More intraguild prey than pest species in arachnid diets may compromise biological control in apple orchards

Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The AuthorsUnderstanding the full diet of natural enemies is necessary for evaluating their role as biocontrol agents, because many enemy species do not only feed on pests but also on other natural enemies. Such intraguild predation can compromise pest control if the consumed enemies are actually better for pest control than their predators. In this study, we used gut metabarcoding to quantify diets of all common arachnid species in Swedish and Spanish apple orchards. For this purpose, we designed new primers that reduce amplification of arachnid predators while retaining high amplification of all prey groups. Results suggest that most arachnids consume a large range of putative pest species on apple but also a high proportion of other natural enemies, where the latter constitute almost a third of all prey sequences. Intraguild predation also varied between regions, with a larger content of heteropteran bugs in arachnid guts from Spanish orchards, but not between orchard types. There was also a tendency for cursorial spiders to have more intraguild prey in the gut than web spiders. Two groups that may be overlooked as important biocontrol agents in apple orchards seem to be theridiid web spiders and opilionids, where the latter had several small-bodied pest species in the gut. These results thus provide important guidance for what arachnid groups should be targets of management actions, even though additional information is needed to quantify all direct and indirect interactions occurring in the complex arthropod food webs in fruit orchards.Peer reviewe

Management-dependent effects of pollinator functional diversity on apple pollination services: A response–effect trait approach

Data available via the Dryad Digital Repository https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.63xsj3v39 (Roquer-Beni et al., 2021).Functional traits mediate the response of communities to disturbances (response traits) and their contribution to ecosystem functions (effect traits). To predict how anthropogenic disturbances influence ecosystem services requires a dual approach including both trait concepts. Here, we used a response–effect trait conceptual framework to understand how local and landscape features affect pollinator functional diversity and pollination services in apple orchards. We worked in 110 apple orchards across four European regions. Orchards differed in management practices. Low-intensity (LI) orchards were certified organic or followed close-to-organic practices. High-intensity (HI) orchards followed integrated pest management practices. Within each management type, orchards encompassed a range of local (flower diversity, agri-environmental structures) and landscape features (orchard and pollinator-friendly habitat cover). We measured pollinator visitation rates and calculated trait composition metrics based on 10 pollinator traits. We used initial fruit set as a measure of pollination service. Some pollinator traits (body size and hairiness) were negatively related to orchard cover and positively affected by pollinator-friendly habitat cover. Bee functional diversity was lower in HI orchards and decreased with increased landscape orchard cover. Pollination service was not associated with any particular trait but increased with pollinator trait diversity in LI orchards. As a result, LI orchards with high pollinator trait diversity reached levels of pollination service similar to those of HI orchards. Synthesis and applications. Pollinator functional diversity enables pollinator communities to respond to agricultural intensification and to increase pollination function. Our results show that efforts to promote biodiversity provide greater returns in low-intensity than in high-intensity orchards. The fact that low-intensity orchards with high pollinator functional diversity reach levels of pollination services similar to those of high-intensity orchards provides a compelling argument for the conversion of high-intensity into low-intensity farms.This research (EcoFruit project) was funded through the 2013–2014 BiodivERsA/FACCE-JPI joint call (2014-74), Spanish MinECo (PCIN-2014-145-C02), German BMBF (PT-DLR/BMBF, 01LC1403) and Swedish Research Council Formas (2014-1784) by Formas (2013-934 to M.T.), Stiftelsen Lantbruksforskning (H1256150 to M.P.), INIA (RTA2013-00039-C03-00 to G.A. and M.M.), MinECo/FEDER (CGL2015-68963-C2-2-R to D.G.), FI-AGAUR (to L.R.-B.) and MinECo (RYC-2015-18448 to X.A.)

Tradeoffs and synergies in wetland multifunctionality: A scaling issue

Wetland area in agricultural landscapes has been heavily reduced to gain land for crop production, but in recent years there is increased societal recognition of the negative consequences from wetland loss on nutrient retention, biodiversity and a range of other benefits to humans. The current trend is therefore to re-establish wetlands, often with an aim to achieve the simultaneous delivery of multiple ecosystem services, i.e., multifunctionality. Here we review the literature on key objectives used to motivate wetland re-establishment in temperate agricultural landscapes (provision of flow regulation, nutrient retention, climate mitigation, biodiversity conservation and cultural ecosystem services), and their relationships to environmental properties, in order to identify potential for tradeoffs and synergies concerning the development of multifunctional wetlands. Through this process, we find that there is a need for a change in scale from a focus on single wetlands to wetlandscapes (multiple neighboring wetlands including their catchments and surrounding landscape features) if multiple societal and environmental goals are to be achieved. Finally, we discuss the key factors to be considered when planning for re-establishment of wetlands that can support achievement of a wide range of objectives at the landscape scale

Using ecological and field survey data to establish a national list of the wild bee pollinators of crops

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects.LH was funded by NERC QMEE CDT. EJB was funded by a BBSRC Ph.D. studentship under grant BB/F016581/1. LB was was supported by the Scholarship Program of the German Federal Environmental Foundation (Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt, DBU, AZ 20014/302). AJC was funded by the BBSRC and Syngenta UK as part of a case award Ph.D. (grant no. 1518739). AE was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 405940-115642). DG and A-MK were funded by grant PCIN2014-145-C02-02 (MinECo; EcoFruit project BiodivERsA-FACCE2014-74). MG was supported by Establishing a UK Pollinator Monitoring and Research Partnership (PMRP) a collaborative project funded by Defra, the Welsh and Scottish Governments, JNCC and project partners’. GAdG was funded via research projects BO-11-011.01-051 and BO-43-011.06-007, commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. DK was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs (BO-11-011.01-011). AK-H was funded by the NKFIH project (FK123813), the Bolyai János Fellowship of the MTA, the ÚNKP-19-4-SZIE-3 New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Innovation and Technology, and together with RF by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund OTKA 101940. MM was funded by Waitrose & Partners, Fruition PO, and the University of Worcester. MM was funded by grant INIA-RTA2013-00139-C03-01 (MinECo and FEDER). BBP and RFS were funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council as part of Wessex BESS (ref. NE/J014680/1). NJV was funded by the Walloon Region (Belgium) Direction générale opérationnelle de l’Agriculture, des Ressources naturelles et de l’Environnement (DGO3) for the "Modèle permaculturel" project on biodiversity in micro-farms, FNRS/FWO joint programme EOS — Excellence Of Science CliPS: Climate change and its impact on Pollination Services (project 30947854)". CW was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (Project number 405945293). BW was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) under research programme NE/N018125/1 ASSIST – Achieving Sustainable Agricultural Systems www.assist.ceh.ac.uk. TB and TO are supported by BBSRC, NERC, ESRC and the Scottish Government under the Global Food Security Programme (Grant BB/R00580X/1)

Functional identity versus species richness: herbivory resistance in plant communities

The resistance of a plant community against herbivore attack may depend on plant species richness, with monocultures often much more severely affected than mixtures of plant species. Here, we used a plant–herbivore system to study the effects of selective herbivory on consumption resistance and recovery after herbivory in 81 experimental grassland plots. Communities were established from seed in 2002 and contained 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 or 60 plant species of 1, 2, 3 or 4 functional groups. In 2004, pairs of enclosure cages (1 m tall, 0.5 m diameter) were set up on all 81 plots. One randomly selected cage of each pair was stocked with 10 male and 10 female nymphs of the meadow grasshopper, Chorthippus parallelus. The grasshoppers fed for 2 months, and the vegetation was monitored over 1 year. Consumption resistance and recovery of vegetation were calculated as proportional changes in vegetation biomass. Overall, grasshopper herbivory averaged 6.8%. Herbivory resistance and recovery were influenced by plant functional group identity, but independent of plant species richness and number of functional groups. However, herbivory induced shifts in vegetation composition that depended on plant species richness. Grasshopper herbivory led to increases in herb cover at the expense of grasses. Herb cover increased more strongly in species-rich mixtures. We conclude that selective herbivory changes the functional composition of plant communities and that compositional changes due to selective herbivory depend on plant 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

Opportunities to reduce pollination deficits and address production shortfalls in an important insect pollinated crop

Pollinators face multiple pressures and there is evidence of populations in decline. As demand for insect-pollinated crops increases, crop production is threatened by shortfalls in pollination services. Understanding the extent of current yield deficits due to pollination and identifying opportunities to protect or improve crop yield and quality through pollination management is therefore of international importance. To explore the extent of ‘pollination deficits’, where maximum yield is not being achieved due to insufficient pollination, we use an extensive dataset on a globally important crop, apples. We quantified how these deficits vary between orchards and countries as well as compare ‘pollinator dependence’ across different apple varieties. We found evidence of pollination deficits and in some cases, risks of over-pollination were even apparent where fruit quality could be reduced by too much pollination. In almost all regions studied we found some orchards performing significantly better than others, in terms of avoiding a pollination deficit and crop yield shortfalls due to sub-optimal pollination. This represents an opportunity to improve production through better pollinator and crop management. Our findings also demonstrate that pollinator dependence varies considerably between apple varieties in terms of fruit number and fruit quality. We propose that assessments of pollination service and deficits in crops can be used to quantify supply and demand for pollinators and help target local management to address deficits although crop variety has a strong influence on the role of pollinators