canopy cover. It is known that cavity-nesting Hymenoptera species compositions are distinct for forest interiors and forest edges (Oliveira et al 2017 ; da Rocha-Filho et al 2017 ) and change with forest modification (Iantas et al 2017 ; Nether et al 2019 ). Likewise, young forests can be expected to harbor different communities, sometimes even with more species compared to old-natural forests (Yeeles et al 2017 ; Araújo et al 2018 ).…”

“…After forest clearance, the regrowth is typically characterized by non-forest species, but forest insects naturally disperse from surrounding forests into new forest plantations and re-establish species-rich communities within the first years of forest growth (Hilt and Fiedler 2005 ; Yeeles et al 2017 ; Araújo et al 2018 ; Hethcoat et al 2019 ). For example, comparing forest interiors to forest edges, or following forest thinning, removal and restoration, cavity-nesting bees, wasps and their natural enemies had comparable species numbers, but showed distinct community compositions (Oliveira et al 2017 ; Iantas et al 2017 ; da Rocha-Filho et al 2017 ; Araújo et al 2018 ; Nether et al 2019 ). Within these and further studies, plant diversity, biomass, canopy area and microclimate are discussed as drivers of multi-trophic forest insect communities (Stangler et al 2015 ; Mayr et al 2020 ).…”

Reviewing the use of bee trap nests for the study of interaction networks in agroecosystems: insights from its use in olive farms

“…No obstante, también hay trabajos que muestran resultados contrarios. Por ejemplo, Nether et al (2019) reportaron que la simplificación del hábitat no modificó la estructura de las redes en paisajes dominados por Bosque Atlántico brasileño. En otro ejemplo similar, Osorio et al (2015) utilizaron nidales artificiales para estudiar cómo varió a escala local (cultivos frente a arboledas) y a escala de paisaje (gradiente zonas agrícolas-bosques) tanto la comunidad de abejas y avispas solitarias que anidan en estas cavidades, como sus enemigos naturales y las redes de interacción entre ellos.…”