Interactions between a native plant species and its pollinators, herbivores, or microbiome can be affected by the presence of non-native plant species. Non-native plant species are altering plant-pollinator interactions, yet we know little about how these non-native species influence natural selection. In addition, year-to-year variation in flowering could influence the impacts of non-native species on reproductive success in native plants and the strength and direction of pollinator-mediated selection. We examined whether the presence of the highly invasive plant Linaria vulgaris influenced average pollinator visitation, species composition of floral visitors, or pollinator-mediated selection in the native Penstemon strictus. In the field, we conducted small scale L. vulgaris inflorescence removals, that were repeated through 3 years. Pollinator-mediated selection on the floral trait of platform length was examined by determining the relationships between platform length and visitation, between visitation and seed production, and by calculating net selection based on seed production. We found that the presence of L. vulgaris on a small spatial scale facilitated pollinator visitation rates to P. strictus but did not influence pollinator-mediated selection on platform length. Pollinator visitation varied across years, as did the relationship between seed production and pollinator visitation, and the relationship between pollinator visitation and platform length. Although components of selection varied across years, no net selection on platform length was detected in any of the 3 years. Our results show how the presence of an invasive plant and year-to-year variation in plant-pollinator interactions affect the pollination and components of pollinator-mediated selection in native plants.

Seed production can be affected by water availability and also depend on the amount (pollen intensity) and quality of pollen deposited. The way pollen receipt on the stigma translates into seeds produced follows that of a saturating dose-response. Not only can water availability and pollen intensity each influence seed production, these factors could interact in their effects on seed production. Changes to the relationship between seed production and pollen intensity can in turn influence pollinator effectiveness and pollinator-mediated selection. We asked how water availability affected indices of plant fitness (seed set, fruit set and seed mass) and the relationship between pollen intensity and seed production in Phacelia parryi. We conducted a greenhouse experiment where we manipulated water availability (either high- or low-water) to pollen recipient plants and hand-pollinated each plant with a range of pollen intensities. We conducted 703 hand-pollinations on 30 plants. For each hand-pollinated flower we measured pollen deposited, seed production and seed mass. We then generated a piecewise regression of the relationship between pollen intensity and seed production, and determined average effects of water on plant fitness measures. This experiment was paired with a field observational study aimed to document natural variation in pollen deposition. Average seed production per fruit was 21 % higher in the high-watered plants. The relationship between pollen intensity and seed production differed between the two water treatments. Plants under high-water exhibited a wider range in which pollen deposition increased seed production. Average natural pollen intensities fell within different regions of the piecewise regression for low- and high-water plants. Water availability can alter the efficiency by which pollen received is translated into seeds produced. Our greenhouse data suggest that only under certain pollen intensity environments will water availability affect how pollen received is translated into seeds produced.

Abstract: Ecology must attract and retain diverse talented people to produce innovative research and relevant solutions to 21st‐century environmental problems. Careers and culture form the foundation of scientific advancement, and substantial progress has been made over recent decades in both realms. Yet, important challenges persist in expanding career paths, inclusion of underrepresented groups, and communication with the public. The ESA Student Section organized a horizon scanning exercise to address the following goals: (1) to identify challenges that 21st‐century ecologists contend with or expect to contend with in careers and outreach to society, (2) to anticipate opportunities to help ecologists meet challenges, and (3) to identify concrete steps that could be taken by individual laboratories, institutions, and the ESA to foster progress. In spring 2016, the ESA Student Section solicited input from student members and organized a working group to assess the state of the discipline and to envision how we might cultivate a more inclusive and effective community. We identified three major challenges. First, PhDs are produced faster than academic positions become available and disconnects between academia and other sectors may keep early‐career ecologists from realizing the breadth of available positions. We propose an online jobs hub to make non‐academic sectors more accessible to ecologists. We also suggest students develop skills portfolios to prepare for non‐academic positions. Second, the composition of people who are ecologists differs from broader society, partially due to implicit biases and institutional barriers. We propose steps to reduce attrition of diversity in ecology that include countering implicit biases and creating mentorship networks. We offer steps to improve recruitment by increasing awareness of ecology among high school students and undergraduates and providing opportunities to engage in ecological research. Finally, ecology is only relevant if the public perceives it to be. We must improve science communication and begin cultivating trust. We propose that ad hoc communication by all ecologists is insufficient; translational ecologists should be hired in every department and formal training in translational ecology is necessary. We hope this paper catalyzes critical thinking and partnerships among students, professional ecologists, and the ESA to ensure the future of ecology is vibrant.