A comparison of land-sharing and land-sparing strategies for plant richness conservation in agricultural landscapes

Creating wildlife habitat using artificial structures: a review of their efficacy and potential use in solar farms

The biodiversity crisis is exacerbated by a growing human population modifying nearly three-quarters of the Earth's land surface area for anthropogenic uses. Habitat loss and modification represent the largest threat to biodiversity and finding ways to offset species decline has been a significant undertaking for conservation. Landscape planning and conservation strategies can enhance habitat suitability for biodiversity in human-modified landscapes. Artificial habitat structures such as artificial reefs, nest boxes, chainsaw hollows, artificial burrows, and artificial hibernacula have all been successfully implemented to improve species survival in human-modified and fragmented landscapes. As the global shift towards renewable energy sources continues to rise, the development of photovoltaic systems is growing exponentially. Large-scale renewable projects, such as photovoltaic solar farms have large space requirements and thus have the potential to displace local wildlife. We discuss the feasibility of 'conservoltaic systems' - photovoltaic systems that incorporate elements tailored specifically to enhance wildlife habitat suitability and species conservation. Artificial habitat structures can potentially lessen the impacts of industrial development (e.g., photovoltaic solar farms) through strategic landscape planning and an understanding of local biodiversity requirements to facilitate recolonization.

How does framing influence preference for multiple solutions to societal problems?

Solutions to environmental and social problems are often framed in dichotomous ways, which can be counterproductive. Instead, multiple solutions are often needed to fully address these problems. Here we examine how framing influences people's preference for multiple solutions. In a pre-registered experiment, participants (N = 1,432) were randomly assigned to one of four framing conditions. In the first three conditions, participants were presented with a series of eight problems, each framed with multiple causes, multiple impacts, or multiple solutions to the problem. The control condition did not present any framing information. Participants indicated their preferred solution, perceived severity and urgency of the problem, and their dichotomous thinking tendency. Pre-registered analyses showed that none of the three frames had a significant impact on preference for multiple solutions, perceived severity, perceived urgency, or dichotomous thinking. However, exploratory analyses showed that perceived severity and urgency of the problem were positively correlated with people's preference for multiple solutions, while dichotomous thinking was negatively correlated. These findings showed no demonstrable impact of framing on multi-solution preference. Future interventions should focus on addressing perceived severity and urgency, or decreasing dichotomous thinking to encourage people to adopt multiple solutions to address complex environmental and social problems.

Biodiversity and yield trade-offs for organic farming

Organic farming supports higher biodiversity than conventional farming, but at the cost of lower yields. We conducted a meta-analysis quantifying the trade-off between biodiversity and yield, comparing conventional and organic farming. We developed a compatibility index to assess whether biodiversity gains from organic farming exceed yield losses, and a substitution index to assess whether organic farming would increase biodiversity in an area if maintaining total production under organic farming would require cultivating more land at the expense of nature. Overall, organic farming had 23% gain in biodiversity with a similar cost of yield decline. Biodiversity gain is negatively correlated to yield loss for microbes and plants, but no correlation was found for other taxa. The biodiversity and yield trade-off varies under different contexts of organic farming. The overall compatibility index value was close to zero, with negative values for cereal crops, positive for non-cereal crops, and varies across taxa. Our results indicate that, on average, the proportion of biodiversity gain is similar to the proportion of yield loss for paired field studies. For some taxa in non-cereal crops, switching to organic farming can lead to a biodiversity gain without yield loss. We calculated the overall value of substitution index and further discussed the application of this index to evaluate when the biodiversity of less intensified farming system is advantageous.

Envisioning the Future of Mosaic Landscapes: Actor Perceptions in a Mixed Cocoa/Oil-Palm Area in Ghana

The future and benefits of mosaic landscapes have been a source of scientific and societal concern due to increasing population growth, climate change, urbanization, and expanding agricultural commodities. There is a growing call for integrated landscape approaches in which landscape actors discuss trade-offs between different land uses with a view to reaching a negotiated decision on the allocation of land uses. Yet, the operationalization of such approaches is still in its infancy, and integrated methodologies to visualize actors' landscape visions are still scarce. This study therefore presents a participatory spatial scenario-building methodology that uncovers local perceptions of landscape dynamics and needed actions in a mixed cocoa-oil-palm landscape in Ghana's Eastern Region. The methodology visualizes landscape actors' perceived plausible changes and desired future landscapes, and is designed to trigger discussions on actions needed to achieve these desired futures. Findings show that farmers and institutional actors are aware of their landscapes with future preferences coming close to actual landscape composition and spatial configuration, and that-contrary to common assumptions-only those in the oil-palm-dominated landscape who already experienced the drawbacks of increasing landscape homogenization desire a mosaic landscape. The paper concludes that the collective mapping process makes actors aware of challenges at landscape level and increases farmers' negotiation power through active engagement in the process and visualization of their knowledge and visions. Application of the methodology requires dedicated funding, political will, and capacity to apply it as an ongoing process, as well as monitoring feedback loops.

Optimizing Species Richness in Mosaic Landscapes: A Probabilistic Model of Species-Area Relationships

Most landscapes are comprised of multiple habitat types differing in the biodiversity they contain. This is certainly true for human modified landscapes, which are often a mix of habitats managed with different intensity, semi-natural habitats and even pristine habitats. To understand fundamental questions of how the composition of such landscapes affects biodiversity conservation, and to evaluate biodiversity consequences of policies that affect the composition of landscapes, there is a need for models able to translate information on biodiversity from individual habitats to landscape-wide predictions. However, this is complicated by species richness not being additive. We constructed a model to help analyze and solve this problem based on two simple assumptions. Firstly, that a habitat can be characterized by the biological community inhabiting it; i.e., which species occur and at what densities. Secondly, that the probability of a species occurring in a particular unit of land is dictated by its average density in the associated habitats, its spatial aggregation, and the size of the land unit. This model leads to a multidimensional species-area relation (one dimension per habitat). If the goal is to maximize species diversity at the landscape scale (γ-diversity), within a fixed area or under a limited budget, the model can be used to find the optimal allocation of the different habitats. In general, the optimal solution depends on the total size of the species pool of the different habitats, but also their similarity (β-diversity). If habitats are complementary (high β), a mix is usually preferred, even if one habitat is poorer (lower α diversity in one habitat). The model lends itself to economic analyses of biodiversity problems, without the need to monetarize biodiversity value, i.e., cost-effectiveness analysis. Land prices and management costs will affect the solution, such that the model can be used to estimate the number of species gained in relation to expenditure on each habitat. We illustrate the utility of the model by applying it to agricultural landscapes in southern Sweden and demonstrate how empirical monitoring data can be used to find the best habitat allocation for biodiversity conservation within and between landscapes.

Reclamation of Cultivated Land Reserves in Northeast China: Indigenous Ecological Insecurity Underlying National Food Security

The competition for land resources created by the need for food security and ecological security is intensifying globally. To resolve the issue of land scarcity in agriculture following rapid urbanization, China implemented its requisition–compensation balance policy of cultivated lands in 1997, the introduction of which consumed numerous areas of land, such as river shoal and bare land, through reclamation. Moreover, these reclaimed and newly cultivated lands were mainly distributed in the northern part of China. Most previous studies of this subject have only examined the overall balance of cultivated lands in well-developed regions, and there is a lack of knowledge about the indigenous gains and losses before and after reclamation in important areas such as northeast China. Therefore, this study selected two representative county-level units in northeast China as the study area to analyze the conversion of cultivated land reserves during 1996–2015, evaluate the performance of reclaimed cultivated lands in terms of quality and productivity and calculate reclamation-induced changes in ecosystem service value. The results indicated that by 2015 only 16.02% of the original cultivated land reserves remained unconverted; nearly 60% were reclaimed as cultivated lands and over 20% were converted to other land resources. River shoal and ruderal land were the primary resources for cultivated lands compensation, and marsh, bare land and saline-alkaline land were found to be converted the most thoroughly. The gain of 23018.55 ha reclaimed cultivated lands were of relatively inferior quality and lower productivity, contributing approximately 4.32% of total grain output. However, this modest gain was at the expense of a 768.03 million yuan ecosystem services loss, with regulating services and supporting services being undermined the most. We argue that even if northeast China continues to shoulder the responsibility of compensating for a majority of cultivated land losses, it still needs to carefully process reclamation and introduce practical measures to protect indigenous ecosystems, in order to better serve the local residents and ensure prolonged food security with sustainability.

Balancing Disturbance and Conservation in Agroecosystems to Improve Biological Control

Disturbances associated with agricultural intensification reduce our ability to achieve sustainable crop production. These disturbances stem from crop-management tactics and can leave crop fields more vulnerable to insect outbreaks, in part because natural-enemy communities often tend to be more susceptible to disturbance than herbivorous pests. Recent research has explored practices that conserve natural-enemy communities and reduce pest outbreaks, revealing that different components of agroecosystems can influence natural-enemy populations. In this review, we consider a range of disturbances that influence pest control provided by natural enemies and how conservation practices can mitigate or counteract disturbance. We use four case studies to illustrate how conservation and disturbance mitigation increase the potential for biological control and provide co-benefits for the broader agroecosystem. To facilitate the adoption of conservation practices that improve top-down control across significant areas of the landscape, these practices will need to provide multifunctional benefits, but should be implemented with natural enemies explicitly in mind.

Incorporating Health Outcomes into Land-Use Planning

The global trend toward increased agricultural production puts pressure on undeveloped areas, raising the question of how to optimally allocate land. Land-use change has recently been linked to a number of human health outcomes, but these are not routinely considered in land-use decision making. We review examples of planners' currently used strategies to evaluate land use and present a conceptual model of optimal land use that incorporates health outcomes. We then present a framework for evaluating the health outcomes of land-use scenarios that can be used by decision makers in an integrated approach to land-use planning.

Can agricultural intensification help to conserve biodiversity? A scenario study for the African continent

Globally, the production of food, feed, bioenergy, and biomaterials has increased considerably during the past decades. This was achieved by the expansion of agricultural land and the intensification of agricultural management. Due to the conversion of natural ecosystems and the increasing use of pesticides and fertilizers, these processes are recognized as important causes of biodiversity loss. This study focuses on the African continent and analyses the potentials to achieve a stable food provision for a growing population, and at the same time, reduce further losses of biodiversity. These targets are important elements of the UN Agenda 2030. Using the spatially explicit land-use model LandSHIFT, we assessed the effectiveness of different land-sparing and land-sharing strategies to achieve these targets until the year 2030. The simulation results indicate that under the assumptions tested, the land sparing approach yields the most desirable results both, on the continental and the regional level. However, the land sharing/sparing framework in general, and the research presented here only analyse the effect of two factors of many (food production and biodiversity conservation). Hence, this study should not be understood to provide specific management recommendations. Further studies, from the regional to the local level, are required that apply a systems approach to understand and explain the multiple dimensions of sustainable food production on the African continent.

Developing stakeholder-driven scenarios on land sharing and land sparing - Insights from five European case studies

Empirical research on land sharing and land sparing has been criticized because preferences of local stakeholders, socio-economic aspects, a bundle of ecosystem services and the local context were only rarely integrated. Using storylines and scenarios is a common approach to include land use drivers and local contexts or to cope with the uncertainties of future developments. The objective of the presented research is to develop comparable participatory regional land use scenarios for the year 2030 reflecting land sharing, land sparing and more intermediate developments across five different European landscapes (Austria, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands and Spain). In order to ensure methodological consistency among the five case studies, a hierarchical multi-scale scenario approach was developed, which consisted of i) the selection of a common global storyline to frame a common sphere of uncertainty for all case studies, ii) the definition of three contrasting qualitative European storylines (representing developments for land sharing, land sparing and a balanced storyline), and iii) the development of three explorative case study-specific land use scenarios with regional stakeholders in workshops. Land use transition rules defined by stakeholders were used to generate three different spatially-explicit scenarios for each case study by means of high-resolution land use maps. All scenarios incorporated various aspects of land use and management to allow subsequent quantification of multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity indicators. The comparison of the final scenarios showed both common as well as diverging trends among the case studies. For instance, stakeholders identified further possibilities to intensify land management in all case studies in the land sparing scenario. In addition, in most case studies stakeholders agreed on the most preferred scenario, i.e. either land sharing or balanced, and the most likely one, i.e. balanced. However, they expressed some skepticism regarding the general plausibility of land sparing in a European context. It can be concluded that stakeholder perceptions and the local context can be integrated in land sharing and land sparing contexts subject to particular process design principles.

Risk-Only Assessment of Genetically Engineered Crops Is Risky

The risks of not considering benefits in risk assessment are often overlooked. Risks are also often evaluated without consideration of the broader context. We discuss these two concepts in relation to genetically engineered (GE) crops. The health, environmental, and economic risks and benefits of GE crops are exemplified and presented in the context of modern agriculture. Misattribution of unique risks to GE crops are discussed. It is concluded that the scale of modern agriculture is its distinguishing characteristic and that the greater knowledge around GE crops allows for a more thorough characterization of risk. By considering the benefits and risks in the context of modern agriculture, society will be better served and benefits will be less likely to be forgone.

Advancing the Sustainability of US Agriculture through Long-Term Research

Agriculture in the United States must respond to escalating demands for productivity and efficiency, as well as pressures to improve its stewardship of natural resources. Growing global population and changing diets, combined with a greater societal awareness of agriculture's role in delivering ecosystem services beyond food, feed, fiber, and energy production, require a comprehensive perspective on where and how US agriculture can be sustainably intensified, that is, made more productive without exacerbating local and off-site environmental concerns. The USDA's Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) network is composed of 18 locations distributed across the contiguous United States working together to integrate national and local agricultural priorities and advance the sustainable intensification of US agriculture. We explore here the concept of sustainable intensification as a framework for defining strategies to enhance production, environmental, and rural prosperity outcomes from agricultural systems. We also elucidate the diversity of factors that have shaped the past and present conditions of cropland, rangeland, and pastureland agroecosystems represented by the LTAR network and identify priorities for research in the areas of production, resource conservation and environmental quality, and rural prosperity. Ultimately, integrated long-term research on sustainable intensification at the national scale is critical to developing practices and programs that can anticipate and address challenges before they become crises.

The governance of land use strategies: Institutional and social dimensions of land sparing and land sharing

Agricultural land use is a key interface between the goals of ensuring food security and protecting biodiversity. "Land sparing" supports intensive agriculture to save land for conservation, whereas "land sharing" integrates production and conservation on the same land. The framing around sparing versus sharing has been extensively debated. Here, we focused on a frequently missing yet crucial component, namely the governance dimension. Through a case-study in Ethiopia, we uncovered stakeholder preferences for sparing versus sharing, the underlying rationale, and implementation capacity challenges. Policy stakeholders preferred sparing whereas implementation stakeholders preferred sharing, which aligned with existing informal institutions. Implementation of both strategies was limited by social, biophysical, and institutional factors. Land use policies need to account for both ecological patterns and social context. The findings from simple analytical frameworks (e.g., sparing vs. sharing) therefore need to be interpreted carefully, and in a social-ecological context, to generate meaningful recommendations for conservation practice.

Plant reproduction is altered by simulated herbicide drift to constructed plant communities

Herbicide drift may have unintended impacts on native vegetation, adversely affecting individual species and plant communities. To determine the potential ecological effects of herbicide drift, small plant community plots were constructed using 9 perennial species found in different Willamette Valley (OR, USA) grassland habitats. Studies were conducted at 2 Oregon State University (Corvallis, OR, USA) farms in 2 separate years, with single and combined treatments of 0.01 to 0.2× field application rates (f.a.r.) of 1119 g ha-1 for glyphosate (active ingredient [a.i.] of 830 g ha-1 acid glyphosate) and 560 g ha-1 a.i. for dicamba. Plant responses were percentage of cover, number of reproductive structures, mature and immature seed production, and vegetative biomass. Herbicide effects differed with species, year, and, to a lesser extent, farm. Generally, 0.1 to 0.2× f.a.r. of the herbicides were required to affect reproduction in Camassia leichtlinii, Elymus glaucus, Eriophyllum lanatum, Festuca idahoensis, Iris tenax, and Prunella vulgaris. Eriophyllum lanatum also had a significant increase in percentage of immature seed dry weight with 0.01× f.a.r. of dicamba or the combination of glyphosate plus dicamba. Other species showed similar trends, but fewer significant responses. These studies indicated potential effects of low levels of herbicides on reproduction of native plants, and demonstrated a protocol whereby species growing in a constructed plant community can be evaluated for ecological responses. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:2799-2813. Published 2017 SETAC. This article is a US government work and, as such, is in the public domain in the United States of America.

Local Plant Diversity Across Multiple Habitats Supports a Diverse Wild Bee Community in Pennsylvania Apple Orchards

Wild pollinators supply essential, historically undervalued pollination services to crops and other flowering plant communities with great potential to ensure agricultural production against the loss of heavily relied upon managed pollinators. Local plant communities provision wild bees with crucial floral and nesting resources, but the distribution of floristic diversity among habitat types in North American agricultural landscapes and its effect on pollinators are diverse and poorly understood, especially in orchard systems. We documented floristic diversity in typical mid-Atlantic commercial apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchards including the forest and orchard-forest edge ("edge") habitats surrounding orchards in a heterogeneous landscape in south-central Pennsylvania, USA. We also assessed the correlation between plant richness and orchard pollinator communities. In this apple production region, edge habitats are the most species rich, supporting 146 out of 202 plant species recorded in our survey. Plant species richness in the orchard and edge habitats were significant predictors of bee species richness and abundance in the orchard, as well as landscape area of the forest and edge habitats. Both the quantity and quality of forest and edges close to orchards play a significant role in provisioning a diverse wild bee community in this agroecosystem.

Reframing the land-sparing/land-sharing debate for biodiversity conservation

Conservation biologists are devoting an increasing amount of energy to debating whether land sparing (high-yielding agriculture on a small land footprint) or land sharing (low-yielding, wildlife-friendly agriculture on a larger land footprint) will promote better outcomes for local and global biodiversity. In turn, concerns are mounting about how to feed the world, given increasing demands for food. In this review, I evaluate the land-sparing/land-sharing framework--does the framework stimulate research and policy that can reconcile agricultural land use with biodiversity conservation, or is a revised framing needed? I review (1) the ecological evidence in favor of sparing versus sharing; (2) the evidence from land-use change studies that assesses whether a relationship exists between agricultural intensification and land sparing; and (3) how that relationship may be affected by socioeconomic and political factors. To address the trade-off between biodiversity conservation and food production, I then ask which forms of agricultural intensification can best feed the world now and in the future. On the basis of my review, I suggest that the dichotomy of the land-sparing/land-sharing framework limits the realm of future possibilities to two, largely undesirable, options for conservation. Both large, protected regions and favorable surrounding matrices are needed to promote biodiversity conservation; they work synergistically and are not mutually exclusive. A "both-and" framing of large protected areas surrounded by a wildlife-friendly matrix suggests different research priorities from the "either-or" framing of sparing versus sharing. Furthermore, wildlife-friendly farming methods such as agroecology may be best adapted to provide food for the world's hungry people.

Glyphosate and dicamba herbicide tank mixture effects on native plant and non-genetically engineered soybean seedlings

Crops engineered to contain genes for tolerance to multiple herbicides may be treated with several herbicides to manage weeds resistant to each herbicide. Thus, nearby non-target plants may be subjected to increased exposure to several herbicides used in combination. Of particular concern are native plants, as well as adjacent crops which have not been genetically engineered for tolerance to herbicides. We evaluated responses of seven species of native plants grown in a greenhouse and treated less than field application rates of glyphosate and/or dicamba: Andropogon gerardii, Asclepias syriaca, Eutrochium purpureum, Oenothera biennis, Polyganum lapathifolium, Solidago canadensis and Tridens flavus, and non-herbicide resistant soybean (Glycine max, Oregon line M4). Herbicide concentrations were 0.03 or 0.1 × field application rates of 1122 g ha(-1) active ingredient (a.i) (831 g ha(-1) acid glyphosate) for glyphosate and 562 g ha(-1) a.i. for dicamba. In general, plant growth responses to combinations of glyphosate and dicamba were less than the sum of growth responses to the individual herbicides (i.e., antagonistic effect), primarily when one or both herbicides alone caused a large reduction in growth. E. purpureum, P. lapathifolium and S. canadensis were the most sensitive species to both herbicides, while A. gerardii was the most tolerant, with no response to either herbicide. The combinations of herbicides resulted in responses most similar to that from dicamba alone for G. max and from glyphosate alone for T. flavus. The results of this study indicated the need for more data such as effects on native plants in the field to assess risks to non-target plants from combinations of herbicides.

Reconciling nature conservation and traditional farming practices: a spatially explicit framework to assess the extent of High Nature Value farmlands in the European countryside

Agriculture constitutes a dominant land cover worldwide, and rural landscapes under extensive farming practices acknowledged due to high biodiversity levels. The High Nature Value farmland (HNVf) concept has been highlighted in the EU environmental and rural policies due to their inherent potential to help characterize and direct financial support to European landscapes where high nature and/or conservation value is dependent on the continuation of specific low-intensity farming systems. Assessing the extent of HNV farmland by necessity relies on the availability of both ecological and farming systems' data, and difficulties associated with making such assessments have been widely described across Europe. A spatially explicit framework of data collection, building out from local administrative units, has recently been suggested as a means of addressing such difficulties. This manuscript tests the relevance of the proposed approach, describes the spatially explicit framework in a case study area in northern Portugal, and discusses the potential of the approach to help better inform the implementation of conservation and rural development policies. Synthesis and applications: The potential of a novel approach (combining land use/cover, farming and environmental data) to provide more accurate and efficient mapping and monitoring of HNV farmlands is tested at the local level in northern Portugal. The approach is considered to constitute a step forward toward a more precise targeting of landscapes for agri-environment schemes, as it allowed a more accurate discrimination of areas within the case study landscape that have a higher value for nature conservation.

A comparison of the herbicide tolerances of rare and common plants in an agricultural landscape

Declining plant biodiversity in agroecosystems has often been attributed to escalating use of chemical herbicides, but other changes in farming systems, including the clearing of seminatural habitat fragments, confound the influence of herbicides. The present study introduces a new approach to evaluate the impacts of herbicide pollution on plant communities at landscape or regional scales. If herbicides are in fact a key factor shaping agricultural plant diversity, one would expect to see the signal of past herbicide impacts in the current plant community composition of an intensively farmed region, with common, successful species more tolerant to widely used herbicides than rare or declining species. Data from an extensive field survey of plant diversity in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, USA, were compared with herbicide bioassay experiments in a greenhouse to test the hypothesis that common species possess higher herbicide tolerances than rare species. Five congeneric pairs of rare and common species were treated with 3 commonly used herbicide modes of action in bioassay experiments, and few significant differences were found in the tolerances of rare species relative to common species. These preliminary results suggest that other factors beyond herbicide exposure may be more important in shaping the distribution and abundance of plant species diversity across an agricultural landscape.

Examining shifts in Carabidae assemblages across a forest-agriculture ecotone

Northeastern U.S. farms are often situated adjacent to forestland due to the heterogeneous nature of the landscape. We investigated how forested areas influence Carabidae diversity within nearby crop fields by establishing transects of pitfall traps. Trapping extended across a forest-agriculture ecotone consisting of maize, an intermediate mowed grass margin, and a forest edge. Carabidae diversity was compared among the three habitats, and community and population dynamics were assessed along the transect. We used a principal response curve to examine and visualize community change across a spatial gradient. The highest levels of richness and evenness were observed in the forest community, and carabid assemblages shifted significantly across the ecotone, especially at the forest-grass interface. Despite strong ecotone effects, population distributions showed that some species were found in all three habitats and seemed to thrive at the ecotone. Based on similarity indices, carabid assemblages collected in maize adjacent to forest differed from carabid assemblages in maize not adjacent to forest. We conclude that forest carabid assemblages exhibit high degrees of dissimilarity with those found in agricultural fields and forested areas should thus be retained in agricultural landscapes to increase biodiversity at the landscape scale. However, ecotone species found at forest edges can still noticeably influence carabid community composition within neighboring agricultural fields. Further studies should determine how these shifts in carabid assemblages influence agroecosystem services in relation to ecosystem services observed in fields embedded in an agricultural matrix.

Supporting crop pollinators with floral resources: network-based phenological matching

The production of diverse and affordable agricultural crop species depends on pollination services provided by bees. Indeed, the proportion of pollinator-dependent crops is increasing globally. Agriculture relies heavily on the domesticated honeybee; the services provided by this single species are under threat and becoming increasingly costly. Importantly, the free pollination services provided by diverse wild bee communities have been shown to be sufficient for high agricultural yields in some systems. However, stable, functional wild bee communities require floral resources, such as pollen and nectar, throughout their active season, not just when crop species are in flower. To target floral provisioning efforts to conserve and support native and managed bee species, we apply network theoretical methods incorporating plant and pollinator phenologies. Using a two-year dataset comprising interactions between bees (superfamily Apoidea, Anthophila) and 25 native perennial plant species in floral provisioning habitat, we identify plant and bee species that provide a key and central role to the stability of the structure of this community. We also examine three specific case studies: how provisioning habitat can provide temporally continuous support for honeybees (Apis mellifera) and bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), and how resource supplementation strategies might be designed for a single genus of important orchard pollinators (Osmia). This framework could be used to provide native bee communities with additional, well-targeted floral resources to ensure that they not only survive, but also thrive.

Ecosystem services and the protection, restoration, and management of ecosystems exposed to chemical stressors

Ecosystem services-the benefits people obtain from ecosystem structures and processes-are essential for human survival and well-being. Chemicals are also an essential component of modern life; however, they may cause adverse ecological effects and reduce ecosystem service provision. Environmental policy makers are increasingly adopting the ecosystem services concept, but applying this approach to the protection, restoration, and management of ecosystems requires the development of new understanding, tools, and frameworks. There is an urgent need to understand and predict the effect of single and multiple stressors on ecosystem service delivery across different spatial scales (local to global), to develop indicators that can be used to quantify and map services and identify synergies and trade-offs between them, to establish protection goals and restoration targets defined in terms of the types and levels of service delivery required, and to develop approaches for the assessment and management of chemical risk to ecosystem services that consider the whole life cycle of products and processes. These are major research challenges for the environmental science community in general and for ecotoxicologists and risk assessors in particular.