| Literature DB >> 28982152 |
Bruce E Young1, Stephanie Auer1, Margaret Ormes1, Giovanni Rapacciuolo1,2, Dale Schweitzer1,3, Nicole Sears1.
Abstract
Increasing attention to pollinators and their role in providing ecosystem services has revealed a paucity of studies on long-term population trends of most insect pollinators in many parts of the world. Because targeted monitoring programs are resource intensive and unlikely to be performed on most insect pollinators, we took advantage of existing collection records to examine long-term trends in northeastern United States populations of 26 species of hawk moths (family Sphingidae) that are presumed to be pollinators. We compiled over 6,600 records from nine museum and 14 private collections that spanned a 112-year period, and used logistic generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) to examine long-term population trends. We controlled for uneven sampling effort by adding a covariate for list length, the number of species recorded during each sampling event. We found that of the 22 species for which there was sufficient data to assess population trends, eight species declined and four species increased in detection probability (the probability of a species being recorded during each year while accounting for effort, climate, and spatial effects in the GLMMs). Of the four species with too few records to statistically assess, two have disappeared from parts of their ranges. None of the four species with diurnal adults showed a trend in detection probability. Two species that are pests of solanaceous crops declined, consistent with a seven-fold drop in the area planted in tobacco and tomato crops. We found some evidence linking susceptibility to parasitoidism by the introduced fly Compsilura concinnata (Tachinidae) to declines. Moths with larvae that feed on vines and trees, where available evidence indicates that the fly is most likely to attack, had a greater propensity to decline than species that use herbs and shrubs as larval host plants. Species that develop in the spring, before Compsilura populations have increased, did not decline. However, restricting the analysis to hawk moth records from areas outside of a "refuge" area where Compsilura does not occur did not significantly increase the intensity of the declines as would be predicted if Compsilura was the primary cause of declines. Forests have recovered over the study period across most of the northeastern U.S., but this does not appear to have been a major factor because host plants of several of the declining species have increased in abundance with forest expansion and maturation. Climate variables used in the GLMMs were not consistently related to moth detection probability. Hawk moth declines may have ecological effects on both the plants pollinated by these species and vertebrate predators of the moths.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28982152 PMCID: PMC5628844 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185683
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Map of study area showing the number of hawk moth records compiled from each county.
Species of hawk moths, their size and natural history, and the sample sizes of records compiled for analysis of species declines in the northeastern United States.
| Species | Activity | Host Plant Habit (Hosts) | Flight Period | Records | Lists |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Diurnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | May-early July | 217 | 27 |
| | Nocturnal | Shrubs (Ericaceae, Caprifoliaceae) | June-August | 817 | 367 |
| | Nocturnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | June-July | 454 | 155 |
| | Nocturnal | Shrubs (Hydrangeaceae: | June-July | 105 | 29 |
| | Nocturnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | May-June | 506 | 191 |
| | Nocturnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | July-September | 69 | 30 |
| | Nocturnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | July-August | 242 | 107 |
| | Diurnal | Shrubs (Caprifoliaceae: | May-August | 253 | 44 |
| | Diurnal | Shrubs (Ericaceae: | May-early July | 53 | 12 |
| | Diurnal | Shrubs (Caprifoliaceae: | May-August | 410 | 52 |
| | Nocturnal | Herbs (Onagraceae: | June-July | 166 | 26 |
| | Nocturnal | Herbs (Onagraceae: | July-Sept | 137 | 32 |
| | Diurnal | Herbs (Onagraceae: | May-June | 2 | 1 |
| | Nocturnal | Vines (Vitaceae) | May-June | 356 | 132 |
| | Nocturnal | Shrubs (Aquifoliaceae: | June-August | 286 | 118 |
| | Nocturnal | Herbs (Lamiaceae) | July-August | 120 | 36 |
| | Nocturnal | Trees (Oleaceae: | July-early August | 66 | 8 |
| | Nocturnal | Herbs (Solanaceae; mostly crops) | June-September | 121 | 24 |
| | Nocturnal | Herbs (Solanaceae; mostly crops) | July-August | 163 | 57 |
| | Nocturnal | Trees (Oleaceae: | June-August | 44 | 4 |
| | Nocturnal | Trees (Oleaceae: | June-August | 204 | 36 |
| | Nocturnal | Trees (Rosaceae: | May-July | 166 | 50 |
| | Nocturnal | Shrubs (Ericaceae, Myricaceae, Rosaceae: | May-July | 1253 | 402 |
| | Nocturnal | Trees (Oleaceae: | June-July | 364 | 94 |
| | Diurnal | Trees and shrubs (Betulaceae: | May-June | 40 | 2 |
a Species are listed alphabetically within subfamilies.
b Species with crepuscular or a combination of diurnal and nocturnal activity were classed as nocturnal.
c Principal hosts listed by [25] that occur within the study area; some species may use additional hosts.
d Populations in the northern portion of the study area are active somewhat later in the season.
e Number of individuals in collections examined with collection year and county data.
f Unique combinations of locality, date, and collector name that included the species. Species with fewer than ten lists were excluded from the analyses.
Fig 2Sample sizes of lists of northeastern U.S. hawk moth records, number of lists, and mean list length, or the number of species recorded in each list, for the period 1900–2012.
Records from Refuge from Compsilura areas, indicated in gray, are from the outer tip of Cape Cod, Nantucket, and Martha’s Vineyard where the Compsilura concinnata parasitoid is presumed not to occur due to unsuitable habitat [42]; Exposed to Compsilura areas, where caterpillars are subject to Compsilura attack, are everywhere else.
Fig 3Trend in relative detection probability 1900–2012 in the northeastern U.S. for (a) diurnal and (b) nocturnal hawk moth species.
Detection probability refers to the probability of a species being recorded during each year while accounting for effort, climate, and spatial effects using logistic generalized linear mixed models. Closed circles represent means of the standardized regression slope for year and error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Declining species are those with error bars completely below zero, increasing species are those with error bars completely above zero, and species with no trend are those with error bars that overlap zero. For nocturnal species, dark gray and light gray asterisks represent significant (i.e., error bars do not overlap zero) temporal trends based on Exposed to Compsilura and Exposed to Compsilura + Refuge from Compsilura models, respectively.
Model coefficients for climate variables with associated confidence intervals in brackets, based on the full set of records (Exposed to Compsilura + Refuge from Compsilura localities).
Coefficients in bold were significantly different from 0.
| Species | Minimum temperature of the coldest month | Mean temperature of the warmest quarter | Precipitation during the warmest quarter |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.41 (-0.47, 1.29) | -0.09 (-1.1, 0.92) | -0.05 (-0.56, 0.46) | |
| 2.35 (-3.83, 8.52) | -2.19 (-8.29, 3.9) | -0.31 (-1.34, 0.71) | |
| -3.76 (-8.97, 1.44) | -4.25 (-10.04, 1.54) | 2 (-1.03, 5.02) | |
| -0.38 (-1.96, 1.21) | 0.71 (-0.67, 2.09) | 0.36 (-0.25, 0.98) | |
| 0.08 (-0.32, 0.47) | |||
| 0.24 (-0.13, 0.61) | 0.13 (-0.25, 0.5) | 0.18 (-0.06, 0.43) | |
| 0.02 (-0.66, 0.69) | 0.51 (-0.07, 1.09) | 0.07 (-0.32, 0.45) | |
| -0.07 (-0.43, 0.3) | 0.09 (-0.28, 0.46) | -0.06 (-0.27, 0.15) | |
| -0.27 (-0.58, 0.04) | 0.22 (-0.07, 0.52) | 0.13 (-0.08, 0.34) | |
| 0.31 (-0.41, 1.02) | 0.31 (-0.31, 0.93) | 0.31 (-0.17, 0.8) | |
| 0.18 (-0.28, 0.65) | -0.1 (-0.34, 0.14) | ||
| -0.31 (-1.1, 0.48) | 0.32 (-0.29, 0.92) | ||
| -0.25 (-1.03, 0.52) | 0.43 (-0.26, 1.12) | 0.16 (-0.32, 0.63) | |
| 0.49 (-0.32, 1.3) | 0.83 (-0.02, 1.68) | 0.08 (-0.33, 0.48) | |
| -0.08 (-0.71, 0.56) | 0.36 (-0.1, 0.82) | 0.11 (-0.3, 0.52) | |
| 0.32 (-0.1, 0.74) | 0.3 (-0.07, 0.68) | 0.04 (-0.24, 0.33) | |
| -0.36 (-0.78, 0.06) | -0.31 (-0.78, 0.15) | 0.03 (-0.24, 0.3) | |
| -0.05 (-0.53, 0.43) | 0.24 (-0.12, 0.6) | ||
| 0.52 (-0.12, 1.16) | 0.26 (-0.1, 0.62) | ||
| 0.2 (-0.19, 0.6) | -0.27 (-0.66, 0.11) | ||
| -0.43 (-0.9, 0.04) | -0.38 (-0.84, 0.09) | -0.19 (-0.46, 0.09) |
Fig 4Temporal change in the area of tobacco and tomato planted in New England.
Area charted in 5-yr intervals. Source: [59], [60]; data for tomatoes were not available for 1900, 2005, and 2010.