Kevin C. Matteson
University of Illinois at Chicago
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Kevin C. Matteson.
Biodiversity and Conservation | 2014
David M. Lowenstein; Kevin C. Matteson; Iyan Xiao; Alexandra Silva; Emily S. Minor
Despite the global trend in urbanization, little is known about patterns of biodiversity or provisioning of ecosystem services in urban areas. Bee communities and the pollination services they provide are important in cities, both for small-scale urban agriculture and native gardens. To better understand this important ecological issue, we examined bee communities, their response to novel floral resources, and their potential to provide pollination services in 25 neighborhoods across Chicago, IL (USA). In these neighborhoods, we evaluated how local floral resources, socioeconomic factors, and surrounding land cover affected abundance, richness, and community composition of bees active in summer. We also quantified species-specific body pollen loads and visitation frequencies to potted flowering purple coneflower plants (Echinacea purpurea) to estimate potential pollination services in each neighborhood. We documented 37 bee species and 79 flowering plant genera across all neighborhoods, with 8 bee species and 14 flowering plant genera observed on average along each neighborhood block. We found that both bee abundance and richness increased in neighborhoods with higher human population density, as did visitation to purple coneflower flower heads. In more densely populated neighborhoods, bee communities shifted to a suite of species that carry more pollen and are more active pollinators in this system, including the European honey bee (Apis mellifera) and native species such as Agapostemon virescens. More densely populated neighborhoods also had a greater diversity of flowering plants, suggesting that the positive relationship between people and bees was mediated by the effect of people on floral resources. Other environmental variables that were important for bee communities included the amount of grass/herbaceous cover and solar radiation in the surrounding area. Our results indicate that bee communities and pollination services can be maintained in dense urban neighborhoods with single-family and multi-family homes, as long as those neighborhoods contain diverse and abundant floral resources.
Oecologia | 2015
David M. Lowenstein; Kevin C. Matteson; Emily S. Minor
Plantings in residential neighborhoods can support wild pollinators. However, it is unknown how effectively wild pollinators maintain pollination services in small, urban gardens with diverse floral resources. We used a ‘mobile garden’ experimental design, whereby potted plants of cucumber, eggplant, and purple coneflower were brought to 30 residential yards in Chicago, IL, USA, to enable direct assessment of pollination services provided by wild pollinator communities. We measured fruit and seed set and investigated the effect of within-yard characteristics and adjacent floral resources on plant pollination. Increased pollinator visitation and taxonomic richness generally led to increases in fruit and seed set for all focal plants. Furthermore, fruit and seed set were correlated across the three species, suggesting that pollination services vary across the landscape in ways that are consistent among different plant species. Plant species varied in terms of which pollinator groups provided the most visits and benefit for pollination. Cucumber pollination was linked to visitation by small sweat bees (Lasioglossum spp.), whereas eggplant pollination was linked to visits by bumble bees. Purple coneflower was visited by the most diverse group of pollinators and, perhaps due to this phenomenon, was more effectively pollinated in florally-rich gardens. Our results demonstrate how a diversity of wild bees supports pollination of multiple plant species, highlighting the importance of pollinator conservation within cities. Non-crop resources should continue to be planted in urban gardens, as these resources have a neutral and potentially positive effect on crop pollination.
Oikos | 2013
Kevin C. Matteson; James B. Grace; Emily S. Minor
Cities and the Environment | 2009
Kevin C. Matteson; Gail A. Langellotto
Conservation Biology | 2012
Kevin C. Matteson; D. J. Taron; Emily S. Minor
Cities and the Environment | 2012
Kevin C. Matteson; Gail A. Langellotto
Cities and the Environment | 2009
Peter A. Werrell; Gail A. Langellotto; Shannon U. Morath; Kevin C. Matteson
Landscape and Urban Planning | 2017
Amélie Y. Davis; Eric Lonsdorf; Cliff R. Shierk; Kevin C. Matteson; John R. Taylor; Sarah Taylor Lovell; Emily S. Minor
Cities and the Environment | 2010
Kevin C. Matteson; Nell Roberts
Grower talks | 2016
Emily S. Minor; David M. Lowenstein; Kevin C. Matteson