Non-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination

Wild and managed bees are well documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25–50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines.

A trophic cascade induced by predatory ants in a fig-fig wasp mutualism

Summary 1. A trophic cascade occurs when predators directly decrease the densities, or change the behaviour, of herbivores and thus indirectly increase plant productivity. The predator–herbivore– plant context is well known, but some predators attack species beneficial to plants (e.g. pollinators) and/or enemies of herbivores (e.g. parasites), and their role in the dynamics of mutualisms remains largely unexplored. 2. We surveyed the predatory ant species and studied predation by the dominant ant species, the weaver ant Oecophylla smaragdina, associated with the fig tree Ficus racemosa in southwest China. We then tested the effects of weaver ants on the oviposition behaviour of pollinating and non-pollinating fig wasps in an ant-exclusion experiment. The effects of weaver ants on fig wasp community structure and fig seed production were then compared between trees with and without O. smaragdina. 3. Oecophylla smaragdina captured more non-pollinating wasps (Platyneura mayri) than pollinators as the insects arrived to lay eggs. When ants were excluded, more non-pollinators laid eggs into figs and fewer pollinators entered figs. Furthermore, trees with O. smaragdina produced more pollinator offspring and fewer non-pollinator offspring, shifting the community structure significantly. In addition, F. racemosa produced significantly more seeds on trees inhabited by weaver ants. 4. Oecophylla smaragdina predation reverses the dominance of the two commonest wasp species at the egg-laying stage and favours the pollinators. This behavioural pattern is mirrored by wasp offspring production, with pollinators’ offspring dominating figs produced by trees inhabited by weaver ants, and offspring of the non-pollinator P. mayri most abundant in figs on trees inhabited by other ants. 5. Overall, our results suggest that predation by weaver ants limits the success of the non-pollinating P. mayri and therefore indirectly benefits the mutualism by increasing the reproductive success of both the pollinators and the plant. Predation is thus a key functional factor that can shape the community structure of a pollinator-plant mutualistic system. Key-words: competitive release, fig wasp, mutualism, predation, predator-exclusion experiment, trophic cascade

How to be a fig wasp down under: the diversity and structure of an Australian fig wasp community

Endophytic insects and their parasitoids provide valuable models for community ecology. The wasp communities in inflorescences of fig trees have great potential for comparative studies, but we must first describe individual communities. Here, we add to the few detailed studies of such communities by describing the one associated with Ficus rubiginosa in Australia. First, we describe community composition, using two different sampling procedures. Overall, we identified 14 species of non-pollinating fig wasp (NPFW) that fall into two size classes. Small wasps, including pollinators, gallers and their parasitoids, were more abundant than large wasps (both galler and parasitoid species). We show that in figs where wasps emerge naturally, the presence of large wasps may partly explain the low emergence of small wasps. During fig development, large gallers oviposit first, before and around the time of pollination, while parasitoids lay eggs after pollination. We further show that parasitoids in the subfamily Sycoryctinae, which comprise the majority of all individual NPFWs, segregate temporally by laying eggs at different stages of fig development. We discuss our results in terms of species co-existence and community structure and compare our findings to those from fig wasp communities on other continents.