Land-use intensification is the main factor for the catastrophic decline of insect pollinators. However, land-use intensification includes multiple processes that act across various scales and should affect pollinator guilds differently depending on their ecology. We aimed to reveal how two main pollinator guilds, wild bees (specialists) and hoverflies (generalists), respond to different land-use intensification measures, i.e. arable field cover (AFC), landscape heterogeneity (LH) and functional flower composition of local plant communities as a measure of habitat quality. We sampled wild bees and hoverflies on 22 dry grassland sites within a highly intensified landscape (NE Germany) within three campaigns using pan traps. We estimated AFC and LH on consecutive radii (60-3000m) around the dry grassland sites and estimated the local functional flower composition. Wild bee species richness and abundance was positively affected by LH and negatively by AFC at small scales (140-400m). In contrast, hoverflies were positively affected by AFC and negatively by LH at larger scales (500-3000m), where both landscape parameters were negatively correlated to each other. At small spatial scales, though, LH had a positive effect on hoverflies abundance. Functional flower diversity had no positive effect on pollinators, but conspicuous flowers seem to attract abundance of both guilds. In conclusion, landscape parameters contrarily affect two pollinator guilds at different scales. The correlation of landscape parameters may influence the observed relationships between landscape parameters and pollinators. Hence, effects of land-use intensification seems to be highly landscape-specific.

Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modelled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one-to-one genotype-phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual-based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and non-adaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directional climate change. Non-adaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, logistic, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (i) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population and the coexistence of polymorphisms, (ii) many-to-one genotype-phenotype map, and (iii) the maintenance of higher genetic variation – compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism – even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red noise stochasticity and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations producing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast.