Creating patches of native flowers facilitates crop pollination in large agricultural fields : mango as a case study

1. As cropland increases, fields become progressively isolated from pollinators, leading to declines in pollinator-dependent crop productivity. With the rise in demand for pollinatordependent foods, such productivity losses may accelerate conversion of natural areas to cropland. Pollination–compensation measures involving managed pollinators or hand pollination are not always optimal or are too costly. Introducing areas of native vegetation within cropland has been proposed as a way to supplement crop pollinators, but this measure is perceived by farmers to carry costs outweighing benefits to agricultural production. Studies quantifying benefits of small patches of native flowers to crop pollination are therefore necessary to encourage such practices. 2. To ascertain whether provision of floral resources within farmlands can facilitate pollination, and hence, crop yields, small experimental patches of perennial native plants (native flower compensation areas, NFCAs) were created in nonproductive areas of large commercial fields of several cultivars of mango Mangifera indica. 3. Pesticide use and isolation from natural habitat were associated with declines in flying visitors and in mango production (kg of marketable fresh fruit), but presence of NFCAs ameliorated these declines, and NFCAs did not harbour any mango pests. In areas far from natural vegetation, orchards near NFCAs had significantly higher diversity and abundance of mango flying visitors, as well as mango production, than orchards far from NFCAs, although these measures were still lower than in orchards close to natural areas. 4. Neither the most abundant flower visitors to mango (ants) nor initial fruit set was significantly affected by distance, pesticides or NFCAs, suggesting that although fertilization is associated with factors unaffected by isolation from natural habitat and pesticide use (i.e. selfand ant-pollination), viable fruit set (and ultimately, production) requires cross-pollination, for which flying visitors are essential. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our results show that the presence of small patches of native flowers within large farms can increase pollinator-dependent crop production if combined with preservation of remaining fragments of natural habitat and judicious use of pesticides. Native flower compensation areas represent a profitable management measure for farmers, increasing cost-effectiveness of cropland while indirectly contributing to preservation of natural habitat.South African National Biodiversity Institute,The University of Pretoria and STEP (Status and Trends of European Pollinators, grant no244090).http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2664hb2013ab201

Global trends in the number and diversity of managed pollinator species

Cultivation of pollinator-dependent crops has expanded globally, increasing our reliance on insect pollination. This essential ecosystem service is provided by a wide range of managed and wild pollinators whose abundance and diversity are thought to be in decline, threatening sustainable food production. The Western honey bee (Apis mellifera) is amongst the best-monitored insects but the state of other managed pollinators is less well known. Here, we review the status and trends of all managed pollinators based on publicly accessible databases and the published literature. We found that, on a global scale, the number of managed A. mellifera colonies has increased by 85% since 1961, driven mainly by Asia. This contrasts with high reported colony overwinter mortality, especially in North America (average 26% since 2007) and Europe (average 16% since 2007). Increasing agricultural dependency on pollinators as well as threats associated with managing non-native pollinators have likely spurred interest in the management of alternative species for pollination, including bumble bees, stingless bees, solitary bees, and flies that have higher efficiency in pollinating specific crops. We identify 66 insect species that have been, or are considered to have the potential to be, managed for crop pollination, including seven bumble bee species and subspecies currently commercially produced mainly for the pollination of greenhouse-grown tomatoes and two species that are trap-nested in New Zealand. Other managed pollinators currently in use include eight solitary bee species (mainly for pollination services in orchards or alfalfa fields) and three fly species (mainly used in enclosures and for seed production). Additional species in each taxonomic category are under consideration for pollinator management. Examples include 15 stingless bee species that are able to buzz-pollinate, will fly in enclosures, and some of which have a history of management for honey production; their use for pollination is not yet established. To ensure sustainable, integrated pollination management in agricultural landscapes, the risks, as well as the benefits of novel managed pollinator species must be considered. We, therefore, urge the prioritization of biodiversity-friendly measures maintaining native pollinator species diversity to provide ecosystem resilience to future environmental changes.Fil: Osterman, Julia. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; AlemaniaFil: Aizen, Marcelo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentina. Institute for Advanced Study; AlemaniaFil: Biesmeijer, Jacobus C.. Leiden University; Países Bajos. Naturalis Biodiversity Center; Países BajosFil: Bosch, Jordi. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Howlett, Brad G.. The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Ltd.; Nueva ZelandaFil: Inouye, David W.. University of Maryland; Estados Unidos. Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory; Estados UnidosFil: Jung, Chuleui. Andong National University; Corea del SurFil: Martins, Dino J.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Medel, Rodrigo. Universidad de Chile; ChileFil: Pauw, Anton. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Seymour, Colleen L.. University of Cape Town; Sudáfrica. South African National Biodiversity Institute; SudáfricaFil: Paxton, Robert J. German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemani

Global agricultural productivity is threatened by increasing pollinator dependence without a parallel increase in crop diversification

The global increase in the proportion of land cultivated with pollinator-dependent crops implies increased reliance on pollination services. Yet agricultural practices themselves can profoundly affect pollinator supply and pollination. Extensive monocultures are associated with a limited pollinator supply and reduced pollination, whereas agricultural diversification can enhance both. Therefore, areas where agricultural diversity has increased, or at least been maintained, may better sustain high and more stable productivity of pollinator-dependent crops. Given that >80% of all crops depend, to varying extents, on insect pollination, a global increase in agricultural pollinator dependence over recent decades might have led to a concomitant increase in agricultural diversification. We evaluated whether an increase in the area of pollinator-dependent crops has indeed been associated with an increase in agricultural diversity, measured here as crop diversity, at the global, regional, and country scales for the period 1961–2016. Globally, results show a relatively weak and decelerating rise in agricultural diversity over time that was largely decoupled from the strong and continually increasing trend in agricultural dependency on pollinators. At regional and country levels, there was no consistent relationship between temporal changes in pollinator dependence and crop diversification. Instead, our results show heterogeneous responses in which increasing pollinator dependence for some countries and regions has been associated with either an increase or a decrease in agricultural diversity. Particularly worrisome is a rapid expansion of pollinator-dependent oilseed crops in several countries of the Americas and Asia that has resulted in a decrease in agricultural diversity. In these regions, reliance on pollinators is increasing, yet agricultural practices that undermine pollination services are expanding. Our analysis has thereby identified world regions of particular concern where environmentally damaging practices associated with large-scale, industrial agriculture threaten key ecosystem services that underlie productivity, in addition to other benefits provided by biodiversity.Fil: Aizen, Marcelo Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; ArgentinaFil: Aguiar, Sebastián. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; ArgentinaFil: Biesmeijer, Jacobus C.. Leiden University; Países Bajos. Naturalis Biodiversity Center; Países BajosFil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Sede Andina. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; ArgentinaFil: Inouye, David W.. University of Maryland; Estados Unidos. Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory; Estados UnidosFil: Jung, Chuleui. Andong National University; Corea del SurFil: Martins, Dino J.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Medel, Rodrigo. Universidad de Chile; ChileFil: Morales, Carolina Laura. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; ArgentinaFil: Ngo, Hien. UN Campus Platz der Vereinten Nationen. Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; AlemaniaFil: Pauw, Anton. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Paxton, Robert J. Martin Luther University Halle Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Sáez, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; ArgentinaFil: Seymour, Colleen L.. South African National Biodiversity Institute; Sudáfrica. University of Cape Town; Sudáfric

A horizon scan of future threats and opportunities for pollinators and pollination

Background. Pollinators, which provide the agriculturally and ecologically essential service of pollination, are under threat at a global scale. Habitat loss and homogenisation, pesticides, parasites and pathogens, invasive species, and climate change have been identified as past and current threats to pollinators. Actions to mitigate these threats, e.g., agri-environment schemes and pesticide-use moratoriums, exist, but have largely been applied post-hoc. However, future sustainability of pollinators and the service they provide requires anticipation of potential threats and opportunities before they occur, enabling timely implementation of policy and practice to prevent, rather than mitigate, further pollinator declines. Methods.Using a horizon scanning approach we identified issues that are likely to impact pollinators, either positively or negatively, over the coming three decades. Results.Our analysis highlights six high priority, and nine secondary issues. High priorities are: (1) corporate control of global agriculture, (2) novel systemic pesticides, (3) novel RNA viruses, (4) the development of new managed pollinators, (5) more frequent heatwaves and drought under climate change, and (6) the potential positive impact of reduced chemical use on pollinators in non-agricultural settings. Discussion. While current pollinator management approaches are largely driven by mitigating past impacts, we present opportunities for pre-emptive practice, legislation, and policy to sustainably manage pollinators for future generations

A global-scale expert assessment of drivers and risks associated with pollinator decline.

Pollinator decline has attracted global attention and substantial efforts are underway to respond through national pollinator strategies and action plans. These policy responses require clarity on what is driving pollinator decline and what risks it generates for society in different parts of the world. Using a formal expert elicitation process, we evaluated the relative regional and global importance of eight drivers of pollinator decline and ten consequent risks to human well-being. Our results indicate that global policy responses should focus on reducing pressure from changes in land cover and configuration, land management and pesticides, as these were considered very important drivers in most regions. We quantify how the importance of drivers and risks from pollinator decline, differ among regions. For example, losing access to managed pollinators was considered a serious risk only for people in North America, whereas yield instability in pollinator-dependent crops was classed as a serious or high risk in four regions but only a moderate risk in Europe and North America. Overall, perceived risks were substantially higher in the Global South. Despite extensive research on pollinator decline, our analysis reveals considerable scientific uncertainty about what this means for human society.University of Reading’s Building Outstanding Impact Support Programm

A 2018 Horizon Scan of Emerging Issues for Global Conservation and Biological Diversity.

This is our ninth annual horizon scan to identify emerging issues that we believe could affect global biological diversity, natural capital and ecosystem services, and conservation efforts. Our diverse and international team, with expertise in horizon scanning, science communication, as well as conservation science, practice, and policy, reviewed 117 potential issues. We identified the 15 that may have the greatest positive or negative effects but are not yet well recognised by the global conservation community. Themes among these topics include new mechanisms driving the emergence and geographic expansion of diseases, innovative biotechnologies, reassessments of global change, and the development of strategic infrastructure to facilitate global economic priorities

TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access

Plant traits - the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants - determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait‐based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits - almost complete coverage for ‘plant growth form’. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait–environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives

Isotope Values; some fauna of Africa and Madagascar from Are Madagascar's obligate grazing-lawns ancient, evolved with endemic herbivores or recently selected by introduced cattle?

Isotope values reflecting relative C3 and C4 dietry content for Africa and Madagasca