Plant-pollinator biodiversity and pollination services in a complex Mediterranean landscape

Mediterranean landscapes comprise a complex mosaic of different habitats that vary in the diversity of their floral communities, pollinator communities and pollination services. Using the Greek Island of Lesvos as a model system, we assess the biodiversity value of six common habitats and measure ecosystemic 'health' using pollen grain deposition in three core flowering plants as a measure of pollination services. Three fire-driven habitats were assessed: freshly burnt areas, fully regenerated pine forests and intermediate age scrub; in addition we examined oak woodlands, actively managed olive groves and groves that had been abandoned from agriculture. Oak woodlands, pine forests and managed olive groves had the highest diversity of bees. The habitat characteristics responsible for structuring bee communities were: floral diversity, floral abundance, nectar energy availability and the variety of nectar resources present. Pollination services in two of our plant species, which were pollinated by a limited sub-set of the pollinator community, indicated that pollination levels were highest in the burnt and mature pine habitats. The third species, which was open to all flower visitors, indicated that oak woodlands had the highest levels of pollination from generalist species. Pollination was always more effective in managed olive groves than in abandoned groves. However, the two most common species of bee, the honeybee and a bumblebee, were not the primary pollinators within these habitats. We conclude that the three habitats of greatest overall value for plant-pollinator communities and provision of the healthiest pollination services are pine forests, oak woodland and managed olive groves. We indicate how the highest value habitats may be maintained in a complex landscape to safeguard and enhance pollination function within these habitats and potentially in adjoining agricultural areas. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Landscape effects on crop pollination services: are there general patterns?

Pollination by bees and other animals increases the size, quality, or stability of harvests for 70% of leading global crops. Because native species pollinate many of these crops effectively, conserving habitats for wild pollinators within agricultural landscapes can help maintain pollination services. Using hierarchical Bayesian techniques, we synthesize the results of 23 studies - representing 16 crops on five continents - to estimate the general relationship between pollination services and distance from natural or semi-natural habitats. We find strong exponential declines in both pollinator richness and native visitation rate. Visitation rate declines more steeply, dropping to half of its maximum at 0.6 km from natural habitat, compared to 1.5 km for richness. Evidence of general decline in fruit and seed set - variables that directly affect yields - is less clear. Visitation rate drops more steeply in tropical compared with temperate regions, and slightly more steeply for social compared with solitary bees. Tropical crops pollinated primarily by social bees may therefore be most susceptible to pollination failure from habitat loss. Quantifying these general relationships can help predict consequences of land use change on pollinator communities and crop productivity, and can inform landscape conservation efforts that balance the needs of native species and people.

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.

Pollination services in the UK: how important are honeybees?

Pollination services are known to provide substantial benefits to human populations and agriculture in particular. Although many species are known to provide pollination services, honeybees (Apis mellifera) are often assumed to provide the majority of these services to agriculture. Using data from a range of secondary sources, this study assesses the importance of insect pollinated crops at regional and national scales and investigates the capacity of honeybees to provide optimal pollination services to UK agriculture. The findings indicate that insect pollinated crops have become increasingly important in UK crop agriculture and, as of 2007, accounted for 20% of UK cropland and 19% of total farmgate crop value. Analysis of honeybee hive numbers indicates that current UK populations are only capable of supplying 34% of pollination service demands even under favourable assumptions, falling from 70% in 1984. In spite of this decline, insect pollinated crop yields have risen by an average of 54% since 1984, casting doubt on long held beliefs that honeybees provide the majority of pollination services. Future land use and crop production patterns may further increase the role of pollination services to UK agriculture, highlighting the importance of measures aimed at maintaining both wild and managed species.

A stated preference valuation of the non-market benefits of pollination services in the UK

Using a choice experiment survey this study examines the UK public's willingness to pay to conserve insect pollinators in relation to the levels of two pollination service benefits: maintaining local produce supplies and the aesthetic benefits of diverse wildflower assemblages. Willingness to pay was estimated using a Bayesian mixed logit with two contrasting controls for attribute non-attendance, exclusion and shrinkage. The results suggest that the UK public have an extremely strong preference to avoid a status quo scenario where pollinator populations and pollination services decline. Total willingness to pay was high and did not significantly vary between the two pollination service outputs, producing a conservative total of £379M over a sample of the tax-paying population of the UK, equivalent to £13.4 per UK taxpayer. Using a basic production function approach, the marginal value of pollination services to these attributes is also extrapolated. The study discusses the implications of these findings and directions for related future research into the non-market value of pollination and other ecosystem services.

Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation

There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.

Pollinator conservation: the difference between managing for pollination services and preserving pollinator diversity

Our review looks at pollinator conservation and highlights the differences in approach between managing for pollination services and preserving pollinator diversity. We argue that ecosystem service management does not equal biodiversity conservation, and that maintaining species diversity is crucial in providing ecosystem resilience in the face of future environmental change. Management and policy measures therefore need to focus on species not just in human dominated landscapes but need to benefit wider diversity of species including those in specialised habitats. We argue that only by adopting a holistic ecosystem approach we can ensure the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the long-term.

Neonicotinoid pesticide exposure impairs crop pollination services provided by bumblebees

Recent concern over global pollinator declines has led to considerable research on the effects of pesticides on bees1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Although pesticides are typically not encountered at lethal levels in the field, there is growing evidence indicating that exposure to field-realistic levels can have sublethal effects on bees, affecting their foraging behaviour1, 6, 7, homing ability8, 9 and reproductive success2, 5. Bees are essential for the pollination of a wide variety of crops and the majority of wild flowering plants10, 11, 12, but until now research on pesticide effects has been limited to direct effects on bees themselves and not on the pollination services they provide. Here we show the first evidence to our knowledge that pesticide exposure can reduce the pollination services bumblebees deliver to apples, a crop of global economic importance. Bumblebee colonies exposed to a neonicotinoid pesticide provided lower visitation rates to apple trees and collected pollen less often. Most importantly, these pesticide-exposed colonies produced apples containing fewer seeds, demonstrating a reduced delivery of pollination services. Our results also indicate that reduced pollination service delivery is not due to pesticide-induced changes in individual bee behaviour, but most likely due to effects at the colony level. These findings show that pesticide exposure can impair the ability of bees to provide pollination services, with important implications for both the sustained delivery of stable crop yields and the functioning of natural ecosystems.

Measuring the economic value of pollination services: principles, evidence and knowledge gaps

An increasing degree of attention is being given to the ecosystem services which insect pollinators supply, and the economic value of these services. Recent research suggests that a range of factors are contributing to a global decline in pollination services, which are often used as a “headline” ecosystem service in terms of communicating the concept of ecosystem services, and how this ties peoples׳ well-being to the condition of ecosystems and the biodiversity found therein. Our paper offers a conceptual framework for measuring the economic value of changes in insect pollinator populations, and then reviews what evidence exists on the empirical magnitude of these values (both market and non-market). This allows us to highlight where the largest gaps in knowledge are, where the greatest conceptual and empirical challenges remain, and where research is most needed.

Pollination services at risk: Bee habitats will decrease owing to climate change in Brazil

Native bees are important providers of pollination services, but there are cumulative evidences of their decline. Global changes such as habitat losses, invasions of exotic species and climate change have been suggested as the main causes of the decline of pollinators. In this study, the influence of climate change on the distribution of 10 species of Brazilian bees was estimated with species distribution modelling. We used Maxent algorithm (maximum entropy) and two different scenarios, an optimistic and a pessimistic, to the years 2050 and 2080. We also evaluated the percentage reduction of species habitat based on the future scenarios of climate change through Geographic Information System (GIS). Results showed that the total area of suitable habitats decreased for all species but one under the different future scenarios. The greatest reductions in habitat area were found for Melipona bicolor bicolor and Melipona scutellaris, which occur predominantly in areas related originally to Atlantic Moist Forest. The species analysed have been reported to be pollinators of some regional crops and the consequence of their decrease for these crops needs further clarification. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Developing European conservation and mitigation tools for pollination services: approaches of the STEP (Status and Trends of European Pollinators) project

Pollinating insects form a key component of European biodiversity, and provide a vital ecosystem service to crops and wild plants. There is growing evidence of declines in both wild and domesticated pollinators, and parallel declines in plants relying upon them. The STEP project (Status and Trends of European Pollinators, 2010-2015, www.step-project.net) is documenting critical elements in the nature and extent of these declines, examining key functional traits associated with pollination deficits, and developing a Red List for some European pollinator groups. Together these activities are laying the groundwork for future pollinator monitoring programmes. STEP is also assessing the relative importance of potential drivers of pollinator declines, including climate change, habitat loss and fragmentation, agrochemicals, pathogens, alien species, light pollution, and their interactions. We are measuring the ecological and economic impacts of declining pollinator services and floral resources, including effects on wild plant populations, crop production and human nutrition. STEP is reviewing existing and potential mitigation options, and providing novel tests of their effectiveness across Europe. Our work is building upon existing and newly developed datasets and models, complemented by spatially-replicated campaigns of field research to fill gaps in current knowledge. Findings are being integrated into a policy-relevant framework to create evidence-based decision support tools. STEP is establishing communication links to a wide range of stakeholders across Europe and beyond, including policy makers, beekeepers, farmers, academics and the general public. Taken together, the STEP research programme aims to improve our understanding of the nature, causes, consequences and potential mitigation of declines in pollination services at local, national, continental and global scales.

Organic farming in isolated landscapes does not benefit flower-visiting insects and pollination

Organic farming has often been found to provide benefits for biodiversity, but the benefits can depend on the species considered and characteristics of the surrounding landscape. In an intensively farmed area of Northeast Italy we investigated whether isolated organic farms, in a conventionally farmed landscape, provided local benefits for insect pollinators and pollination services. We quantified the relative effects of local management (i.e. the farm system), landscape management (proportion of surrounding uncultivated land) and interactions between them. We compared six organic and six conventional vine fields. The proportion of surrounding uncultivated land was calculated for each site at radii of 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 m. The organic fields did not differ from the conventional in their floral resources or proportion of surrounding uncultivated land. Data were collected on pollinator abundance and species richness, visitation rates to, and pollination of experimental potted plants. None of these factors were significantly affected by the farming system. The abundance of visits to the potted plants in the conventional fields tended to be negatively affected by the proportion of surrounding uncultivated land. The proportion fruit set, weight of seeds per plant and seed weight in conventional and organic fields were all negatively affected by the proportion of surrounding uncultivated land. In vine fields the impact of the surrounding landscape was stronger than the local management. Enhancement of biodiversity through organic farming should not be assumed to be ubiquitous, as potential benefits may be offset by the crop type, organicmanagement practices and the specific habitat requirements in the surrounding landscape.

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.