Stability of pollination services decreases with isolation from natural areas despite honey bee visits

Sustainable agricultural landscapes by definition provide high magnitude and stability of ecosystem services, biodiversity and crop productivity. However, few studies have considered landscape effects on the stability of ecosystem services. We tested whether isolation from florally diverse natural and semi-natural areas reduces the spatial and temporal stability of flower-visitor richness and pollination services in crop fields. We synthesised data from 29 studies with contrasting biomes, crop species and pollinator communities. Stability of flower-visitor richness, visitation rate (all insects except honey bees) and fruit set all decreased with distance from natural areas. At 1 km from adjacent natural areas, spatial stability decreased by 25, 16 and 9% for richness, visitation and fruit set, respectively, while temporal stability decreased by 39% for richness and 13% for visitation. Mean richness, visitation and fruit set also decreased with isolation, by 34, 27 and 16% at 1 km respectively. In contrast, honey bee visitation did not change with isolation and represented > 25% of crop visits in 21 studies. Therefore, wild pollinators are relevant for crop productivity and stability even when honey bees are abundant. Policies to preserve and restore natural areas in agricultural landscapes should enhance levels and reliability of pollination services.

Local management and landscape drivers of pollination and biological control services in a Kenyan agro-ecosystem

Arthropods that have a direct impact on crop production (i.e. pests, natural enemies and pollinators) can be influenced by both local farm management and the context within which the fields occur in the wider landscape. However, the contributions and spatial scales at which these drivers operate and interact are not fully understood, particularly in the developing world. The impact of both local management and landscape context on insect pollinators and natural enemy communities and on their capacity to deliver related ecosystem services to an economically important tropical crop, pigeonpea was investigated. The study was conducted in nine paired farms across a gradient of increasing distance to semi-native vegetation in Kibwezi, Kenya. Results show that proximity of fields to semi-native habitats negatively affected pollinator and chewing insect abundance. Within fields, pesticide use was a key negative predictor of pollinator, pest and foliar active predator abundance. On the contrary, fertilizer application significantly enhanced pollinator and both chewing and sucking insect pest abundance. At a 1 km spatial scale of fields, there were significant negative effects of the number of semi-native habitat patches within fields dominated by mass flowering pigeonpea on pollinators abundance. For service provision, a significant decline in fruit set when insects were excluded from flowers was recorded. This study reveals the interconnections of pollinators, predators and pests with pigeonpea crop. For sustainable yields and to conserve high densities of both pollinators and predators of pests within pigeonpea landscapes, it is crucial to target the adoption of less disruptive farm management practices such as reducing pesticide and fertilizer inputs.

Enhancing habitat to help the plight of the bumblebee

Modern farming has caused considerable declines in UK bumblebee populations, and, while options exist for farmers to increase the quantity of bee-friendly habitat, uptake has been low. Robin Blake explains how existing habitats on farms could be enhanced for the benefit of bumblebees

A novel method for assessing risks to pollinators from plant protection products using honeybees as a model species

Pollination is one of the most important ecosystem services in agroecosystems and supports food production. Pollinators are potentially at risk being exposed to pesticides and the main route of exposure is direct contact, in some cases ingestion, of contaminated materials such as pollen, nectar, flowers and foliage. To date there are no suitable methods for predicting pesticide exposure for pollinators, therefore official procedures to assess pesticide risk are based on a Hazard Quotient. Here we develop a procedure to assess exposure and risk for pollinators based on the foraging behaviour of honeybees (Apis mellifera) and using this species as indicator representative of pollinating insects. The method was applied in 13 European field sites with different climatic, landscape and land use characteristics. The level of risk during the crop growing season was evaluated as a function of the active ingredients used and application regime. Risk levels were primarily determined by the agronomic practices employed (i.e. crop type, pest control method, pesticide use), and there was a clear temporal partitioning of risks through time. Generally the risk was higher in sites cultivated with permanent crops, such as vineyard and olive, than in annual crops, such as cereals and oil seed rape. The greatest level of risk is generally found at the beginning of the growing season for annual crops and later in June–July for permanent crops.

The impact of an insecticide on insect flower visitation and pollination in an agricultural landscape

1 Pesticides are considered a threat to pollinators but little is known about the potential impacts of their widespread use on pollinators. Less still is known about the impacts on pollination, comprising the ecosystem service that pollinators provide to wildflowers and crops. 2 The present study measured flower visitation and pollination in an agricultural landscape, by placing potted flowering plants (Petunia sp.) in vine fields sprayed with a highly toxic insecticide (fenitrothion). During two sampling rounds, insect visitors to the petunias were observed and measures of pollination were recorded by counting and weighing seeds. 3 In the earlier sampling round, a lower species richness of insect visitors was observed in fields that had received an early application of insecticide. No negative impacts were found from later applications. The results obtained suggest a greater potential harm to insect pollinators and flower visitation as a result of insecticide application early in the season. 4 No reduction in pollination was found in fields that received an early insecticide application. Pollination was greater with two insecticide applications between sampling rounds rather than one application. 5 In the present study system, insecticide application had a negative effect on pollinators but a possible positive effect on pollination services. In some cases, it may be that actions for conserving biodiversity will not benefit pollination services to all plants.

Novel margin management to enhance Auchenorrhyncha biodiversity in intensive grasslands

Agricultural intensification, including changes in cutting, grazing and fertilizer regimes, has led to declines in UK and NW European grassland biodiversity. We aimed to develop field margin management practices that would support invertebrate diversity and abundance on intensively managed grassland farms, focusing on planthoppers and leafhoppers (Auchenorrhyncha). Replicated across four farms in south-west England, we manipulated conventional management practices (inorganic fertilizer, cutting frequency and height, and aftermath grazing) to create seven treatments along a gradient of decreasing management intensity and increasing sward architectural complexity. Auchenorrhyncha were sampled annually between 2003 and 2005. Auchenorrhyncha abundance and species richness was highest in the most extensively managed treatments. Abundance was lowest with frequent cutting, while species richness was lowest where cattle grazing occurred. Unexpectedly, application of inorganic fertilizer had no effect on Auchenorrhyncha abundance or species richness. Management options that enhance invertebrate diversity, while allowing the remainder of the field to be managed conventionally, represent a potentially important conservation tool for many lowland improved grasslands. Extensification of conventional management in field margin areas of such grasslands are likely to benefit this numerically dominant component of grassland invertebrate fauna. These management practices have the potential to be incorporated into existing UK and European agri-environment schemes.

New tools to boost butterfly habitat quality in existing grass buffer strips

There are approximately 29,000 ha of grass buffer strips in the UK under Agri-Environment Schemes; however, typically they are floristically poor and as such are of limited biodiversity value. Introducing a sown wildflower component has the potential to increase dramatically the value of these buffer strips for a suite of native species, including butterflies. This study investigates management practices aiming to promote the establishment and maintenance of wildflowers in existing buffer strips. The effectiveness of two methods used to increase the establishment of wildflowers for the benefit of native butterfly species were tested, both individually and in combination. The management practices were: (1) the application of a selective graminicide (fluazifop-P-butyl) which reduces the dominance of competitive grasses; and (2) scarification of the soil which creates germination niches for sown wildflower seeds. A wildflower seed mix consisting of nine species was sown in conjunction with the scarification treatment. Responses of wildflowers and butterflies were monitored for two years after establishment. Results indicate that the combined scarification and graminicide treatment produced the greatest cover and species richness of sown wildflowers. Butterfly abundance, species richness and diversity were positively correlated with sown wildflower species richness, with the highest values in the combined scarification and graminicide treatment. These findings have confirmed the importance of both scarification as a means of introducing wildflower seed into existing buffer strips, and subsequent management using graminicides, for the benefit of butterflies. Application of this approach could provide tools to help butterfly conservation on farmland in the future.