The Buzz of Inconsistency: Pollinator Potential vs. Research Effort

ABSTRACT Pollinator insects are essential for the functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and play a critical role in ensuring food security; thus, studies on this topic provide significant benefits for human society. Pollination involves diverse taxa that can vary depending on the specific environment. Nevertheless, it is not always possible to monitor and study all pollinators of an ecosystem, as the research context is often constrained by financial and personnel limitations. European and national directives mostly focus on the monitoring of three taxa: bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila), hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) and lepidopterans (Lepidoptera). However, an effective prioritisation of taxa for pollinator research should consider their actual role as pollinators, which can vary according to the considered ecosystem. Moreover, knowledge about the specific potential of different taxa as pollinators in different ecosystems is still limited. Here, we evaluated, in mountain environments in the European Alps, the potential as pollinators of the three aforementioned taxa together with three other occurring flower‐visiting taxa: beetles (Coleoptera), muscid flies (Diptera: Muscidae) and ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). We compared them in terms of flower visitor abundance and actual pollen transport. In addition, we evaluated whether the scientific efforts made thus far by European researchers aligned with the actual potential of the different taxa as pollinators in a mountain context. Bees and hoverflies have been found to be both the most effective pollen carriers and the most studied pollinators. Instead, a clear discrepancy is observed for muscid flies and lepidopterans, with the former being underrepresented in the scientific literature compared to their actual potential as pollinators, while the latter are overrepresented, ranking as the second most studied taxon despite being the least abundant visitors and contributing negligibly to pollen transport. Our purpose is not to generalise our findings, but to highlight the relevant discrepancies that may exist between the actual role of pollinators in specific ecosystems and the research efforts directed towards them.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Entomology
Published
2025-04-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.13430
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Plant and animal studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.05

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Buzz of Inconsistency: Pollinator Potential vs. Research Effort

Morena Casartelli, Elena Eustacchio, M. Bonelli, Marco Caccianiga et al.
2 citations
Journal of Applied Entomology
Plant and animal studies
6.05
article

The Buzz of Inconsistency: Pollinator Potential vs. Research Effort

Morena Casartelli, Elena Eustacchio, M. Bonelli, Marco Caccianiga, Luca Pedrotti, Mauro Gobbi, Francesco Pietra
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Pollinator insects are essential for the functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and play a critical role in ensuring food security; thus, studies on this topic provide significant benefits for human society. Pollination involves diverse taxa that can vary depending on the specific environment. Nevertheless, it is not always possible to monitor and study all pollinators of an ecosystem, as the research context is often constrained by financial and personnel limitations. European and national directives mostly focus on the monitoring of three taxa: bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila), hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) and lepidopterans (Lepidoptera). However, an effective prioritisation of taxa for pollinator research should consider their actual role as pollinators, which can vary according to the considered ecosystem. Moreover, knowledge about the specific potential of different taxa as pollinators in different ecosystems is still limited. Here, we evaluated, in mountain environments in the European Alps, the potential as pollinators of the three aforementioned taxa together with three other occurring flower‐visiting taxa: beetles (Coleoptera), muscid flies (Diptera: Muscidae) and ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). We compared them in terms of flower visitor abundance and actual pollen transport. In addition, we evaluated whether the scientific efforts made thus far by European researchers aligned with the actual potential of the different taxa as pollinators in a mountain context. Bees and hoverflies have been found to be both the most effective pollen carriers and the most studied pollinators. Instead, a clear discrepancy is observed for muscid flies and lepidopterans, with the former being underrepresented in the scientific literature compared to their actual potential as pollinators, while the latter are overrepresented, ranking as the second most studied taxon despite being the least abundant visitors and contributing negligibly to pollen transport. Our purpose is not to generalise our findings, but to highlight the relevant discrepancies that may exist between the actual role of pollinators in specific ecosystems and the research efforts directed towards them.

Journal of Applied EntomologyVol. 149(7)
University of Milan (IT), Parco Nazionale d'Abruzzo (IT), Museo delle Scienze (IT)
Università degli Studi di Milano, Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Plant and animal studies
6.05
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.