Hubbell, S. P. The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography (Princeton Univ. Press, 2001).
Wills, C. et al. Nonrandom processes maintain diversity in tropical forests. Science 311, 527–531 (2006).
Google Scholar
Chesson, P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 31, 343–366 (2000).
Google Scholar
Ollerton, J. Pollinator diversity: distribution, ecological function, and conservation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 353–376 (2017).
Google Scholar
Vamosi, J. C. et al. Pollination decays in biodiversity hotspots. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 956–961 (2006).
Google Scholar
Bennett, J. M. et al. Land use and pollinator dependency drives global patterns of pollen limitation in the Anthropocene. Nat. Commun. 11, 3999 (2020).
Google Scholar
Potts, S. G. et al. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 345–353 (2010).
Google Scholar
Vamosi, J. C., Magallon, S., Mayrose, I., Otto, S. P. & Sauquet, H. Macroevolutionary patterns of flowering plant speciation and extinction. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 69, 685–706 (2018).
Google Scholar
Ollerton, J., Winfree, R. & Tarrant, S. How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120, 321–326 (2011).
Google Scholar
Rodger, J. G. et al. 2021 Widespread vulnerability of plant seed production to pollinator decline. Sci. Adv. (in the press).
Pimm, S. L., Jones, H. L. & Diamond, J. On the risk of extinction. Am. Nat. 132, 757–785 (1988).
Google Scholar
Sargent, R. D. & Ackerly, D. D. Plant–pollinator interactions and the assembly of plant communities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 123–130 (2008).
Google Scholar
Benadi, G. & Pauw, A. Frequency dependence of pollinator visitation rates suggests that pollination niches can allow plant species coexistence. J. Ecol. 106, 1892–1901 (2018).
Google Scholar
Bruno, J. F., Stachowicz, J. J. & Bertness, M. D. Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 119–125 (2003).
Google Scholar
Benadi, G., Bluthgen, N., Hovestadt, T. & Poethke, H. J. Population dynamics of plant and pollinator communities: stability reconsidered. Am. Nat. 179, 157–168 (2012).
Google Scholar
Moeller, D. A. Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology 85, 3289–3301 (2004).
Google Scholar
Bergamo, P. J., Susin Streher, N., Traveset, A., Wolowski, M. & Sazima, M. Pollination outcomes reveal negative density-dependence coupled with interspecific facilitation among plants. Ecol. Lett. 23, 129–139 (2020).
Google Scholar
Barrett, S. C. H. The evolution of plant sexual diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 274–284 (2002).
Google Scholar
Ashman, T. L. & Arceo-Gómez, G. Toward a predictive understanding of the fitness costs of heterospecific pollen receipt and its importance in co-flowering communities. Am. J. Bot. 100, 1061–1070 (2013).
Google Scholar
Moreira-Hernández, J. I. & Muchhala, N. Importance of pollinator-mediated interspecific pollen transfer for angiosperm evolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 50, 191–217 (2019).
Google Scholar
Ashman, T. L. et al. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85, 2408–2421 (2004).
Google Scholar
Tur, C., Saez, A., Traveset, A. & Aizen, M. A. Evaluating the effects of pollinator-mediated interactions using pollen transfer networks: evidence of widespread facilitation in south Andean plant communities. Ecol. Lett. 19, 576–586 (2016).
Google Scholar
Levin, D. A. & Anderson, W. W. Competition for pollinators between simultaneously flowering species. Am. Nat. 104, 455–467 (1970).
Google Scholar
Ashman, T. L., Alonso, C., Parra-Tabla, V. & Arceo-Gómez, G. Pollen on stigmas as proxies of pollinator competition and facilitation: complexities, caveats and future directions. Ann. Bot. 125, 1003–1012 (2020).
Google Scholar
Lloyd, D. G. Some reproductive factors affecting the selection of self-fertilization in plants. Am. Nat. 113, 67–79 (1979).
Google Scholar
Sargent, R. D. & Otto, S. P. The role of local species abundance in the evolution of pollinator attraction in flowering plants. Am. Nat. 167, 67–80 (2006).
Google Scholar
Adler, P. B., Fajardo, A., Kleinhesselink, A. R. & Kraft, N. J. B. Trait-based tests of coexistence mechanisms. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1294–1306 (2013).
Google Scholar
Armbruster, W. S. The specialization continuum in pollination systems: diversity of concepts and implications for ecology, evolution and conservation. Funct. Ecol. 31, 88–100 (2017).
Google Scholar
Minnaar, C., Anderson, B., de Jager, M. L. & Karron, J. D. Plant–pollinator interactions along the pathway to paternity. Ann. Bot. 123, 225–245 (2019).
Google Scholar
Kantsa, A. et al. Disentangling the role of floral sensory stimuli in pollination networks. Nat. Commun. 9, 1041 (2018).
Google Scholar
Fang, Q. & Huang, S. Q. A directed network analysis of heterospecific pollen transfer in a biodiverse community. Ecology 94, 1176–1185 (2013).
Google Scholar
Baldwin, B. G. Origins of plant diversity in the California floristic province. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 45, 347–369 (2014).
Google Scholar
Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., Melian, C. J. & Olesen, J. M. The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9383–9387 (2003).
Google Scholar
Thomson, J. D., Fung, H. F. & Ogilvie, J. E. Effects of spatial patterning of co-flowering plant species on pollination quantity and purity. Ann. Bot. 123, 303–310 (2019).
Google Scholar
Rezende, E. L., Lavabre, J. E., Guimaraes, P. R., Jordano, P. & Bascompte, J. Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks. Nature 448, 925–928 (2007).
Google Scholar
Song, C. L., Rohr, R. P. & Saavedra, S. Why are some plant–pollinator networks more nested than others? J. Anim. Ecol. 86, 1417–1424 (2017).
Google Scholar
Hegland, S. J., Nielsen, A., Lazaro, A., Bjerknes, A. L. & Totland, O. How does climate warming affect plant–pollinator interactions? Ecol. Lett. 12, 184–195 (2009).
Google Scholar
Ohlemuller, R. et al. The coincidence of climatic and species rarity: high risk to small-range species from climate change. Biol. Lett. 4, 568–572 (2008).
Google Scholar
Arceo-Gómez, G., Kaczorowski, R. L. & Ashman, T.-L. A network approach to understanding patterns of coflowering in diverse communities. Int. J. Plant Sci. 179, 569–582 (2018).
Google Scholar
Koski, M. H. et al. Plant–flower visitor networks in a serpentine metacommunity: assessing traits associated with keystone plant species. Arthropod Plant Interact. 9, 9–21 (2015).
Google Scholar
Arceo-Gómez, G. et al. Patterns of among- and within-species variation in heterospecific pollen receipt: the importance of ecological generalization. Am. J. Bot. 103, 396–407 (2016).
Google Scholar
Chao, A. et al. Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol. Monogr. 84, 45–67 (2014).
Google Scholar
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, https://www.R-project.org/ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019).
Arceo-Gómez, G., Alonso, C., Ashman, T.-L. & Parra-Tabla, V. Variation in sampling effort affects the observed richness of plant–plant interactions via heterospecific pollen transfer: implications for interpretation of pollen transfer networks. Am. J. Bot. 105, 1601–1608 (2018).
Google Scholar
Hayes, R. A., Cullen N., Kaczorowski R. L., O’Neill E. M. & Ashman T-L. A community-wide description and key of pollen from co-flowering plants of the serpentine seeps of Mclaughlin Reserve. Madrono (in the press).
Dafni, A. Pollination Ecology: a Practical Approach (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992).
McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Waste NOT, want not: why rarefying microbiome data is inadmissible. PLoS Comp. Biol. 10, e1003531 (2014).
Google Scholar
Qian, H. & Jin, Y. An updated megaphylogeny of plants, a tool for generating plant phylogenies and an analysis of phylogenetic community structure. J. Plant Ecol. 9, 233–239 (2016).
Google Scholar
Zanne, A. E. et al. Three keys to the radiation of angiosperms into freezing environments. Nature 506, 89–92 (2014).
Google Scholar
Hinchliff, C. E. et al. Synthesis of phylogeny and taxonomy into a comprehensive tree of life. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 12764–12769 (2015).
Google Scholar
Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).
Google Scholar
Michonneau, F., Brown, J. W. & Winter, D. J. rotl: an R package to interact with the Open Tree of Life data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1476–1481 (2016).
Google Scholar
Revell, L. J. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 217–223 (2012).
Google Scholar
Le, S., Josse, J. & Husson, F. FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis. J. Stat. Softw. 25, 1–18 (2008).
Google Scholar
Dormann, C. F., Gruber, B. & Fruend, J. Introducing the bipartite package: analysing ecological networks. R News 8, 8–11 (2008).
Feinsinger, P., Spears, E. E. & Poole, R. W. A simple measure of niche breadth. Ecology 62, 27–32 (1981).
Google Scholar
Horn, H. S. Measurement of “overlap” in comparative ecological studies. Am. Nat. 100, 419–424 (1966).
Google Scholar
Almeida-Neto, M., Guimaraes, P., Guimaraes, P. R., Loyola, R. D. & Ulrich, W. A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117, 1227–1239 (2008).
Google Scholar
Csardi, G. & Nepusz, T. The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal 1695, 1–9 (2006).
Patefield, W. Algorithm AS 159: an efficient method of generating random R × C tables with given row and column totals. Appl. Stat. 30, 91–97 (1981).
Google Scholar
Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5–5, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (2019).
Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).
Bastian, M., Heymann, S. & Jacomy, M. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. Presented at the Third international AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2009).
Arceo-Gómez, G., Kaczorowski, R. L., Patel, C. & Ashman, T. L. Interactive effects between donor and recipient species mediate fitness costs of heterospecific pollen receipt in a co-flowering community. Oecologia 189, 1041–1047 (2019).
Google Scholar
Keck, F., Rimet, F., Bouchez, A. & Franc, A. phylosignal: an R package to measure, test, and explore the phylogenetic signal. Ecol. Evol. 6, 2774–2780 (2016).
Google Scholar
Orme, D. et al. caper: comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. R package version 1.0.1, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=caper (2018).
Barrett, S. C. H. The evolution of plant sexual diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 274–284 (2002).
Google Scholar
Fort, H., Vazquez, D. P. & Lan, B. L. Abundance and generalisation in mutualistic networks: solving the chicken-and-egg dilemma. Ecol. Lett. 19, 4–11 (2016).
Google Scholar
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D. & R Core Team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-143, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme (2019).
Lefcheck, J. S. & Freckleton, R. piecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equation modelling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 573–579 (2015).
Google Scholar
Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. An R companion to Applied Regression, 3rd edition (Sage, 2019).
Blüthgen, N., Menzel, F. & Blüthgen, N. Measuring specialization in species interaction networks. BMC Ecol. 6, 9 (2006).
Google Scholar
Shipley, B. The AIC model selection method applied to path analytic models compared using a d-separation test. Ecology 94, 560–564 (2013).
Google Scholar
van der Bijl, W. phylopath: easy phylogenetic path analysis in R. PeerJ 6, e4718 (2018).
Google Scholar
Source: Ecology - nature.com
