Calcareous grassland fragments as sources of bee pollinators for the surrounding agricultural landscape

Global trends in grassland carrying capacity and relative stocking density of livestock

Although the role of livestock in future food systems is debated, animal proteins are unlikely to completely disappear from our diet. Grasslands are a key source of primary productivity for livestock, and feed-food competition is often limited on such land. Previous research on the potential for sustainable grazing has focused on restricted geographical areas or does not consider inter-annual changes in grazing opportunities. Here, we developed a robust method to estimate trends and interannual variability (IV) in global livestock carrying capacity (number of grazing animals a piece of land can support) over 2001-2015, as well as relative stocking density (the reported livestock distribution relative to the estimated carrying capacity [CC]) in 2010. We first estimated the aboveground biomass that is available for grazers on global grasslands based on the MODIS Net Primary Production product. This was then used to calculate livestock carrying capacities using slopes, forest cover, and animal forage requirements as restrictions. We found that globally, CC decreased on 27% of total grasslands area, mostly in Europe and southeastern Brazil, while it increased on 15% of grasslands, particularly in Sudano-Sahel and some parts of South America. In 2010, livestock forage requirements exceeded forage availability in northwestern Europe, and southern and eastern Asia. Although our findings imply some opportunities to increase grazing pressures in cold regions, Central Africa, and Australia, the high IV or low biomass supply might prevent considerable increases in stocking densities. The approach and derived open access data sets can feed into global food system modelling, support conservation efforts to reduce land degradation associated with overgrazing, and help identify undergrazed areas for targeted sustainable intensification efforts or rewilding purposes.

Pollinator guilds respond contrastingly at different scales to landscape parameters of land-use intensity

Land‐use intensification is the main factor for the catastrophic decline of insect pollinators. However, land‐use intensification includes multiple processes that act across various scales and should affect pollinator guilds differently depending on their ecology. We aimed to reveal how two main pollinator guilds, wild bees and hoverflies, respond to different land‐use intensification measures, that is, arable field cover (AFC), landscape heterogeneity (LH), and functional flower composition of local plant communities as a measure of habitat quality. We sampled wild bees and hoverflies on 22 dry grassland sites within a highly intensified landscape (NE Germany) within three campaigns using pan traps. We estimated AFC and LH on consecutive radii (60–3000 m) around the dry grassland sites and estimated the local functional flower composition. Wild bee species richness and abundance was positively affected by LH and negatively by AFC at small scales (140–400 m). In contrast, hoverflies were positively affected by AFC and negatively by LH at larger scales (500–3000 m), where both landscape parameters were negatively correlated to each other. At small spatial scales, though, LH had a positive effect on hoverfly abundance. Functional flower diversity had no positive effect on pollinators, but conspicuous flowers seem to attract abundance of hoverflies. In conclusion, landscape parameters contrarily affect two pollinator guilds at different scales. The correlation of landscape parameters may influence the observed relationships between landscape parameters and pollinators. Hence, effects of land‐use intensification seem to be highly landscape‐specific.