We use the optimal foraging theory to study coexistence between two plant species and a generalist pollinator. We compare conditions for plant coexistence for non-adaptive vs. adaptive pollinators that adjust their foraging strategy to maximize fitness. When pollinators have fixed preferences, we show that plant coexistence typically requires both weak competition between plants for resources (e.g., space or nutrients) and pollinator preferences that are not too biased in favour of either plant. We also show how plant coexistence is promoted by indirect facilitation via the pollinator. When pollinators are adaptive foragers, pollinator's diet maximizes pollinator's fitness measured as the per capita population growth rate. Simulations show that this has two conflicting consequences for plant coexistence. On the one hand, when competition between pollinators is weak, adaptation favours pollinator specialization on the more profitable plant which increases asymmetries in plant competition and makes their coexistence less likely. On the other hand, when competition between pollinators is strong, adaptation promotes generalism, which facilitates plant coexistence. In addition, adaptive foraging allows pollinators to survive sudden loss of the preferred plant host, thus preventing further collapse of the entire community.

Department of Mathematics and Biomathematics Faculty of Science University of South Bohemia České Budějovice Czech Republic

Institute of Entomology Biology Center Czech Academy of Sciences České Budějovice Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Memmott J, Waser NM, Price MV. Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2004;271:2605–2611. 10.1098/rspb.2004.2909 PubMed DOI PMC

Bastolla U, Fortuna MA, Pascual-García A, Ferrera A, Luque B, Bascompte J. The architecture of mutualistic networks minimizes competition and increases biodiversity. Nature. 2009;458:1018–1020. 10.1038/nature07950 PubMed DOI

Okuyama T, Holland JN. Network structural properties mediate the stability of mutualistic communities. Ecology Letters. 2008;11:208–216. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01137.x PubMed DOI

Benadi G, Blüthgen N, Hovestadt T, Poethke HJ. When can plant-pollinator interactions promote plant diversity? American Naturalist. 2013;182:131–146. 10.1086/670942 PubMed DOI

Bewick S, Brosi BJ, Armsworth PR. Predicting the effect of competition on secondary plant extinctions in plant–pollinator networks. Oikos. 2013;122:1710–1719. 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00016.x DOI

Holt RD. Community modules In: Gange AC, Brown VK, editors. Multitrophic Interactions in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Blackwell Science; 1997. p. 333–349.

Bolker B, Holyoak M, Křivan V, Rowe L, Schmitz O. Connecting theoretical and empirical studies of trait-mediated interactions. Ecology. 2003;84:1101–1114. 10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[1101:CTAESO]2.0.CO;2 DOI

Rathcke B. Competition and facilitation among plants for pollination In: Real L, editor. Pollination Biology. Academic Press; 1983. p. 305–329.

Moeller DA. Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology. 2004;85(12):3289–3301. 10.1890/03-0810 DOI

Ghazoul J. Floral diversity and the facilitation of pollination. Journal of Ecology. 2006;94:295–304. 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01098.x DOI

Fretwell SD, Lucas HL. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica. 1969;19:16–36.

Křivan V, Cressman R, Schneider C. The ideal free distribution: a review and synthesis of the game-theoretic perspective. Theoretical Population Biology. 2008;73:403–425. 10.1016/j.tpb.2007.12.009 PubMed DOI

Fontaine C, Collin CL, Dajoz I. Generalist foraging of pollinators: diet expansion at high density. Journal of Ecology. 2008;96:1002–1010. 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01405.x DOI

Revilla TA. Numerical responses in resource-based mutualisms: a time scale approach. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2015;378:39–46. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.04.012 PubMed DOI

Schoener TW. Alternatives to Lotka-Volterra competition: models of intermediate complexity. Theoretical Population Biology. 1976;10:309–333. 10.1016/0040-5809(76)90022-8 PubMed DOI

Armstrong RA, McGehee R. Coexistence of two competitors on one resource. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1976;56:499–502. 10.1016/S0022-5193(76)80089-6 PubMed DOI

Armstrong RA, McGehee R. Competitive exclusion. American Naturalist. 1980;115:151–170. 10.1086/283553 DOI

Ermentrout B. Simulating, Analyzing, and Animating Dynamical Systems: A Guide to XPPAUT for Researchers and Students. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; 2002.

Grover JP. Resource Competition. vol. 19 of Population and Community Biology Series. London: Chapman & Hall; 1997.

Maynard Smith J, Price GR. The logic of animal conflict. Nature. 1973;246:15–18. 10.1038/246015a0 DOI

Hofbauer J, Sigmund K. Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics. Cambridge University Press; 1998.

Geritz SAH, Kisdi E, Meszena G, Metz JAJ. Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree. Evolutionary Ecology. 1998;12:35–57. 10.1023/A:1006554906681 DOI

MATLAB. version 7.10.0 (R2010a). Natick, Massachusetts: The MathWorks Inc.; 2010.

May RM. Models for two interaction populations In: May RM, editor. Theoretical Ecology: Principles and Applications. Saunders; 1976. p. 78–104.

Vandermeer J, Boucher DH. Varieties of mutualistic interaction in population models. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1978;74:549–558. 10.1016/0022-5193(78)90241-2 PubMed DOI

Courchamp F, Berec L, Gascoigne J. Allee Effects in Ecology and Conservation. Oxford University Press; 2008.

Bronstein JL. Mutualism. Oxford University Press; 2015.

Morales CL, Traveset A. A meta-analysis of impacts of alien vs. native plants on pollinator visitation and reproductive success of co-flowering native plants. Ecology Letters. 2009;12:716–728. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01319.x PubMed DOI

Gyllenberg M, Yan P, Wang Y. Limit cycles for competitor–competitor–mutualist Lotka–Volterra systems. Physica D. 2006;221:135–145. 10.1016/j.physd.2006.07.016 DOI

Valdovinos FS, Moisset de Espanés P, Flores JD, Ramos-Jiliberto R. Adaptive foraging allows the maintenance of biodiversity of pollination networks. Oikos. 2013;122:907–917. 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20830.x DOI

Holt RD. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theoretical Population Biology. 1977;12:197–229. 10.1016/0040-5809(77)90042-9 PubMed DOI

Křivan V. Dynamic ideal free distribution: Effects of optimal patch choice on predator-prey dynamics. American Naturalist. 1997;149:164–178. 10.1086/285984 DOI

Kondoh M. Foraging adaptation and the relationship between food-web complexity and stability. Science. 2003;299:1388–1391. 10.1126/science.1079154 PubMed DOI

Křivan V. Competition in di-and tri-trophic food web modules. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2014;343:127–137. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.11.020 PubMed DOI

Song Z, Feldman MW. Adaptive foraging behaviour of individual pollinators and the coexistence of co-flowering plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2014;281:20132437 10.1098/rspb.2013.2437 PubMed DOI PMC

Brown BJ, Mitchell RJ, Graham SA. Competition for pollination between an invasive species (purple loosestrife) and a native congener. Ecology. 2002;83:2328–2336. 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2328:CFPBAI]2.0.CO;2 DOI

Levin DA, Anderson WW. Competition for pollinators between simultaneously flowering species. American Naturalist. 1970;104:455–467. 10.1086/282680 DOI

Murcia C, Feinsinger P. Interspecific pollen loss by hummingbirds visiting flower mixtures: Effects of floral architecture. Ecology. 1996;77:550–560. 10.2307/2265629 DOI

Morales CL, Traveset A. Interspecific pollen transfer: magnitude, prevalence and consequences for plant fitness. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences. 2008;27:221–238. 10.1080/07352680802205631 DOI

Kunin W, Iwasa Y. Pollinator foraging strategies in mixed floral arrays: density effects and floral constancy. Theoretical Population Biology. 1996;49:232–263. 10.1006/tpbi.1996.0013 PubMed DOI

Thomson JD. Patterns of visitation by animal pollinators. Oikos. 1982;39:241–250. 10.2307/3544491 DOI