Almonds are one of the most economically valuable crops globally and require pollination by insects to optimise the production of high quality, marketable nuts. The Western honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) is an efficient pollinator of almond, and hives are often placed in almond orchards to provide pollination services.

While several studies have investigated pollen collection by honey bees, little is known about the usage of almond and other pollen sources by individual hives during almond bloom.

Invertebrates are critical to life on earth but suffer entrenched neglect through public apathy, political ignorance, and scientific knowledge limitations. A fundamental shift in attitudes toward invertebrates is critical to prevent further biodiversity loss. Accurate and effective science communication is an essential tool to address the challenges of invertebrate conservation at a time when society is more online and more connected than ever before.

Aim: Understanding how climate conditions influence plant–pollinator interactions at the global scale is crucial to understand how pollinator communities and ecosystem function respond to environmental change. Here, we investigate whether climate drives differences in network roles of the main insect pollinator orders: Diptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera.

Location: Global.

Time period: 1968–2020.

Major taxa studied: Diptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera.

Methods: We collated plant–pollinator networks from 26 countries and territories across the five main Köppen–Geiger climate zones. In total, we compiled data from 101 networks that included >1500 plant species from 167 families and >2800 pollinator species from 163 families. We assessed differences in the composition of plant–pollinator interactions among climate zones using a permutational ANOVA. We calculated standard network metrics for pollinator taxonomic groups and used Bayesian generalized mixed models to test whether climate zone influenced the proportion of pollinator network links and the level of pollinator generalism.

Results: We found that climate is a strong driver of compositional dissimilarities between plant–pollinator interactions. Relative to other taxa, bees and flies made up the greatest proportion of network links across climate zones. When network size was accounted for, bees were the most generalist pollinator group in the tropics, whereas non-bee Hymenoptera were the most generalist in arid zones, and syrphid flies were the most generalist in polar networks.

Main conclusions: We provide empirical evidence at the global scale that climate strongly influences the roles of different pollinator taxa within networks. Importantly, non-bee taxa, particularly flies, play central network roles across most climate zones, despite often being overlooked in pollination research and conservation. Our results identify the need for greater understanding of how global environmental change affects plant–pollinator interactions.

Protective covers are commonly employed in agricultural systems to reduce the impacts of extreme weather events, pest species and to control the environmental conditions in which crop plants are grown. As protected cropping systems are expanding rapidly, there is an urgent need to better understand how variations in netting practices might impact pollination service delivery by wild and managed insects to pollinator dependent crops. We used southern highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L. interspecific hybrid) crops to investigate (i) how variations in protected cropping structures (fully netted, partially netted and unnetted blocks) influence the amount and composition of pollen deposited on crop stigmas; (ii) to what extent blueberry floral abundance and plant richness in remnant vegetation influence pollen composition on crop stigmas; and (iii) the difference between stigmatic pollen load composition in the middle and at the edge of crop blocks. We collected data from 15 field blocks of 6 different cultivars distributed on 10 farms. We collected blueberry stigmas to analyse the pollen load and measured blueberry floral abundance and richness of flowering plant taxa in remnant vegetation every two weeks. Our results indicate that blueberry pollen abundance on stigmas was reduced by up to 81% under full netting and 36% by partial netting. On blueberry stigmas, we identified a total of 31 morphospecies of non-blueberry pollen from 20 plant families. There was no relationship between blueberry stigmatic pollen loads and blueberry floral abundance. Moreover, the composition of non-blueberry pollen on stigmas differed between blueberry blocks under different netting categories. However, there was no relationship between plant taxa present in the surrounding remnant vegetation of each block and the pollen load on the stigmas of each block. Combining all netting treatments, stigmas located at the edge of the blocks received a greater amount of both conspecific (5% more) and heterospecific (40% more) pollen grains than those within the middle of blocks. Pollen flow in fields is reduced under netting structures as well as in the middle of blocks. Reduced blueberry pollen flow under nets may be detrimental to fruit yield and quality for some varieties of pollinator dependent crops, particularly those that are self-incompatible.

Prendergast and Hogendoorn (2021) comment on the ‘methodological shortcomings’ of Australian bee studies, but forgo the opportunity to provide a balanced assessment of the relative merits of different survey methods to inform future studies (for a constructive example of this see Packer & Darla‐West 2021). Instead, they single out standardised survey tools for bees (pan traps and vane traps) as the focus of their criticism and strongly advocate sweep netting and direct observation by skilled entomologists as the ‘pre‐eminen[t]’ methods for bee surveys. They consistently criticise the published work of a small number of Australian authors (particularly ourselves) and claim that any results from pan trap and vane trap samples lead to ‘incorrect conclusions’ about bee biodiversity.

1. Understanding how increasing risk of frequent and severe fires affects biodiversity and ecosystem function is important for effective conservation and recovery, but large knowledge gaps exist for many taxa in many parts of the world, especially invertebrates.
2. After Australia's 2019–2020 catastrophic bushfire disaster, estimates of biodiversity loss and government priorities for post-fire conservation activities were focused on vertebrates and plants because of lack of knowledge about invertebrates.
3. Our synthesis of published evidence reveals a fragmented and ambiguous body of literature on invertebrate responses to fire in Australian ecosystems, limiting the capacity of evidence to inform effective conservation policy in response to extreme fire events. Peer-reviewed studies are available for only six of the more than 30 invertebrate phyla and 88% were on arthropods, predominantly ants.
4. Nearly all studies (94%) were conducted in terrestrial habitats, with only four studies measuring impacts in freshwater habitats and no studies of impacts on marine invertebrates. The high variation in study designs and treatment categories, as well as the absence of key methodological details in many older observational studies, means that there is substantial opportunity to improve our approach to collating meaningful estimates of general fire effects.
5. To understand the full ecological effects of catastrophic fire events, and design effective policies that support recovery of ecosystems now and in future, it is critical that we improve understanding of how fire regimes affect invertebrates. We list key priorities for research and policy to support invertebrate conservation and ecosystem recovery in the face of increasing fire risk.