Hayes Jen J-M, Bell Nicole C, Best Lincoln R, Bruslind Svea R, Johnson Devon O, Mead Mallory E, Spofford Tyler S, Langellotto Gail A
Horticulture Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA.
Center for Agriculture, Food, and the Environment, University of Massachusetts Amherst Mt. Ida Campus, Newton, MA, USA.
Environ Entomol. 2025 Feb 19;54(1):199-214. doi: 10.1093/ee/nvae126.
Planting native flora is a popular conservation strategy for pollinators. When searching for native plants, consumers may encounter cultivars of native plants, which can have different phenotypic traits than plants found in wild populations ("wild-type native plants"). Previous research evaluating pollinator visitation to wild-type native plants and native cultivars has yielded mixed results, in terms of whether their visitation rates are similar or distinct. We established a garden experiment in Corvallis, Oregon, to examine pollinator visitation and utilization of Pacific Northwest native plant species and cultivars. Over 3 years, we collected and observed bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea), butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea), and syrphid flies (Diptera: Syrphidae) to understand (i) if plant pairs had different visitation rates, (ii) whether any pollinators were associated with differential visitation, and (iii) if specialist taxa preferred wild types over cultivars. Pollinator visitation rates varied by plant and pollinator groupings, but in comparisons between native plant and cultivar pairs, native plants were preferred 37.2% of the time (n = 29 comparisons), cultivars 7.7% of the time (n = 6), and there was no difference in 55.1% of comparisons (n = 43). Our pollinator community data found native plants had greater observed total pollinator richness (except for 1 tie) and bee richness than cultivars, though predicted richness varied. Specialist bees were collected more often from wild types. Cultivars with high visitation rates were minimally developed selections, as opposed to interspecific hybrids. Our results join a growing body of literature in suggesting wild-type native and minimally developed plants should be emphasized for supporting pollinator fauna.
种植本土植物是一种受传粉者欢迎的保护策略。在寻找本土植物时，消费者可能会遇到本土植物的栽培品种，这些栽培品种可能具有与野生种群中发现的植物（“野生型本土植物”）不同的表型特征。以往评估传粉者对野生型本土植物和本土栽培品种访问情况的研究结果不一，即它们的访问率是相似还是不同。我们在俄勒冈州科瓦利斯市开展了一项花园实验，以研究传粉者对太平洋西北地区本土植物物种和栽培品种的访问及利用情况。在3年时间里，我们收集并观察了蜜蜂（膜翅目：蜜蜂总科）、蝴蝶（鳞翅目：凤蝶总科）和食蚜蝇（双翅目：食蚜蝇科），以了解：（i）植物对之间的访问率是否不同；（ii）是否有传粉者与不同的访问情况相关联；（iii）特定类群是否更喜欢野生型而非栽培品种。传粉者的访问率因植物和传粉者类别而异，但在本土植物与栽培品种对的比较中，本土植物在37.2%的时间里更受青睐（n = 29次比较），栽培品种在7.7%的时间里更受青睐（n = 6），在55.1%的比较中没有差异（n = 43）。我们的传粉者群落数据发现，本土植物的观察到的传粉者总丰富度（除一次平局外）和蜜蜂丰富度高于栽培品种，尽管预测的丰富度有所不同。从野生型中收集到特定蜜蜂的频率更高。访问率高的栽培品种是最低限度培育的选择品种，而非种间杂交品种。我们的研究结果与越来越多的文献一致，表明应强调野生型本土植物和最低限度培育的植物以支持传粉动物群。
