Options
Rader, Romina
Loading...
Given Name
Romina
Romina
Surname
Rader
UNE Researcher ID
une-id:rrader
Email
rrader@une.edu.au
Preferred Given Name
Romina
School/Department
School of Environmental and Rural Science
4 results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- PublicationA new model for ecological networks using species-level traits1. Recent studies on plant-pollinator networks have focused on explaining network structure through linkage rules, including spatio-temporal overlap, and phenotypic trait or phylogenetic signal complementarity. Few studies, however, have quantified the extent to which functional traits affect the probability of plants and pollinators interacting with each other. 2. Dirichlet-multinomial (DM) regression is a consumer-resource model for the interaction probabilities in a mutualistic network. This flexible model accommodates network heterogeneity through random effects and overdispersion and can estimate the contribution of species-level traits to plant-pollinator interactions. 3. Using artificial networks based on linkage rules and neutrality, we evaluate the performance of DM regression and explore the model's parameter space. We also analyse an empirical network in which the interaction probabilities are modelled by species characteristics. 4. Study results show that such random effects models can provide good fits to observed data. The characteristics pollinators seek in plant species may be better anticipated if species interactions are modelled by the functional traits that drive them.
- PublicationNon-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination(National Academy of Sciences, 2016)
; ;Bartomeus, Ignasi ;Bommarco, Riccardo ;Brittain, Claire ;Carvalheiro, Luisa G ;Chacoff, Natacha P ;Entling, Martin H ;Foully, Benjamin ;Freitas, Breno M ;Gemmill-Herren, Barbara ;Ghazoul, Jaboury ;Griffin, Sean R ;Garibaldi, Lucas A; ;Herbertsson, Lina ;Herzog, Felix ;Hipolito, Juliana; ;Jauker, Frank ;Klein, Alexandra-Maria ;Kleijn, David ;Krishnan, Smitha ;Lemos, Camila Q ;Garratt, Michael P D ;Lindstrom, Sandra A M ;Mandelik, Yael ;Monteiro, Victor M ;Nelson, Warrick ;Nilsson, Lovisa ;Pattemore, David E ;de O Pereira, Natalia ;Pisanty, Gideon ;Potts, Simon G ;Reemer, Menno ;Howlett, Brad G ;Rundlof, Maj ;Sheffield, Cory S ;Scheper, Jeroen ;Schuepp, Christof ;Smith, Henrik G ;Stanley, Dara A ;Stout, Jane C ;Szentgyorgyi, Hajnalka ;Taki, Hisatomo ;Vergara, Carlos H ;Winfree, Rachael ;Viana, Blandina F ;Woyciechowski, Michal ;Cunningham, Saul A ;Mayfield, Margaret M ;Arthur, Anthony DAndersson, Georg K SWild and managed bees are well documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25-50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines. - PublicationNative bees buffer the negative impact of climate warming on honey bee pollination of watermelon crops(Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2013)
; ;Reilly, James ;Bartomeus, IgnasiWinfree, RachaelIf climate change affects pollinator-dependent crop production, this will have important implications for global food security because insect pollinators contribute to production for 75% of the leading global food crops. We investigate whether climate warming could result in indirect impacts upon crop pollination services via an overlooked mechanism, namely temperature-induced shifts in the diurnal activity patterns of pollinators. Using a large data set on bee pollination of watermelon crops, we predict how pollination services might change under various climate change scenarios. Our results show that under the most extreme IPCC scenario (A1F1), pollination services by managed honey bees are expected to decline by 14.5%, whereas pollination services provided by most native, wild taxa are predicted to increase, resulting in an estimated aggregate change in pollination services of +4.5% by 2099. We demonstrate the importance of native biodiversity in buffering the impacts of climate change, because crop pollination services would decline more steeply without the native, wild pollinators. More generally, our study provides an important example of how biodiversity can stabilize ecosystem services against environmental change. - PublicationWild Pollinators Enhance Fruit Set of Crops Regardless of Honey Bee Abundance(American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2013)
;Garibaldi, Lucas A ;Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf ;Bartomeus, Ignasi ;Benjamin, Faye ;Boreux, Virginie ;Cariveau, Daniel ;Chacoff, Natacha P ;Dudenhoffer, Jan H ;Freitas, Breno M ;Ghazoul, Jaboury ;Greenleaf, Sarah ;Hipolito, Juliana ;Winfree, Rachael ;Holzschuh, Andrea ;Howlett, Brad G ;Isaacs, Rufus ;Javorek, Steven K ;Kennedy, Christina M ;Krewenka, Kristin M ;Krishnan, Smitha ;Mandelik, Yael ;Mayfield, Margaret M ;Motzke, Iris ;Aizen, Marcelo A ;Munyuli, Theodore ;Nault, Brian A ;Otieno, Mark ;Petersen, Jessica ;Pisanty, Gideon ;Potts, Simon G; ;Ricketts, Taylor H ;Rundlof, Maj ;Seymour, Colin L ;Bommarco, Riccardo ;Schuepp, Christof ;Szentgyorgyi, Hajnalka ;Taki, Hisatomo ;Tscharntke, Teja ;Vergara, Carlos H ;Viana, Blandina F ;Wanger, Thomas C ;Westphal, Catrin ;Williams, Neal ;Klein, Alexandra M ;Cunningham, Saul A ;Kremen, Claire ;Carvalheiro, Luisa G ;Harder, Lawrence DAfik, OhadThe diversity and abundance of wild insect pollinators have declined in many agricultural landscapes. Whether such declines reduce crop yields, or are mitigated by managed pollinators such as honey bees, is unclear. We found universally positive associations of fruit set with flower visitation by wild insects in 41 crop systems worldwide. In contrast, fruit set increased significantly with flower visitation by honey bees in only 14% of the systems surveyed. Overall, wild insects pollinated crops more effectively; an increase in wild insect visitation enhanced fruit set by twice as much as an equivalent increase in honey bee visitation. Visitation by wild insects and honey bees promoted fruit set independently, so pollination by managed honey bees supplemented, rather than substituted for, pollination by wild insects. Our results suggest that new practices for integrated management of both honey bees and diverse wild insect assemblages will enhance global crop yields.