Crop management affects pollinator attractiveness and visitation in oilseed rape

Seed treatment with clothianidin induces changes in plant metabolism and alters pollinator foraging preferences

Neonicotinoids, systemic insecticides that are distributed into all plant tissues and protect against pests, have become a common part of crop production, but can unintentionally also affect non-target organisms, including pollinators. Such effects can be direct effects from insecticide exposure, but neonicotinoids can affect plant physiology, and effects could therefore also be indirectly mediated by changes in plant phenology, attractiveness and nutritional value. Under controlled greenhouse conditions, we tested if seed treatment with the neonicotinoid clothianidin affected oilseed rape's production of flower resources for bees and the content of the secondary plant products glucosinolates that provide defense against herbivores. Additionally, we tested if seed treatment affected the attractiveness of oilseed rape to flower visiting bumblebees, using outdoor mesocosms. Flowers and leaves of clothianidin-treated plants had different profiles of glucosinolates compared with untreated plants. Bumblebees in mesocosms foraged slightly more on untreated plants. Neither flower timing, flower size nor the production of pollen and nectar differed between treatments, and therefore cannot explain any preference for untreated oilseed rape. We instead propose that this small but significant preference for untreated plants was related to the altered glucosinolate profile caused by clothianidin. Thereby, this study contributes to the understanding of the complex relationships between neonicotinoid-treated crops and pollinator foraging choices, by suggesting a potential mechanistic link by which insecticide treatment can affect insect behavior.

Prioritizing pollinators over pests: wild bees are more important than beetle damage for watermelon yield

Insect pests and pollinators can interact directly and indirectly to affect crop production; however, impacts of these interactions on marketable yield are little known. Thus, the evaluation of interactions between pests and pollinators are needed to best prioritize management efforts. Over 2 years, we evaluated the impact of pollinator visitation and/or beetle (Acalymma vittatum) infestation on fruit set and yield in seedless watermelon production. In 2020, we tested the main effect of pollinator visitation: two or eight honeybee visits, two wild bee visits, hand pollinated and open pollinated. In 2021, we crossed wild and managed pollinator visitation (two or four honeybee visits, two or four wild bee visits, hand pollinated and open pollinated) with varying beetle infestation levels (0, 3, 6 and 9 beetles/plant). In both years, wild bees contributed significantly to high fruit yields, and exclusive visitation from wild bees increased yield by a factor of 1.5-3 compared to honeybees. In 2021, pollination was the only significant factor for fruit set and marketable yield even when compared to the varying beetle infestation levels. These data advocate for a reprioritization of management, to conserve and protect wild bee pollination, which could be more critical than avoiding pest damage for ensuring high yields.

Pollinator nutrition and its role in merging the dual objectives of pollinator health and optimal crop production

Bee and non-bee insect pollinators play an integral role in the quantity and quality of production for many food crops, yet there is growing evidence that nutritional challenges to pollinators in agricultural landscapes are an important factor in the reduction of pollinator populations worldwide. Schemes to enhance crop pollinator health have historically focused on floral resource plantings aimed at increasing pollinator abundance and diversity by providing more foraging opportunities for bees. These efforts have demonstrated that improvements in bee diversity and abundance are achievable; however, goals of increasing crop pollination outcomes via these interventions are not consistently met. To support pollinator health and crop pollination outcomes in tandem, habitat enhancements must be tailored to meet the life-history needs of specific crop pollinators, including non-bees. This will require greater understanding of the nutritional demands of these taxa together with the supply of floral and non-floral food resources and how these interact in cropping environments. Understanding the mechanisms underlying crop pollination and pollinator health in unison across a range of taxa is clearly a win–win for industry and conservation, yet achievement of these goals will require new knowledge and novel, targeted methods.

This article is part of the theme issue ‘Natural processes influencing pollinator health: from chemistry to landscapes’.

Pesticide residues in honeybee-collected pollen: does the EU regulation protect honeybees from pesticides?

Researchers globally identify pesticides as one of the main reasons for pollinator decline. In the European Union (EU), extensive legislation is implemented to protect pollinators from harmful pesticide exposure. The aim of our study was to discover whether the pesticide residue levels in honeybee matrices, such as nectar and pollen, exceeded the chronic or acute toxicity levels when beehives were located next to fields treated with specific insecticides. The insecticides were used according to the EU legislation and its national implementation. The experiments were conducted in turnip rape, oilseed rape, and caraway fields in southern Finland during the years 2019 and 2020. The pesticides used in the experiments contained the active substances lambda-cyhalothrin (2019), esfenvalerate (2020), and tau-fluvalinate (2020). However, the honeybee-collected pollen and nectar were analyzed for residues of more than 100 active substances. The results showed that the pesticide residue levels clearly remained under the oral acute toxicity for honeybees, although we found high levels of thiacloprid residues in the pollen collected in 2019. The pesticide residues in nectar were below LOQ values, which was most likely due to the rainy weather conditions together with the chosen sampling method. No statistically significant differences were observed between the insecticide-treated and untreated fields. In light of our research, the EU legislation protected honeybees from oral acute toxicity during the years 2019 and 2020. However, potential sublethal effects of thiacloprid and other pesticide compounds found in the collected pollen cannot be ruled out. In the future, constant monitoring of pesticide exposure of honeybees and wild pollinators should be established to ensure that pesticide legislation, and its implementation across the EU successfully protects pollinators and their services in agricultural environments.

Can Costs of Pesticide Exposure for Bumblebees Be Balanced by Benefits from a Mass-Flowering Crop?

Mass-flowering crops provide forage for bees but also contain pesticides. Such pesticide exposure can harm bees, but our understanding of how this cost is balanced by forage benefits is limited. To provide insights into benefits and costs, we placed bumblebee colonies in 18 landscapes with conventional red clover fields treated with the neonicotinoid thiacloprid (flowers + pesticide), untreated organic red clover fields (flowers), or landscapes lacking clover fields (controls). Colonies grew heavier near thiacloprid-treated clover compared to controls lacking clover, while colonies near untreated clover did not differ from colonies in neither of the other landscape types. Thiacloprid treatment effectively controlled pests and increased bumblebee crop visitation. However, colony production of queens and males did not differ among landscape types. In conclusion, thiacloprid application in clover appears to be of low risk for bumblebees. More generally, neonicotinoids may not be equally harmful when used in flowering crops and effective low-risk pest control in such crops could potentially benefit bumblebees and crop pollination.

Flowers up! The effect of floral height along the shoot axis on the fitness of bat-pollinated species

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Bat-pollination is an important system in terms of occurrence and distribution, although it remains little studied. Thus, the role of particular flower traits in this interaction remains uncertain. Flower height along the shoot axis, associated with flower exposure, has often been deemed a key trait in this system, but its effect on fitness has not previously been assessed. We aimed to test its role and propose that taller flowers attain higher fitness due to a higher degree of accessibility and conspicuity to foraging bats.

METHODS

We assessed the effect of floral height on bat visiting rates to individual flowers of Crescentia cujete (Bignoniaceae), a cauliflorous model bat-pollinated species with a marked gradient in flower height along the shoot axis. Additionally, we tested the effect of this variable on seed/ovule ratio measurements from seven other species from different families along a herb-tree gradient. Hypotheses were tested through mixed-effect linear models.

KEY RESULTS

Bat visiting rates varied positively as a function of flower height in C. cujete, but significance was found only for the subset of flowers located on the trunk, closer to the ground. Similarly, seed/ovule ratios were positively correlated with flower height only for the three species with the shortest statures along the height gradient and shortest average floral heights. These results suggest that proximity to the ground, associated with herbaceous or bushy surrounding vegetation, may be an obstacle to the foraging of nectar-feeding bats, which in turn should explain the morphological convergence of inflorescence length and exposure strategies of short-statured bat-pollinated plants.

CONCLUSIONS

Flower height has a species-specific effect on plant fitness. This study provides a novel numerical perspective to the role of an unexplored trait in bat-pollination, and has elucidated some aspects of the adaptive importance of flower height based on limitations imposed by ecologically complex pollinators.

Bee pollination outperforms pesticides for oilseed crop production and profitability

Nature-based agriculture that reduces dependency on chemical inputs requires using ecological principles for sustainable agro-ecosystems, aiming to balance ecology, economics and social justice. There is growing evidence that pollinator-dependent crops with high insect, particularly bee, pollination service can give higher yields. However, the interacting effects between insect pollination and agricultural inputs on crop yields and farm economics remain to be established to reconcile food production with biodiversity conservation. We quantified individual and combined effects of pesticides, insect pollination and soil quality on oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) yield and gross margin, using a total of 294 farmers' fields surveyed between 2013 and 2016. We show that yield and gross margins are greater (15-40%) in fields with higher pollinator abundance than in fields with reduced pollinator abundance. This effect is, however, strongly reduced by pesticide use. Greater yields may be achieved by either increasing agrochemicals or increasing bee abundance, but crop economic returns were only increased by the latter, because pesticides did not increase yields while their costs reduced gross margins.