DOI: 10.5061/dryad.fbg79cp2t
title: Effect of green infrastructure on restoration of pollination networks and plant performance in semi-natural dry grasslands across Europe

description: Agricultural intensification, afforestation and land abandonment are major
 drivers of biodiversity loss in semi-natural grasslands across Europe.
 Reversing these losses requires the reinstatement of plant-animal
 interactions such as pollination. Here we assessed the differences in
 species composition and patterns of plant-pollinator interactions in
 ancient and restored grasslands and how these patterns are influenced by
 landscape connectivity, across three European regions (Belgium, Germany
 and Sweden). We evaluated the differences in pollinator community
 assemblage, abundance, and interaction network structure between 24
 ancient and restored grasslands. We then assessed the effect of
 surrounding landscape functional connectivity (i.e. green infrastructure,
 GI) on these variables and tested possible consequences on the
 reproduction of two model plants, Lotus corniculatus and Salvia pratensis.
 Neither pollinator richness nor species composition differed between
 ancient and restored grasslands. A high turnover of interactions across
 grasslands was detected but was mainly due to replacement of pollinator
 and plant species. The impact of grassland restoration was consistent
 across various pollinator functional groups, whereas the surrounding GI
 had differential effects. Notably, bees, butterflies, beetles, and
 dipterans (excluding hoverflies) exhibited the most significant responses
 to GI variations. Interestingly, networks in restored grasslands were more
 specialised (i.e. less functionally redundant) than in ancient ones and
 also showed a higher number of insect visits to habitat-generalist plant
 species. Landscape connectivity had a similar effect, with
 habitat-specialist plant species receiving fewer visits at higher GI
 values. Fruit set in S. pratensis and L. corniculatus was unaffected by
 grassland type or GI. However, the fruit set in the specialist S.
 pratensis increased with the number of pollinator visits, indicating a
 positive correlation between pollinator activity and reproductive success
 in this particular species. Synthesis and applications. Our findings
 provide evidence of the necessity to enhance ecosystem functions while
 avoiding biotic homogenization. Restoration programs should aim at
 increasing landscape connectivity which influences plant communities,
 pollinator assemblages, and their interaction patterns. To avoid
 generalist species taking over from specialists in restored grasslands, we
 suggest reinforcing the presence of specialist species in the latter, for
 instance by means of introductions, as well as increasing the connectivity
 to source populations.
description: We sampled plant-pollinator interactions five times at each of
 the 24 focal grasslands throughout the main ﬂowering periods of 2018. We
 shifted geographically with the flowering period (May 3rd-June 6th-in
 Germany, June 14th-July 8th in Belgium and July 10th-August 9th in
 Sweden), from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on sunny days with low wind, and above
 15ºC. We gathered flower visitation data along three parallel linear
 transects (80m long and 3m wide) over 45 min (15 min per transect).  We
 recorded the identity and number of insect contacts to flowers,
 considering only those (i.e. potential pollination events) when an insect
 clearly touched the flower reproductive organs.
description: # Effect of green infrastructure on restoration of pollination networks
 and plant performance in semi-natural dry grasslands across Europe
 ## **Description of the
 Data and File Structure** Within this dataset, you'll find a
 collection of 24 bipartite matrices, each corresponding to a specific
 study plot. These matrices provide pollination networks in semi-natural
 dry grasslands across Europe. Each matrix represents the plants in rows
 and their pollinators in columns. Each cell in the matrix represents the
 number of visits by each pollinator. **Variables Naming and
 abbreviations**: Row and column names of each matrix contain the acronym
 of the scientific name of each species. Three letters for the genus and
 three letters for the species. In cases where taxonomic identification to
 species has not been achieved, the identified genus or family is
 indicated. The full scientific name of each species can be found in
 Appendices 2 and 3 of the supporting information of the associated article
 by Traveset et al. (2024) in the Journal of Applied Ecology. **File Naming
 Convention:** The files are named following a consistent pattern for easy
 identification. They start with the country name, providing geographical
 context, followed by the unique plot code. This naming convention not only
 facilitates efficient organization but also allows users to quickly locate
 data relevant to a specific region or parcel. **Relationships Between
 Matrices:** Each bipartite matrix encapsulates the interactions between
 species within a distinct study plot. These matrices collectively
 contribute to a holistic understanding of how green infrastructure
 influences the restoration of pollination networks across diverse European
 landscapes. **Referencing Additional Information:** For detailed insights
 into the species and parcel characteristics, users are encouraged to refer
 to the associated article by Traveset et al. (2024) in the Journal of
 Applied Ecology. The article serves as a comprehensive guide, providing
 context, methodologies, and additional details that enhance the
 interpretation and utilization of the dataset.