Mismatched outcomes for biodiversity and ecosystem services: testing the responses of crop pollinators and wild bee biodiversity to habitat enhancement

Impacts of Climate Change and Mitigation Strategies for Some Abiotic and Biotic Constraints Influencing Fruit Growth and Quality

Factors such as extreme temperatures, light radiation, and nutritional condition influence the physiological, biochemical, and molecular processes associated with fruit development and its quality. Besides abiotic stresses, biotic constraints can also affect fruit growth and quality. Moreover, there can be interactions between stressful conditions. However, it is challenging to predict and generalize the risks of climate change scenarios on seasonal patterns of growth, development, yield, and quality of fruit species because their responses are often highly complex and involve changes at multiple levels. Advancements in genetic editing technologies hold great potential for the agricultural sector, particularly in enhancing fruit crop traits. These improvements can be tailored to meet consumer preferences, which is crucial for commercial success. Canopy management and innovative training systems are also key factors that contribute to maximizing yield efficiency and improving fruit quality, which are essential for the competitiveness of orchards. Moreover, the creation of habitats that support pollinators is a critical aspect of sustainable agriculture, as they play a significant role in the production of many crops, including fruits. Incorporating these strategies allows fruit growers to adapt to changing climate conditions, which is increasingly important for the stability of food production. By investing in these areas, fruit growers can stay ahead of challenges and opportunities in the industry, ultimately leading to increased success and profitability. In this review, we aim to provide an updated overview of the current knowledge on this important topic. We also provide recommendations for future research.

High pesticide exposure and risk to bees in pollinator plantings adjacent to conventionally managed blueberry fields

Wildflower plantings adjacent to agricultural fields provide diverse floral resources and nesting sites for wild bees. However, their proximity to pest control activities in the crop may result in pesticide exposure if pesticides drift into pollinator plantings. To quantify pesticide residues in pollinator plantings, we sampled flowers and soil from pollinator plantings and compared them to samples from unenhanced field margins and crop row middles. At conventionally managed farms, flowers from pollinator plantings had similar exposure profiles to those from unenhanced field margins or crop row middles, with multiple pesticides and high and similar risk quotient (RQ) values (with pollinator planting RQ: 3.9; without pollinator planting RQ: 4.0). Whereas samples from unsprayed sites had significantly lower risk (RQ: 0.005). Soil samples had overall low risk to bees. Additionally, we placed bumble bee colonies (Bombus impatiens) in field margins of crop fields with and without pollinator plantings and measured residues in bee-collected pollen. Pesticide exposure was similar in pollen from sites with or without pollinator plantings, and risk was generally high (with pollinator planting RQ: 0.5; without pollinator planting RQ: 1.1) and not significant between the two field types. Risk was lower at sites where there was no pesticide activity (RQ: 0.3), but again there was no significant difference between management types. The insecticide phosmet, which is used on blueberry farms for control of Drosophila suzukii, accounted for the majority of elevated risk. Additionally, analysis of pollen collected by bumble bees found no significant difference in floral species richness between sites with or without pollinator plantings. Our results suggest that pollinator plantings do not reduce pesticide risk and do not increase pollen diversity collected by B. impatiens, further highlighting the need to reduce exposure through enhanced IPM adoption, drift mitigation, and removal of attractive flowering weeds prior to insecticide applications.

Perennial herb diversity contributes more than annual herb diversity to multifunctionality in dryland ecosystems of North-western China

BACKGROUND

Considerable attention has been given to how different aspects of biodiversity sustain ecosystem functions. Herbs are a critical component of the plant community of dryland ecosystems, but the importance of different life form groups of herbs is often overlooked in experiments on biodiversity-ecosystem multifunctionality. Hence, little is known about how the multiple attributes of diversity of different life form groups of herbs affect changes to the multifunctionality of ecosystems.

METHODS

We investigated geographic patterns of herb diversity and ecosystem multifunctionality along a precipitation gradient of 2100 km in Northwest China, and assessed the taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional attributes of different life form groups of herbs on the multifunctionality.

RESULTS

We found that subordinate (richness effect) species of annual herbs and dominant (mass ratio effect) species of perennial herbs were crucial for driving multifunctionality. Most importantly, the multiple attributes (taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional) of herb diversity enhanced the multifunctionality. The functional diversity of herbs provided greater explanatory power than did taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity. In addition, the multiple attribute diversity of perennial herbs contributed more than annual herbs to multifunctionality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide insights into previously neglected mechanisms by which the diversity of different life form groups of herbs affect ecosystem multifunctionality. These results provide a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between biodiversity and multifunctionality, and will ultimately contribute to multifunctional conservation and restoration programs in dryland ecosystems.

Precipitation preferences alter the relative importance of herbaceous plant diversity for multifunctionality in the drylands of China

Background

Multiple components of biodiversity are excellent predictors of precipitation-induced changes in ecosystem function. However, the importance of differing scales (alpha versus beta) is usually overlooked in biodiversity–ecosystem multifunctionality studies. Consequently, little is known about how precipitation regulates the relationship between multifunctionality and multiple components of alpha and beta diversity.

Aims

We investigated geographic patterns of herbaceous plant diversity and ecosystem multifunctionality along a precipitation gradient spanning more than 2010 km in Northwest China.

Methods

We assessed the effects of herbaceous species, phylogenetic, and functional components at different scales on multifunctionality in drylands.

Results

The alpha diversity of species and functional beta diversity were key components explaining the variation in multifunctionality. As the main environmental factor, MAP (mean annual precipitation) affected multifunctionality by changing the mediating variables (i.e., species alpha and functional beta diversity). More importantly, a certain precipitation threshold was detected for the relationship of multifunctionality to species alpha and functional beta diversity. MAPs of approximately 158 mm and 140 mm modulated this relationship (shifting it from uncorrelated to significantly correlated).

Conclusions

Our findings provide insights into previously neglected mechanisms by which diversity in herbaceous layers at different scales affects ecosystem multifunctionality. It is highlighted that MAP regulates the relationship between diversity and multifunctionality in dryland ecosystems at different scales. Further, diversity may have substantial consequences for multifunctionality where MAP is higher. These empirical results provide a comprehensive understanding of the biodiversity–multifunctionality relationship in the context of precipitation, ultimately contributing to conservation and restoration programs for multifunctionality in drylands.

Pesticide exposure of wild bees and honey bees foraging from field border flowers in intensively managed agriculture areas

Bees are critical for food crop pollination, yet their populations are declining as agricultural practices intensify. Pollinator-attractive field border plantings (e.g. hedgerows and forb strips) can increase bee diversity and abundance in agricultural areas; however, recent studies suggest these plants may contain pesticides. Pesticide exposure for wild bees remains largely unknown; however, this information is needed to inform agricultural practices and pesticide regulations meant to protect bees. It is important to determine whether border plantings that attract and support pollinators may also deliver pesticides to them. In this study, we collected various samples for pesticide residue analysis, including: multiple species of wild bees, honey bees, flowers from four types of bee-attractive field border plants, and soil. Silicone bands were also utilized as passive aerial samplers of pesticide residues. The five pesticides detected most frequently across all samples were the insecticide bifenthrin, the herbicides thiobencarb, metolaclor, and propanil, and the fungicide fluopyram. We detected the greatest number of parent pesticides in bands (24), followed by soil (21). Pesticides were also detected in field border plant flowers (16), which do not receive direct pesticide applications, and included many products which were not applied to adjacent field crops. Pesticide concentrations were lower in bees than in flowers but higher in bees than in soils. Pesticide residue per bee (ng/bee) increased with increasing wild bee size, though pesticide concentration (ng/g) did not increase. While honey bees and wild bees contained a similar number and concentration of pesticides overall, pesticide mixtures varied by bee type, and included some mixtures known to cause sublethal effects. The results from this study highlight the benefits of measuring more sample types to capture the total exposome of bees, including a greater range of bee species, as well as the need to consider exposure to pesticides at the landscape level.

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’.

Impacts of Wildflower Interventions on Beneficial Insects in Fruit Crops: A Review

Integrated pest management (IPM) has been practiced by the fruit industry for at least 30 years. Naturally occurring beneficial insects have been encouraged to thrive alongside introduced predatory insects. However, Conservation Biological Control (CBC) and augmented biocontrol through the release of large numbers of natural enemies is normally only widely adopted when a pest has become resistant to available conventional pesticides and control has begun to break down. In addition, the incorporation of wild pollinator management, essential to fruit production, has, in the past, not been a priority but is now increasingly recognized through integrated pest and pollinator management (IPPM). This review focuses on the impacts on pest regulation and pollination services in fruit crops through the delivery of natural enemies and pollinating insects by provisioning areas of fruiting crops with floral resources. Most of the studies in this review highlighted beneficial or benign impacts of floral resource prevision to fruit crops. However, placement in the landscape and spill-over of beneficial arthropods into the crop can be influential and limiting. This review also highlights the need for longer-term ecological studies to understand the impacts of changing arthropod communities over time and the opportunity to tailor wildflower mixes to specific crops for increased pest control and pollination benefits, ultimately impacting fruit growers bottom-line with less reliance on pesticides.

Landscape Context Influences the Bee Conservation Value of Wildflower Plantings

Pollination provided by bees is a critical ecosystem service for agricultural production. However, bee populations are at risk from stressors such as habitat loss, pesticides, and disease. On-farm wildflower plantings is one mitigation strategy to provide habitat and resources for bees. In many instances, government programs can subsidize the installation of these plantings for private landowners. Semi-natural habitat (SNH) in the landscape is also important for bee conservation and may alter the effectiveness of wildflower plantings. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of wildflower plantings and interactions with SNH in the landscape for promoting bee abundance and richness. Bee surveys were conducted over 2 yr at 22 sites in eastern Virginia and Maryland. Wildflower plantings, averaging 0.22 ha in size, were installed and maintained by cooperators at 10 of the sites. In total, 5,122 bees were identified from 85 species. Wildflower plantings did not alter bee communities independently, but bee abundance was greater on farms with plantings and 20-30% SNH in the landscape. Bee abundance and richness had nonlinear responses to increasing SNH in the landscape. The positive effects for richness and abundance peaked when SNH was approximately 40% of the landscape. Similar to predictions of the intermediate-landscape complexity hypothesis, increases in bee abundance at wildflower sites were only detected in simplified landscapes. Results indicate that small wildflower plantings in the Mid-Atlantic U.S. only provided conservation benefits to bee communities under specific circumstances on the scale studied, and that conserving SNH across the landscape may be a more important strategy.

Socioecological Factors and Farmer Perceptions Impacting Pesticide Use and Pollinator Conservation on Cucurbit Farms

While research suggests that pollinator decline is linked with agricultural practices, it is unclear whether farmers share this view and adapt management to promote pollinators based on their understanding of these threats. To address these issues, we surveyed farmers of pollinator-dependent cucurbit crops across four states in the Midwest, USA. We grouped farmers by their perceptions of pollinator declines and routes of pesticide exposure and used statistical models to evaluate if farmers manage pests and pollinators based on these perceptions. Out of 93 completed surveys, 39% of farmers believed pollinators were in decline. When grouped, 17% of farmers were classified as proponents, ranking (on a 1–5 Likert scale) the factors mediating pesticide exposure and pollinator declines as important or highly important. For comparison, 44 and 39% of farmers were classified as neutral or skeptical, respectively, of these same factors. Compared to the neutral and skeptic groups, proponents were on average younger, had fewer years farming but more years in family farming, and were more dependent on income from outside the farming system. Proponents also on average reported smaller farms, higher pest richness, more land in cucurbit production, and greater richness of crops that are not pollinator dependent, when compared to the neutrals and skeptics. We did not find pest and pollinator management to be related to farmer perceptions of pollinator decline or routes of pesticide exposure, but farmers classified as pollinator “proponents” were more likely to indicate participation in future pollinator habitat restoration programs. Rather, management strategies were better explained by on-farm environmental conditions (e.g., pest richness, farm size, number of pollinator dependent crops) and economic factors (e.g., sources of income). Generally, our research shows that farmers who perceive pollinator threats may not be using pollinator supportive practices. Thus, while some farmers believe in pollinator declines, there remains a need to connect this knowledge with on-farm practices.

Building effective policies to conserve pollinators: translating knowledge into policy

Pollination management recommendations are becoming increasingly precise, context-specific and knowledge-intensive. Pollination is a service delivered across landscapes, entailing policy constructs across agricultural landscapes. Diversified farming practices effectively promote pollination services. Yet it remains difficult to secure large-scale uptake by farming communities. A strong foundation upon which to base policy formulation stems from respecting the perspective of farmers and local communities on the need to conserve pollinators, alongside scientific understanding. Ecological intensification resonates with both indigenous knowledge, local communities and scientific understanding. It emphasizes that the regulating functions of nature require both landscape-level agroecosystem design and recognition of the complexity of agricultural systems. Facilitating ecological intensification across landscapes requires collective decision-making, with institutional innovation in local structures and food system governance.

Supplemental forage ameliorates the negative impact of insecticides on bumblebees in a pollinator-dependent crop

Insecticide use and insufficient forage are two of the leading stressors to pollinators in agroecosystems. While these factors have been well studied individually, the experimental designs do not reflect real-world conditions where insecticide exposure and lack of forage occur simultaneously and could interactively suppress pollinator health. Using outdoor enclosures, we tested the effects of insecticides (imidacloprid + lambda-cyhalothrin) and non-crop forage (clover) in a factorial design, measuring the survival, behaviour and performance of bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), as well as pollination of the focal crop, watermelon. Colony survival was synergistically reduced to 17% in watermelon alone + insecticides (survival was 100% in all other treatments). However, behavioural shifts in foraging were mainly owing to insecticides (e.g. 95% reduced visitation rate to watermelon flowers), while impacts on hive performance were primarily driven by clover presence (e.g. 374% increase in the number of live eggs). Insecticide-mediated reductions in foraging decreased crop pollination (fruit set) by 32%. Altogether, these data indicate that both insecticides and non-crop forage play integral roles in shaping pollinator health in agricultural landscapes, but the relative importance and interaction of these two factors depend on which aspect of ‘health’ is being considered.

Corridors through time: Does resource continuity impact pollinator communities, populations, and individuals?

Spatial aspects of connectivity have received considerable attention from ecologists and conservationists, yet temporal connectivity, the periodic linking of habitats, plays an equally important, but largely overlooked role. Different biological and biophysical attributes of ecosystems underpin temporal connectivity, but here we focus on resource continuity, the uninterrupted availability of foraging sites. We test the response of pollinators to resource continuity at community, population, and individual levels using a novel natural experiment consisting of farms with either single or sequential cropping systems. We found significant effects at the population level; colony density of an important crop pollinator (Bombus impatiens L.) was greater when crop floral resources were continuously available. However, we did not find significant effects at the community or individual level; wild bee abundance, diversity and body size did not respond to resource continuity. Raspberry farms with greater early season resources provided by blueberry had greater bumble bee populations, suggesting beneficial effects on resource availability due to crop diversity. Better understanding the impact of resource continuity via crop diversity on broader patterns of biodiversity is essential for the co-management of biodiversity and ecosystem services.