3 research outputs found
Bee pollination of strawberries on different spatial scales – from crop varieties and fields to landscapes
Recommended from our members
Wild insect diversity increases inter-annual stability in global crop pollinator communities.
While an increasing number of studies indicate that range, diversity and abundance of many wild pollinators has declined, the global area of pollinator-dependent crops has significantly increased over the last few decades. Crop pollination studies to date, have mainly focused on either identifying different guilds pollinating various crops, or on factors driving spatial changes and turnover observed in these communities. The mechanisms driving temporal stability for ecosystem functioning and services, however, remain poorly understood. Our study quantifies temporal variability observed in crop pollinators in 21 different crops across multiple years at a global scale. Using data from 43 studies from six continents, we show that (i) higher pollinator diversity confers greater inter-annual stability in pollinator communities, (ii) temporal variation observed in pollinator abundance is primarily driven by the three most dominant species, and (iii) crops in tropical regions demonstrate higher inter-annual variability in pollinator species richness than crops in temperate regions. We highlight the importance of recognising wild pollinator diversity in agricultural landscapes to stabilize pollinator persistence across years to protect both biodiversity and crop pollination services. Short-term agricultural management practices aimed at dominant species for stabilising pollination services need to be considered alongside longer-term conservation goals focussed on maintaining and facilitating biodiversity to confer ecological stability
Sparing Land for Biodiversity at Multiple Spatial Scales
A common approach to the conservation of farmland biodiversity and the promotion of multifunctional landscapes, particularly in landscapes containing only small remnants of non-crop habitats, has been to maintain landscape heterogeneity and reduce land-use intensity. In contrast, it has recently been shown that devoting specific areas of non-crop habitats to conservation, segregated from high-yielding farmland (?land sparing?), can more effectively conserve biodiversity than promoting low-yielding, less intensively managed farmland occupying larger areas (?land sharing?). In the present paper we suggest that the debate over the relative merits of land sparing or land sharing is partly blurred by the differing spatial scales at which it is suggested that land sparing should be applied. We argue that there is no single correct spatial scale for segregating biodiversity protection and commodity production in multifunctional landscA common approach to the conservation of farmland biodiversity and the promotion of multifunctional landscapes, particularly in landscapes containing only small remnants of non-crop habitats, has been to maintain landscape heterogeneity and reduce land-use intensity. In contrast, it has recently been shown that devoting specific areas of non-crop habitats to conservation, segregated from high-yielding farmland (?land sparing?), can more effectively conserve biodiversity than promoting low-yielding, less intensively managed farmland occupying larger areas (?land sharing?). In the present paper we suggest that the debate over the relative merits of land sparing or land sharing is partly blurred by the differing spatial scales at which it is suggested that land sparing should be applied. We argue that there is no single correct spatial scale for segregating biodiversity protection and commodity production in multifunctional landscapes. Instead we propose an alternative conceptual construct, which we call ?multiple-scale land sparing,? targeting biodiversity and ecosystem services in transformed landscapes. We discuss how multiple-scale land sparing may overcome the apparent dichotomy between land sharing and land sparing and help to find acceptable compromises that conserve biodiversity and landscape multifunctionality.apes. Instead we propose an alternative conceptual construct, which we call ?multiple-scale land sparing,? targeting biodiversity and ecosystem services in transformed landscapes. We discuss how multiple-scale land sparing may overcome the apparent dichotomy between land sharing and land sparing and help to find acceptable compromises that conserve biodiversity and landscape multifunctionality.Fil: Ekroos, Johan. Lund University; SueciaFil: Ödman, Anja M.. Lund University; SueciaFil: Andersson, Karl Georg Sixten. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Lund University; SueciaFil: Birkhofer, Klaus. Lund University; SueciaFil: Herbertsson, Lina. Lund University; SueciaFil: Klatt, Björn K.. Lund University; SueciaFil: Olsson, Ola. Lund University; SueciaFil: Olsson, Pål Axel. Lund University; SueciaFil: Persson, Anna S.. Lund University; SueciaFil: Prentice, Honor C.. Lund University; SueciaFil: Rundlöf, Maj. Lund University; SueciaFil: Smith, Henrik G.. Lund University; Sueci