Plant-pollinator network architecture does not impact intraspecific microbiome variability.

Variation in how individuals interact with food resources can directly impact, and be affected by, their microbial interactions due to the potential for transmission. The degree to which this transmission occurs, however, may depend on the structure of forager networks, which determine the community-scale transmission opportunities. In particular, how the community-scale opportunity for transfer balances individual-scale barriers to transmission is unclear. Examining the bee-flower and bee-microbial interactions of over 1000 individual bees, we tested (1) the degree to which individual floral visits predicted microbiome composition and (2) whether plant-bee networks with increased opportunity for microbial transmission homogenized the microbiomes of bees within that network. The pollen community composition carried by bees was associated with microbiome composition at some sites, suggesting that microbial transmission at flowers occurred. Contrary to our predictions, however, microbiome variability did not differ based on transfer opportunity: bee microbiomes in asymmetric networks with high opportunity for microbial transfer were similarly variable compared to microbiomes in networks with more evenly distributed links. These findings suggest that microbial transmission at flowers is frequent enough to be observed at the community level, but that community network structure did not substantially change the dynamics of this transmission, perhaps due to filtering processes in host guts.

Multiple ecosystem service synergies and landscape mediation of biodiversity within urban agroecosystems.

Ecosystem services (ESs) are essential for human well-being, especially in urban areas where 60% of the global population will live by 2030. While urban habitats have the potential to support biodiversity and ES, few studies have quantified the impact of local and landscape management across a diverse suite of services. We leverage 5 years of data (>5000 observations) across a network of urban community gardens to determine the drivers of biodiversity and ES trade-offs and synergies. We found multiple synergies and few trade-offs, contrasting previous assumptions that food production is at odds with biodiversity. Furthermore, we show that natural landscape cover interacts with local management to mediate services provided by mobile animals, specifically pest control and pollination. By quantifying the factors that support a diverse suite of ES, we highlight the critical role of garden management and urban planning for optimizing biodiversity and human benefit.

Rarity begets rarity: Social and environmental drivers of rare organisms in cities.

Cities are sometimes characterized as homogenous with species assemblages composed of abundant, generalist species having similar ecological functions. Under this assumption, rare species, or species observed infrequently, would have especially high conservation value in cities for their potential to increase functional diversity. Management to increase the number of rare species in cities could be an important conservation strategy in a rapidly urbanizing world. However, most studies of species rarity define rarity in relatively pristine environments where human management and disturbance is minimized. We know little about what species are rare, how many species are rare, and what management practices promote rare species in urban environments. Here, we identified which plants and species of birds and bees that control pests and pollinate crops are rare in urban gardens and assessed how social, biophysical factors, and cross-taxonomic comparisons influence rare species richness. We found overwhelming numbers of rare species, with more than 50% of plants observed classified as rare. Our results highlight the importance of women, older individuals, and gardeners who live closer to garden sites in increasing the number of rare plants within urban areas. Fewer rare plants were found in older gardens and gardens with more bare soil. There were more rare bird species in larger gardens and more rare bee species for which canopy cover was higher. We also found that in some cases, rarity begets rarity, with positive correlations found between the number of rare plants and bee species and between bee and bird species. Overall, our results suggest that urban gardens include a high number of species existing at low frequency and that social and biophysical factors promoting rare, planned biodiversity can cascade down to promote rare, associated biodiversity.

Floral resources shape parasite and pathogen dynamics in bees facing urbanization.

Urbanization is associated with increases in impervious land cover, which alters the distribution of resources available to wildlife and concentrates activity in unbuilt spaces such as parks and gardens. How resource shifts alter the dynamics of parasite and pathogen transmission has not been addressed for many important species in urban systems. We focus on urban gardens, resource-rich "islands" within the urban matrix, to examine how the availability of floral resources at local and landscape scales influences the prevalence of six RNA viruses and three parasites in honey bees and bumble bees. Because parasites and pathogens are transmitted at flowers between visitors, we expected that floral abundance would concentrate bees within gardens, amplifying infection rates in pollinators, unless increases in floral resources would enhance bee diversity enough to dilute transmission. We found that garden size and flowering perennial plant abundance had a positive, direct effect on parasite and pathogen richness in bumble bees, suggesting that resource provisioning amplifies transmission. We also found that parasitism rates in honey bees were positively associated with parasites and pathogens in bumble bees, suggesting spillover between species. Encouragingly, we found evidence that management may mitigate parasitism through indirect effects: garden size had a positive impact on bee diversity, which in turn was negatively associated with parasite and pathogen richness in bumble bees. Unexpectedly, we observed that that parasite and pathogen richness in honey bees had no significant predictors, highlighting the complexity of comparing transmission dynamics between species. Although floral resources provide bees with food, we suggest more research on the tradeoffs between resource provisioning and disease transmission to implement conservation plantings in changing landscapes.

Mass-flowering monoculture attracts bees, amplifying parasite prevalence.

As the global agricultural footprint expands, it is increasingly important to address the link between the resource pulses characteristic of monoculture farming and wildlife epidemiology. To understand how mass-flowering crops impact host communities and subsequently amplify or dilute parasitism, we surveyed wild and managed bees in a monoculture landscape with varying degrees of floral diversification. We screened 1509 bees from 16 genera in sunflower fields and in non-crop flowering habitat across 200 km2 of the California Central Valley. We found that mass-flowering crops increase bee abundance. Wild bee abundance was subsequently associated with higher parasite presence, but only in sites with a low abundance of non-crop flowers. Bee traits related to higher dispersal ability (body size) and diet breadth (pollen lecty) were also positively related to parasite presence. Our results highlight the importance of non-crop flowering habitat for supporting bee communities. We suggest monoculture alone cannot support healthy bees.

Environment Shapes the Microbiome of the Blue Orchard Bee, Osmia lignaria : RRH: Environmental Drivers of Bee Microbiome.

Wild bees encounter environmental microbes while foraging. While environmental context affects bee diversity, little is known about it how affects the wild bee microbiome. We used field surveys in 17 urban gardens to examine whether and how variation in local and landscape habitat features shapes the microbiome of the solitary Blue Orchard Bee, Osmia lignaria. We installed O. lignaria cocoons at each site, allowed bees to emerge and forage, then collected them. We measured local features of gardens using vegetation transects and landscape features with GIS. We found that in microbiome composition between bee individuals varied by environmental features such as natural habitat, floral resources, and bee species richness. We also found that environmental features were associated with the abundance of bacterial groups important for bee health, such as Lactobacillus. Our study highlights complex interactions between environment context, bee species diversity, and the bee-associated microbes.

Local and Landscape Drivers of Carabid Activity, Species Richness, and Traits in Urban Gardens in Coastal California.

Urban ecosystems, as mosaics of residential, industrial, commercial, and agricultural land, present challenges for species survival due to impervious surface, degradation, fragmentation, and modification of natural habitat, pollution, and introduced species. Some urban habitats, such as community gardens, support biodiversity and promote ecosystem services. In gardens, local factors (e.g., vegetation, groundcover) and landscape surroundings (e.g., agriculture, built or impervious cover) may influence species abundance, richness, and functional traits that are present. We examined which local and landscape factors within 19 community gardens in the California central coast influence ground beetle (Carabidae) activity density, species richness, functional group richness, and functional traits-body size, wing morphology, and dispersal ability. Gardens with higher crop richness and that are surrounded by agricultural land had greater carabid activity density, while species and functional group richness did not respond to any local or landscape factor. Gardens with more leaf litter had lower carabid activity, and gardens with more leaf litter tended to have more larger carabids. Changes in local (floral abundance, ground cover) and landscape (urban land cover) factors also influenced the distribution of individuals with certain wing morphology and body size traits. Thus, both local and landscape factors influence the taxonomic and functional traits of carabid communities, with potential implications for pest control services that are provided by carabids.

Vegetation Management and Host Density Influence Bee-Parasite Interactions in Urban Gardens.

Apocephalus borealis phorid flies, a parasitoid of bumble bees and yellow jacket wasps in North America, was recently reported as a novel parasitoid of the honey bee Apis mellifera Linnaeus (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Little is known about the ecology of this interaction, including phorid fecundity on bee hosts, whether phorid-bee parasitism is density dependent, and which local habitat and landscape features may correlate with changes in parasitism rates for either bumble or honey bees. We examined the impact of local and landscape drivers and host abundance on phorid parasitism of A. mellifera and the bumble bee Bombus vosnesenskii Radoszkowski (Hymenoptera: Apidae). We worked in 19 urban gardens along the North-Central Coast of California, where phorid parasitism of honey bees was first reported in 2012. We collected and incubated bees for phorid emergence, and surveyed local vegetation, ground cover, and floral characteristics as well as land cover types surrounding gardens. We found that phorid parasitism was higher on bumble bees than on honey bees, and phorids produced nearly twice as many pupae on individual bumble bee hosts than on honey bee hosts. Parasitism of both bumble and honey bees increased with abundance of honey bees in a site. Differences in landscape surroundings did not correlate with parasitism, but local factors related to bee resource provisioning (e.g., tree and shrub abundance) positively correlated with increased parasitism. This research thus helps to document and describe conditions that may have facilitated phorid fly host shift to honey bees and further elucidate how resource provisioning in urban gardens influences bee-parasite interactions.