Butterflies, bumblebees and hoverflies are equally effective pollinators of Knautia arvensis (Caprifoliaceae), a generalist plant species with compound inflorescences

• Published in: Journal of applied entomology (1986) Vol. 149; no. 5; pp. 685 - 696
• Main Authors: Ollerton, Jeff, Coulthard, Emma, Tarrant, Sam, Woolford, James, Jorge, Leonardo Ré, Rech, André Rodrigo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.06.2025
• Subjects: adaptation; bees; Bombus; Bumblebees; Butterflies & moths; Caprifoliaceae; Effectiveness; entomology; environmental change; Environmental changes; flies; Flight; floral evolution; Flowers; Flowers & plants; Functional groups; generalisation; Knautia arvensis; Lepidoptera; Plant reproduction; Plant reproductive structures; Plant species; Plants (botany); Pollination; pollinator effectiveness; Pollinators; Relative abundance; species; Stigmas (botany); Subpopulations; Syrphidae
• DOI: 10.1111/jen.13345
• ISSN: 0931-2048

Plant‐pollinator interactions exist along a continuum from complete specialisation to highly generalised, that may vary in time and space. A long‐held assumption is that large bees are usually the most effective pollinators of generalist plants. We tested this by studying the relative importance of different groups of pollinators of Knautia arvensis (L.) Coult. (Caprifoliaceae: Dipsacoideae). This plant is suitable for such a study because it attracts a diversity of flower visitors, belonging to different functional groups. We asked whether all functional groups of pollinators are equally effective, or if one group is most effective, which has been documented in other species with apparently generalised pollination systems. We studied two subpopulations of K. arvensis, one at low and one at high density in Northampton, UK. To assess pollinator importance we exposed unvisited inflorescences to single visits by different groups of pollinators (butterflies, bumblebees, hoverflies and others) and assessed the proportion of pollinated stigmas. We then multiplied the effectiveness of each pollinator group with their proportional visitation frequency in five different years. For each group we also compared time spent on flowers and flight distance between visits. The relative importance of each pollinator group varied between years, as did their flight distances between flower visits. Butterflies were the best pollinators on a per visit basis (in terms of the proportion of stigmas pollinated) and flew further after visiting an inflorescence. Different measures and proxies of pollinator effectiveness varied between taxa, subpopulations, and years, and no one group of pollinators was consistently more effective than the others. Our results demonstrate the adaptive value of generalised pollination strategies when variation in relative abundance of different types of pollinators is considered. Such strategies may have buffered the ability of plants to reproduce during past periods of environmental change and may do so in the future.