Effects of grazing intensity on pollinator abundance and diversity,and on pollination services

1. Pollinating insects provide important ecosystem services and are influenced by the intensity of grazing. Based on the Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis (IDH), pollinator diversity is expected to peak at intermediate grazing intensities. However, this hump‐shaped relationship is rarely found. 2. The effect of grazing intensity was tested on flower cover, on the abundance and richness of bees, hoverflies and bee flies, and on pollination services to early‐flowering bee‐pollinated Asphodelus ramosus L. For that, we used data on 11 plant–pollinator phryganic communities from Lesvos Island (Greece) widely differing in grazing intensities. 3. Flower abundance and richness showed hump‐shaped relationships with grazing intensity. Grazing affected the abundance and richness of bees and hoverflies directly and also indirectly, through changes in the flower community. Grazing influenced directly the richness but not the abundance of bee flies. Overall, pollinator abundance and richness showed hump‐shaped relationships with grazing intensity, but variations in strength (hoverfly abundance) and direction (bee community) of the effect appeared along the season. Early in the season, grazing increased bee abundance but decreased richness, resulting in increased pollen limitation in A. ramosus. 4. The effects of grazing on pollinators vary with the intensity of the disturbance, generally supporting the IDH, and the timing of land‐use activities may influence pollination services. Management strategies should include moderate grazing levels to preserve overall diversity in this area, however, the conservation of particular early bee or bee‐pollinated species may benefit from reduced grazing in early spring.     

Native bees buffer the negative impact of climate warming on honey bee pollination of watermelon crops

If climate change affects pollinator‐dependent crop production, this will have important implications for global food security because insect pollinators contribute to production for 75% of the leading global food crops. We investigate whether climate warming could result in indirect impacts upon crop pollination services via an overlooked mechanism, namely temperature‐induced shifts in the diurnal activity patterns of pollinators. Using a large data set on bee pollination of watermelon crops, we predict how pollination services might change under various climate change scenarios. Our results show that under the most extreme IPCC scenario (A1F1), pollination services by managed honey bees are expected to decline by 14.5%, whereas pollination services provided by most native, wild taxa are predicted to increase, resulting in an estimated aggregate change in pollination services of +4.5% by 2099. We demonstrate the importance of native biodiversity in buffering the impacts of climate change, because crop pollination services would decline more steeply without the native, wild pollinators. More generally, our study provides an important example of how biodiversity can stabilize ecosystem services against environmental change.     

Local and landscape effects on bee communities of Hungarian winter cereal fields

• 1 Pollination is a key ecosystem service. Although bees are the most important pollinators, they are endangered by intensive agricultural practices. The present study investigated the effects of farmland management and environmental factors at local and landscape scales on bees in Central Hungary.
• 2 Bees were sampled in winter cereal fields that varied in the amount of applied fertilizer and insecticide use. Measurements included total, small and large bee species richness and abundance; stability of total species richness and abundance (coefficient of variation, CV); the nitrogen content of fertilizers; the number of insecticide applications; within‐field location; species richness and abundance of insect‐pollinated plants; and the percentage of semi‐natural areas in a 500‐m radius circle around the fields under study.
• 3 Increasing the amount of fertilizer decreased total and small bee abundance and increased the CV of total bee abundance. Insecticide use had a significant negative effect on total and small bee species richness and on large bee abundance. The percentage of semi‐natural habitats in a 500‐m radius did not influence bee species richness and abundance.
• 4 The results obtained confirms that the intensification of farmland management poses a threat to bee diversity, and thus may reduce pollination services. Recently‐introduced agri‐environment schemes are one potential approach for managing agricultural land use: reduced amounts of fertilizer and a cessation of insecticide application might lead to high bee species richness and abundance and ensure the pollination of wild plants and flowering crops.

     

Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management

Understanding the negative and positive effects of agricultural land use for the conservation of biodiversity, and its relation to ecosystem services, needs a landscape perspective. Agriculture can contribute to the conservation of high‐diversity systems, which may provide important ecosystem services such as pollination and biological control via complementarity and sampling effects. Land‐use management is often focused on few species and local processes, but in dynamic, agricultural landscapes, only a diversity of insurance species may guarantee resilience (the capacity to reorganize after disturbance). Interacting species experience their surrounding landscape at different spatial scales, which influences trophic interactions. Structurally complex landscapes enhance local diversity in agroecosystems, which may compensate for local high‐intensity management. Organisms with high‐dispersal abilities appear to drive these biodiversity patterns and ecosystem services, because of their recolonization ability and larger resources experienced. Agri‐environment schemes (incentives for farmers to benefit the environment) need to broaden their perspective and to take the different responses to schemes in simple (high impact) and complex (low impact) agricultural landscapes into account. In simple landscapes, local allocation of habitat is more important than in complex landscapes, which are in total at risk. However, little knowledge of the relative importance of local and landscape management for biodiversity and its relation to ecosystem services make reliable recommendations difficult.     

The effects of urbanization on pollinators and pollination: A meta-analysis

Urbanization is increasing worldwide, with major impacts on biodiversity, species interactions and ecosystem functioning. Pollination is an ecosystem function vital for terrestrial ecosystems and food security; however, the processes underlying the patterns of pollinator diversity and the ecosystem services they provide in cities have seldom been quantified. Here, we perform a comprehensive meta-analysis of 133 studies examining the effects of urbanization on pollinators and pollination. Our results confirm the widespread negative impacts of urbanization on pollinator richness and abundance, with Lepidoptera being the most affected group. Furthermore, pollinator responses were found to be trait-specific, with below-ground nesting and solitary Hymenoptera, and spring flyers more severely affected by urbanization. Meanwhile, cities promote non-native pollinators, which may exacerbate conservation risks to native species. Surprisingly, despite the negative effects of urbanization on pollinator diversity, pollination service measured as seed set is enhanced in non-tropical cities likely due to abundant generalists and managed pollinators therein. We emphasize that the richness of local flowering plants could mitigate the negative impacts of urbanization on pollinator diversity. Overall, the results demonstrate the varying magnitudes of multiple moderators on urban pollinators and pollination services and could help guide conservation actions for biodiversity and ecosystem function for a sustainable future.     

Pollination of a bee‐dependent forb in restored prairie: no evidence of pollen limitation in landscapes dominated by row crop agriculture

Restoration is used to conserve biodiversity; however, it is unclear to what extent restoration impacts ecosystem functions. Pollination is an ecosystem function that is critical to plant reproduction and thus restoration success. Few studies have assessed whether pollination is restored within restoration areas themselves. Plant–animal interactions may be affected by factors beyond the scale of the restoration. For example, surrounding landscape context may influence pollinator abundance and consequently the amount of pollen deposited. Decreased pollen receipt might then limit seed set. We hypothesized that in restorations surrounded by more agriculture, pollinator‐dependent forbs would experience greater pollen limitation. This would likely be due to declines in pollinator abundance within the restorations with an increase in surrounding agriculture. We deployed potted Chamaecrista fasciculata (Fabaceae), an obligatorily bee‐pollinated forb, and sampled bee communities in restored prairies in Minnesota, U.S.A. We measured pollen limitation by comparing seed set among open and supplementally pollinated plants. We also sampled native bees in seven of the eight sites. We tested for a relationship between proportion row crop agriculture (corn and soy) surrounding a restoration and pollen limitation, as well as an effect of agriculture on bee abundance. We did not find evidence that increasing proportion of surrounding agriculture negatively affected pollen limitation or bee abundance. Our results indicate that greater surrounding agriculture may not influence pollination of C. fasciculata through declines in pollinator availability, and suggest for some plants that landscape context might not limit pollination in restorations.     

Response diversity to land use occurs but does not consistently stabilise ecosystem services provided by native pollinators

More diverse biological communities may provide ecosystem services that are less variable over space or time. However, the mechanisms underlying this relationship are rarely investigated empirically in real‐world ecosystems. Here, we investigate how a potentially important stabilising mechanism, response diversity, the differential response to environmental change among species, stabilises pollination services against land‐use change. We measured crop pollination services provided by native bees across land‐use gradients in three crop systems. We found that bee species responded differentially to increasing agricultural land cover in all three systems, demonstrating that response diversity occurs. Similarly, we found response diversity in pollination services in two of the systems. However, there was no evidence that response diversity, in general, stabilised ecosystem services. Our results suggest that either response diversity is not the primary stabilising mechanism in our system, or that new measures of response diversity are needed that better capture the stabilising effects it provides.     

The challenge of accurately documenting bee species richness in agroecosystems: bee diversity in eastern apple orchards

Bees are important pollinators of agricultural crops, and bee diversity has been shown to be closely associated with pollination, a valuable ecosystem service. Higher functional diversity and species richness of bees have been shown to lead to higher crop yield. Bees simultaneously represent a mega‐diverse taxon that is extremely challenging to sample thoroughly and an important group to understand because of pollination services. We sampled bees visiting apple blossoms in 28 orchards over 6 years. We used species rarefaction analyses to test for the completeness of sampling and the relationship between species richness and sampling effort, orchard size, and percent agriculture in the surrounding landscape. We performed more than 190 h of sampling, collecting 11,219 specimens representing 104 species. Despite the sampling intensity, we captured <75% of expected species richness at more than half of the sites. For most of these, the variation in bee community composition between years was greater than among sites. Species richness was influenced by percent agriculture, orchard size, and sampling effort, but we found no factors explaining the difference between observed and expected species richness. Competition between honeybees and wild bees did not appear to be a factor, as we found no correlation between honeybee and wild bee abundance. Our study shows that the pollinator fauna of agroecosystems can be diverse and challenging to thoroughly sample. We demonstrate that there is high temporal variation in community composition and that sites vary widely in the sampling effort required to fully describe their diversity. In order to maximize pollination services provided by wild bee species, we must first accurately estimate species richness. For researchers interested in providing this estimate, we recommend multiyear studies and rarefaction analyses to quantify the gap between observed and expected species richness.     

Forest biodiversity,ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

Forests are critical habitats for biodiversity and they are also essential for the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services that are important to human well-being. There is increasing evidence that biodiversity contributes to forest ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Here we provide a review of forest ecosystem services including biomass production, habitat provisioning services, pollination, seed dispersal, resistance to wind storms, fire regulation and mitigation, pest regulation of native and invading insects, carbon sequestration, and cultural ecosystem services, in relation to forest type, structure and diversity. We also consider relationships between forest biodiversity and multifunctionality, and trade-offs among ecosystem services. We compare the concepts of ecosystem processes, functions and services to clarify their definitions. Our review of published studies indicates a lack of empirical studies that establish quantitative and causal relationships between forest biodiversity and many important ecosystem services. The literature is highly skewed; studies on provisioning of nutrition and energy, and on cultural services, delivered by mixed-species forests are under-represented. Planted forests offer ample opportunity for optimising their composition and diversity because replanting after harvesting is a recurring process. Planting mixed-species forests should be given more consideration as they are likely to provide a wider range of ecosystem services within the forest and for adjacent land uses. This review also serves as the introduction to this special issue of Biodiversity and Conservation on various aspects of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services.     

Bee Species Diversity Enhances Productivity and Stability in a Perennial Crop

Wild bees provide important pollination services to agroecoystems, but the mechanisms which underlie their contribution to ecosystem functioning—and, therefore, their importance in maintaining and enhancing these services—remain unclear. We evaluated several mechanisms through which wild bees contribute to crop productivity, the stability of pollinator visitation, and the efficiency of individual pollinators in a highly bee-pollination dependent plant, highbush blueberry. We surveyed the bee community (through transect sampling and pan trapping) and measured pollination of both open- and singly-visited flowers. We found that the abundance of managed honey bees, Apis mellifera, and wild-bee richness were equally important in describing resulting open pollination. Wild-bee richness was a better predictor of pollination than wild-bee abundance. We also found evidence suggesting pollinator visitation (and subsequent pollination) are stabilized through the differential response of bee taxa to weather (i.e., response diversity). Variation in the individual visit efficiency of A. mellifera and the southeastern blueberry bee, Habropoda laboriosa, a wild specialist, was not associated with changes in the pollinator community. Our findings add to a growing literature that diverse pollinator communities provide more stable and productive ecosystem services.     

Comparison of pollinators and natural enemies: a meta‐analysis of landscape and local effects on abundance and richness in crops

To manage agroecosystems for multiple ecosystem services, we need to know whether the management of one service has positive, negative, or no effects on other services. We do not yet have data on the interactions between pollination and pest‐control services. However, we do have data on the distributions of pollinators and natural enemies in agroecosystems. Therefore, we compared these two groups of ecosystem service providers, to see if the management of farms and agricultural landscapes might have similar effects on the abundance and richness of both. In a meta‐analysis, we compared 46 studies that sampled bees, predatory beetles, parasitic wasps, and spiders in fields, orchards, or vineyards of food crops. These studies used the proximity or proportion of non‐crop or natural habitats in the landscapes surrounding these crops (a measure of landscape complexity), or the proximity or diversity of non‐crop plants in the margins of these crops (a measure of local complexity), to explain the abundance or richness of these beneficial arthropods. Compositional complexity at both landscape and local scales had positive effects on both pollinators and natural enemies, but different effects on different taxa. Effects on bees and spiders were significantly positive, but effects on parasitoids and predatory beetles (mostly Carabidae and Staphylinidae) were inconclusive. Landscape complexity had significantly stronger effects on bees than it did on predatory beetles and significantly stronger effects in non‐woody rather than in woody crops. Effects on richness were significantly stronger than effects on abundance, but possibly only for spiders. This abundance‐richness difference might be caused by differences between generalists and specialists, or between arthropods that depend on non‐crop habitats (ecotone species and dispersers) and those that do not (cultural species). We call this the ‘specialist‐generalist’ or ‘cultural difference’ mechanism. If complexity has stronger effects on richness than abundance, it might have stronger effects on the stability than the magnitude of these arthropod‐mediated ecosystem services. We conclude that some pollinators and natural enemies seem to have compatible responses to complexity, and it might be possible to manage agroecosystems for the benefit of both. However, too few studies have compared the two, and so we cannot yet conclude that there are no negative interactions between pollinators and natural enemies, and no trade‐offs between pollination and pest‐control services. Therefore, we suggest a framework for future research to bridge these gaps in our knowledge.     

Arid grassland bee communities: associated environmental variables and responses to restoration

In recent years restoration project efforts in arid grasslands of the Pacific Northwest have increased; however, little is known about the bee communities in these areas or how restoration affects them. Native bees provide an essential ecosystem service through pollination of crops and native plants and understanding their response to restoration is a high priority. To address this issue, we conducted a three‐year study in an arid bunchgrass prairie with three objectives: (1) describe the bee community of this unique grassland type and its temporal variability; (2) investigate environmental variables influencing the community; and (3) examine effects of restoration on the community. We identified 62 bee species and found strong seasonal and inter‐annual variation in bee abundance, richness, diversity, and species composition. Unexpectedly, these temporal trends did not correspond with patterns in floral resources; however, several variables were associated with variation in bee abundance, richness, and diversity among sites. Sites with high levels of litter cover had more bees, while sites with taller vegetation or more blooming flowers had greater species richness but lower diversity. We found no detectable effect of restoration on bee abundance, richness, diversity, or composition. Species composition at native sites differed from those in actively and passively restored sites, which did not differ from each other. Restored sites also had fewer flowers and differing floral composition relative to native sites. These results suggest that if grassland restoration is to benefit bees, efforts should focus on both expanding floral resources and enhancing variables that influence nesting habitat.     

Bee community responses to a gradient of oak savanna restoration practices

North American Midwestern oak (Quercus spp.) savannas are rare fire‐dependent ecosystems that can support high levels of biodiversity and are the focus of considerable restoration effort due to widespread fire suppression. Due to the predominance of understory forbs in oak savannas, many of which require insect pollination, restoration practices should be evaluated for their potential impacts on pollinator communities. We evaluated bee community responses during the first 2 years of experimental restoration of fire‐suppressed oak savanna in southern Michigan. We used unmanaged references and two different restoration methods (burning only and burning with thinning) to examine the effects of restoration intensity on the abundance, diversity, and functional groups of bees. We found that thinning and burning rapidly increased bee abundance, richness, and Shannon's diversity, relative to unmanaged references, whereas burn‐only restoration largely failed to do so. Thinning and burning also resulted in a distinct bee community after two seasons, while bee communities in burn‐only restoration plots were similar to those from unmanaged references. Differences in bee diversity and community structure between treatments may be due to the influence of restoration on nesting resources, which is reflected in the differential captures of various nesting guilds. Overall, oak savanna restoration by thinning and burning had positive effects on bee diversity, while burning alone only increased bee abundance. We thus illustrate how restoration strategies that typically target plants have broader‐reaching biodiversity benefits. Although restoring savannas through burning alone may eventually shift bee communities, coupling thinning with burning will influence pollinator communities over the shorter term.     

Proximity to wildflower strips did not boost crop pollination on small,diversified farms harboring diverse wild bees

The yield of many agricultural crops depends on pollination services provided by wild and managed bees, many of which are experiencing declines due to factors such as reductions in floral resources. Thus, improving pollinator habitat on farmlands using management strategies like planting wildflower strips is vital for wild bee conservation and sustainable crop pollination. Yet, few studies have examined whether and at what spatial scales wildflower strips enhance crop pollination and yields, and most research has been conducted in large-scale commercial agriculture. Therefore, we investigated the effects of wildflower strips on crop pollination on small, diversified farms (i.e., those growing a variety of crop species) where wild bee diversity and abundance is predicted to be comparatively high. Over three years, on four diversified farms in Montana USA, we tested the hypothesis that distance (20, 60, and 180 m) of crops from native perennial wildflower strips planted alongside crop fields affected wild bee visitation, pollination, and yields of squash and sunflower crop plants. We found that distance to wildflower strips did not affect bee visitation or pollination in crops. Squash yield was pollen-limited in the growing season prior to wildflower strip establishment, and in one of the two years after wildflower strip establishment, but proximity to wildflower strips did not influence the magnitude of pollen limitation. Sunflower seed production was not pollen-limited in any year. Our findings demonstrate that even on diverse farms with wildflower strips and a demonstrated high diversity of bees, some crops do not necessarily receive maximum pollination, regardless of distance from the wildflower strips. However, the value of wildflower strips for supporting wild bee diversity, and other ecological or economic benefits, needs consideration for a full understanding of this pollinator habitat management strategy.     

Humans,bees, and pollination services in the city: the case of Chicago,IL (USA)

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.     

Implications of Three Biofuel Crops for Beneficial Arthropods in Agricultural Landscapes

Production of biofuel feedstocks in agricultural landscapes will result in land use changes that may have major implications for arthropod-mediated ecosystem services such as pollination and pest suppression. By comparing the abundance and diversity of insect pollinators and generalist natural enemies in three model biofuel crops: corn, switchgrass, and mixed prairie, we tested the hypothesis that biofuel crops comprised of more diverse plant communities would support increased levels of beneficial insects. These three biofuel crops contained a diverse bee community comprised of 75 species. Overall, bees were three to four times more abundant in switchgrass and prairie than in corn, with members of the sweat bee (Halictidae) and small carpenter bee (Ceratina spp.) groups the most abundant. Switchgrass and prairie had significantly greater bee species richness than corn during the July sampling period. The natural enemy community at these sites was dominated by lady beetles (Coccinellidae), long-legged flies (Dolichopodidae), and hover flies (Syrphidae) which varied in their response to crop type. Coccinellids were generally most abundant in prairie and switchgrass, with the exception of the pollen feeding Coleomegilla maculata that was most abundant in corn. Several rare or declining coccinellid species were detected in prairie and switchgrass sites. Dolichopodidae were more abundant in prairie and switchgrass while Syrphidae showed no significant response to crop type. Our results indicate that beneficial insects generally responded positively to the increased vegetational diversity of prairie and switchgrass sites; however, when managed as a dedicated biofuel crop, plant and arthropod diversity in switchgrass may decrease. Our findings support the hypothesis that vegetationally diverse biofuel crops support higher abundance and diversity of beneficial insects. Future policy regarding the production of biofuel feedstocks should consider the ecosystem services that different biofuel crops may support in agricultural landscapes.     

Native bees provide insurance against ongoing honey bee losses

One of the values of biodiversity is that it may provide 'biological insurance' for services currently rendered by domesticated species or technology. We used crop pollination as a model system, and investigated whether the loss of a domesticated pollinator (the honey bee) could be compensated for by native, wild bee species. We measured pollination provided to watermelon crops at 23 farms in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, USA, and used a simulation model to separate the pollen provided by honey bees and native bees. Simulation results predict that native bees alone provide sufficient pollination at > 90% of the farms studied. Furthermore, empirical total pollen deposition at flowers was strongly, significantly correlated with native bee visitation but not with honey bee visitation. The honey bee is currently undergoing extensive die-offs because of Colony Collapse Disorder. We predict that in our region native bees will buffer potential declines in agricultural production because of honey bee losses.     

Bumble bee abundance and richness improves honey bee pollination behaviour in sweet cherry

Pollination service in agricultural crops increases significantly with pollinator diversity and wild pollinator abundance. Differences in the foraging behaviour of pollinating insects are one of the reasons why pollinator diversity and abundance enhances crop pollination. Here, we focused on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees in sweet cherry orchards. In addition, we studied the influence of bee diversity and abundance on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees. Honey bees were found to visit fewer flowers than bumble bees. Bumble bees also showed a higher probability of changing trees between rows than honey bees. Both visitation rate and probability of row changes of honey bees increased with bumble bee diversity and with bumble bee abundance. We also found that the probability of row changes of honey bees increased with increasing bumble bee abundance. These effects of bumble bee richness and abundance on the pollination behaviour of honey bees can improve the pollination performance of honey bees in crops that depend on cross pollination. Our results highlight the higher pollination performance of bumble bees and the facilitative effect of wild pollinators to crop pollination.     

Organic farming improves pollination success in strawberries

Pollination of insect pollinated crops has been found to be correlated to pollinator abundance and diversity. Since organic farming has the potential to mitigate negative effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity, it may also benefit crop pollination, but direct evidence of this is scant. We evaluated the effect of organic farming on pollination of strawberry plants focusing on (1) if pollination success was higher on organic farms compared to conventional farms, and (2) if there was a time lag from conversion to organic farming until an effect was manifested. We found that pollination success and the proportion of fully pollinated berries were higher on organic compared to conventional farms and this difference was already evident 2-4 years after conversion to organic farming. Our results suggest that conversion to organic farming may rapidly increase pollination success and hence benefit the ecosystem service of crop pollination regarding both yield quantity and quality.