Search

Mason bees (Osmia spp.) are efficient fruit tree pollinators that can be encouraged to occupy and breed in artificial nesting material. In sweet cherry orchards, they are occasionally used as an alternative managed pollinator as a replacement for or in addition to honey bees (Apis mellifera). Yet, the lack of practical guidelines on management practices, for example optimal stocking rates, for both mason bee nesting material and honey bees might compromise pollination service provision. In this study, we assessed the relationship between stocking rates (honey bee hives and mason bee nesting material) and the abundance of honey bees and mason bees in 17 sweet cherry (Prunus avium) orchards in Central Germany. We furthermore performed a pollination experiment to explore the interactive effect of mason bees and honey bees on sweet cherry fruit set. In the orchards, both honey bee and mason bee abundance increased with increasing stocking rates of hives or nesting material, respectively. Honey bee abundance increased linearly with stocking rates. In contrast, mason bee abundance asymptoted at 2–3 nesting boxes per ha, beyond which more boxes resulted in little increase in visitation rate. Our pollination experiment demonstrated that orchards were pollen limited, with only 28% of insect-pollinated flowers setting fruit versus 39% of optimally hand-pollinated flowers. Honey bees and mason bees enhanced sweet cherry fruit set, but only when both were present and not when either was present alone in an orchard. Our findings demonstrate that offering nesting material for mason bees and employing honey bee hives can enhance bee abundance in sweet cherry orchards. By increasing honey bee abundance in combination with enhanced mason bee abundance, farmers can substantially boost fruit set and potentially sweet cherry yield. To enhance pollination services, farmers should consider the benefits of increasing pollinator biodiversity as an immediate benefit to improve crop yields.

Phenological overlap between crop flowering and pollinators is a crucial trait for the pollination of more than 75% of the world's crops. However, crop management rarely considers the seasonal aspect of plant–pollinator mutualism. Here, we investigate the phenological overlap between crops and pollinators and how it affects pollination and fruit production. We measured the abundance and richness of native and non-native pollinators visiting raspberry flowers at two different times during the flowering season (i.e. early and late flowering periods) and examined their effects on crop yield in 16 fields. The community of pollinators foraging on raspberry flowers was more diverse and dominated by native pollinators during the early flowering period when most native plant species were flowering. Later in the season, when native flower resources declined in the surrounding environment, raspberry flowers were visited mainly by two non-native bees: managed honeybees and the invasive bumblebee Bombus terrestris. Pollinator contribution to raspberry yield was twice as high in the early flowering period compared to the late period (61% vs. 31% increase in drupelet set respectively). Flower damage caused by extremely high visitation frequencies by non-native bees in the late period was six times higher than in the early flowering period (30% vs. 5% of damaged flowers respectively). Synthesis and applications. Providing sufficient pollen and nectar resources to support wild pollinators over extended periods in agricultural landscapes can contribute to crop pollination and ensure high fruit weight and quality. This can be achieved by restoring natural and semi-natural areas near crop fields with native, long-flowering plant species. Growers and crop breeding programmes should consider selecting flowering times that coincide with periods of high diversity or abundance of native pollinators to reduce dependence on managed pollinators.

An increasing number of farmland initiatives aim to aid biodiversity conservation through alternative farming practices such as nature-inclusive farming. However, these approaches frequently lead to trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and crop yield. For example, buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum) is a melliferous crop that flowers for a long period in the summer when nectar in agricultural areas is generally scarce, and buckwheat cultivation could therefore contribute to wild pollinator conservation. However, honeybees (Apis mellifera) are placed to ensure sufficient crop pollination, which potentially increases resource competition with wild pollinators in and around the crop. Here, we have studied this trade-off by surveying pollinators in and around 16 small-scale (∼1 ha) flowering buckwheat fields and we determined the contribution of pollinator density to crop yield in a nature-inclusive farming project. We found that the buckwheat pollinator community was diverse, albeit dominated by honeybees. We found no clear indications of resource competition between honeybees and wild pollinators within the buckwheat fields. Honeybee density in the surroundings was generally low, and increased minimally during honeybee-hive placement. While densities of honeybees decreased non-linearly over the day in buckwheat fields, they did not (temporarily) move into the surroundings of the field, suggesting limited competition for resources with wild pollinators. Crop yield was largely dependent on crop pollinator density, notably of honeybees, and to a lesser extent crop biomass (as a proxy for agricultural management). Our results show that buckwheat cultivation fits well within nature-inclusive farming if some simple precautionary measures are being taken, such as limiting the honeybee-hive densities and placing hives only during the main flowering period. The introduction of buckwheat cultivation into crop rotation could then contribute to fill an important nectar gap i

Context: Landscape simplification is a main driver of insect decline, threatening crop pollination services. Changes in functional features in simplified agroecosystems may impact the abundance of wild pollinators. Objectives: Here, we studied whether different pollinator groups based on life-history are differentially associated to landscape features, and how this affects crop pollination service delivery. Methods: Using window traps in a highly simplified agroecosystem, we surveyed pollinator abundances and diversity associated with: (1) bare fence-lines separating pastures (control), (2) conifer hedgerows (3) farm gardens of diverse exotic plant species (4) effluent-ponds, (5) newly established native-plantings, (6) gorse (Ulex europaeus) hedgerows and (7) open water channels across six to twelve dairy farms. We also measured pollination service delivery to potted pak choi (Brassica rapa) plots near features 1–5 on six farms. Results: Pollinators at gardens, native-plantings, and effluent-ponds delivered significantly more pollination service than at bare fence-lines, with flies being more effective pollinators than bees at all features assessed. Taxa delivering the service also differed across features. The native bee Lasioglossum sordidum delivered more pollination at garden and native-planting features than at other features, drone flies (Eristalis tenax) contributed the majority of pollination service at effluent-ponds and bare fence-lines, while calliphorid flies contributed most pollination at conifer hedgerows. Conclusions: Conversion of functional features to bare fence-lines negatively affects on-farm pollinator diversity and its service to crop plants. However, farmers can benefit from enhancing features containing diverse plant species that support non-bee and bee species proven to deliver measurable crop pollination services.

Global biodiversity is declining under pressure of agricultural intensification and land-use change. Two-thirds of the agricultural lands is directly or indirectly devoted to the production of animal products. Replacing animal-based proteins by plant-based proteins can be an important step to a more sustainable agricultural system. Lupins (Lupinus sp.) are promising crop species due to a high protein content of up to 40 %, but crop yields are unstable in both quantity and quality. This might be due to a lack of effective pollinators, but the contribution of insect pollination to lupin crop yield is unknown. Here we studied for five varieties of two common lupin crop species (L. albus and L. angustifolius) which pollinators visit lupin flowers, whether this depends on nectar production, and what the contribution of insect pollination is to crop yield. We used a semi-experimental setup and placed bagged and open-pollinated plants in pots along an expected gradient of insect visitors and determined several yield parameters. We recorded 1355 pollinator visits of only eight bee species. None of the varieties tested produced nectar. Compared to bagged plants, protein yield increase of open-pollinated plants ranged from 3 to 11% depending on variety. Yield of open-pollinated plants was only consistently related to visitation of the large-bodied buff-tailed bumblebee (B. terrestris group; 59 % of all pollinators) with impact on seed set related yield parameters (number of seeds and pods) being generally larger than on seed filling related yield parameters (g/plant). Within the observed range, higher visitation rate of buff-tailed bumblebees increased protein yield of open-pollinated plants with 10–40 %. Visitation rates of the smaller common carder bee (B. pascuorum; 33 % of all pollinators), or all pollinators combined, were not significantly related to protein crop yield. This could indicate that only relatively large species are effective lupin pollinators. Lupins are

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects.

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

Mitigating pollinator declines in agriculturally dominated landscapes to safeguard pollination services requires the involvement of farmers and their willingness to adopt pollinator-friendly management. However, farmer knowledge, perceptions, and actions to support on-farm pollinators and their alignment with science-based knowledge and recommendations are rarely evaluated. To close this knowledge gap, we interviewed 560 farmers from 11 countries around the world, cultivating at least one of four widely grown pollinator-dependent crops (apple, avocado, kiwifruit, oilseed rape). We particularly focused on non-bee crop pollinators which, despite being important pollinators of many crops, received less research attention than bees. We found that farmers perceived bees to be more important pollinators than other flower-visiting insects. However, around 75% of the farmers acknowledged that non-bees contributed to the pollination of their crops, seeing them as additional pollinators rather than substitutes for bees. Despite farmers rating their own observations as being most important in how they perceived the contribution of different crop pollinator taxa, their perception aligned closely with results from available scientific studies across crops and countries. Farmer perceptions were also linked with their pollinator management practices, e.g. farmers who used managed bees for crop pollination services (more than half the farmers) rated these managed bees as particularly important. Interestingly, their willingness to establish wildflower strips or manage hedgerows to enhance pollinator visitation was linked to their ecological knowledge of non-bees or to government subsidies. Farmers adapted practices to enhance pollination services depending on the crop, which indicates an understanding of differences in the pollination ecology of crops. Almost half of the farmers had changed on-farm pollination management in the past 10 years and farm practices differed greatly betwe

Crop pollination is one of Nature’s Contributions to People (NCP) that reconciles biodiversity conservation and agricultural production. NCP benefits vary across space, including among distinct political-administrative levels within nations. Moreover, initiatives to restore ecosystems may enhance NCP provision, such as crop pollination delivered by native pollinators. We mapped crop pollination demand (PD), diversity of pollinator-dependent crops, and vegetation deficit (VD) (vis-a-vis Brazilian legal requirements) across all 5570 municipalities in Brazil. Pollinator-dependent crops represented ∼55% of the annual monetary value of agricultural production and ∼15% of the annual crop production. Municipalities with greater crop PD (i.e., higher degree of pollinator dependence of crop production) also had greater VD, associated with large properties and monocultures. In contrast, municipalities with a greater diversity of pollinator-dependent crops and predominantly small properties presented a smaller VD. Our results support that ecological restoration prompted by legal requirements offers great potential to promote crop productivity in larger properties. Moreover, conservation of vegetation remnants could support food security in small properties. We provided the first steps to identify spatial patterns linking biodiversity conservation and pollination service. Using Brazilian legal requirements as an example, we show that land-use management policies may be successfully used to ensure agricultural sustainability and crop production.

The entomophilous pollination niche (abundance, phenotypic traits, foraging behaviours and environmental tolerances of insect pollinators) helps to understand and better manage crop polli-nation. We apply this niche approach to assess how an entomophilous crop (blueberry, Vaccinium ashei) can be expanded into new territories (i.e., northern Spain) far from their original area of domestication (North America). Insect visits to blueberry flowers were monitored in a plantation on 12 different days, at 8 different times during day and covering various weather conditions. Abundance, visitation rate, pollen gathering behaviour, and frequency of inter-plant and inter-row movements were recorded. The pollinator assemblage was basically composed of one managed honeybee species (50.8% of visits) and three native bumblebee species (48.3%). There was a marked pattern of seasonal segregation throughout bloom, with bumblebees dominating the early bloom and honeybee the late bloom. Pollinators also segregated along gradients of daily temperature and relative humidity. Finally, the two pollinator types differed in foraging behaviour, with bumblebees having a visitation rate double that of honeybee, collecting pollen more frequently and changing plant and row more frequently. The spatio-temporal and functional complementarity between honeybee and bumblebees suggested here encourages the consideration of an integrated crop pollination strategy for blueberries, based on the concurrence of both wild and managed bees.

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects.

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Global biodiversity is declining under pressure of agricultural intensification and land-use change. Two-thirds of the agricultural lands is directly or indirectly devoted to the production of animal products. Replacing animal-based proteins by plant-based proteins can be an important step to a more sustainable agricultural system. Lupins (Lupinus sp.) are promising crop species due to a high protein content of up to 40 %, but crop yields are unstable in both quantity and quality. This might be due to a lack of effective pollinators, but the contribution of insect pollination to lupin crop yield is unknown. Here we studied for five varieties of two common lupin crop species (L. albus and L. angustifolius) which pollinators visit lupin flowers, whether this depends on nectar production, and what the contribution of insect pollination is to crop yield. We used a semi-experimental setup and placed bagged and open-pollinated plants in pots along an expected gradient of insect visitors and determined several yield parameters. We recorded 1355 pollinator visits of only eight bee species. None of the varieties tested produced nectar. Compared to bagged plants, protein yield increase of open-pollinated plants ranged from 3 to 11% depending on variety. Yield of open-pollinated plants was only consistently related to visitation of the large-bodied buff-tailed bumblebee (B. terrestris group; 59 % of all pollinators) with impact on seed set related yield parameters (number of seeds and pods) being generally larger than on seed filling related yield parameters (g/plant). Within the observed range, higher visitation rate of buff-tailed bumblebees increased protein yield of open-pollinated plants with 10–40 %. Visitation rates of the smaller common carder bee (B. pascuorum; 33 % of all pollinators), or all pollinators combined, were not significantly related to protein crop yield. This could indicate that only relatively large species are effective lupin pollinators. Lupins are ge

Pollination is an ecosystem service that directly contributes to agricultural production, and can therefore provide a strong incentive to conserve natural habitats that support pollinator populations. However, we have yet to provide consistent and convincing pollination service valuations to effectively slow the conversion of natural habitats. We use coffee in Kodagu, India, to illustrate the uncertainties involved in estimating costs and benefits of pollination services. First, we fully account for the benefits obtained by coffee agroforests that are attributable to pollination from wild bees nesting in forest habitats. Second, we compare these benefits to the opportunity cost of conserving forest habitats and forgoing conversion to coffee production. Throughout, we systematically quantify the uncertainties in our accounting exercise and identify the parameters that contribute most to uncertainty in pollination service valuation. We find the value of pollination services provided by one hectare of forest to be 25% lower than the profits obtained from converting that same surface to coffee production using average values for all parameters. However, our results show this value is not robust to moderate uncertainty in parameter values, particularly that driven by variability in pollinator density. Synthesis and applications. Our findings emphasize the need to develop robust estimates of both value and opportunity costs of pollination services that take into account landscape and management variables. Our analysis contributes to strengthening pollination service arguments used to help stakeholders make informed decisions on land use and conservation practices. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2019 British Ecological Society

Pollination is an ecosystem service that directly contributes to agricultural production, and can therefore provide a strong incentive to conserve natural habitats that support pollinator populations. However, we have yet to provide consistent and convincing pollination service valuations to effectively slow the conversion of natural habitats. We use coffee in Kodagu, India, to illustrate the uncertainties involved in estimating costs and benefits of pollination services. First, we fully account for the benefits obtained by coffee agroforests that are attributable to pollination from wild bees nesting in forest habitats. Second, we compare these benefits to the opportunity cost of conserving forest habitats and forgoing conversion to coffee production. Throughout, we systematically quantify the uncertainties in our accounting exercise and identify the parameters that contribute most to uncertainty in pollination service valuation. We find the value of pollination services provided by one hectare of forest to be 25% lower than the profits obtained from converting that same surface to coffee production using average values for all parameters. However, our results show this value is not robust to moderate uncertainty in parameter values, particularly that driven by variability in pollinator density. Synthesis and applications. Our findings emphasize the need to develop robust estimates of both value and opportunity costs of pollination services that take into account landscape and management variables. Our analysis contributes to strengthening pollination service arguments used to help stakeholders make informed decisions on land use and conservation practices. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2019 British Ecological Society

Pollination is an ecosystem service that directly contributes to agricultural production, and can therefore provide a strong incentive to conserve natural habitats that support pollinator populations. However, we have yet to provide consistent and convincing pollination service valuations to effectively slow the conversion of natural habitats. We use coffee in Kodagu, India, to illustrate the uncertainties involved in estimating costs and benefits of pollination services. First, we fully account for the benefits obtained by coffee agroforests that are attributable to pollination from wild bees nesting in forest habitats. Second, we compare these benefits to the opportunity cost of conserving forest habitats and forgoing conversion to coffee production. Throughout, we systematically quantify the uncertainties in our accounting exercise and identify the parameters that contribute most to uncertainty in pollination service valuation. We find the value of pollination services provided by one hectare of forest to be 25% lower than the profits obtained from converting that same surface to coffee production using average values for all parameters. However, our results show this value is not robust to moderate uncertainty in parameter values, particularly that driven by variability in pollinator density. Synthesis and applications. Our findings emphasize the need to develop robust estimates of both value and opportunity costs of pollination services that take into account landscape and management variables. Our analysis contributes to strengthening pollination service arguments used to help stakeholders make informed decisions on land use and conservation practices. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2019 British Ecological Society

The sustainability of agriculture can be improved by integrating management of ecosystem services, such as insect pollination, into farming practices. However, large‐scale adoption of ecosystem services‐based practices in agriculture is lacking, possibly because growers undervalue the benefits of ecosystem services compared to those of conventional management practices. Here we show that, under representative real‐world conditions, pollination and plant quality made similar contributions to marketable seed yield of hybrid leek (Allium porrum). Relative to the median, a 25% improvement of plant quality and pollination increased crop value by an estimated $18 007 and $17 174 ha−1 respectively. Across five crop lines, bumblebees delivered most pollination services, while other wild pollinator groups made less frequent but nevertheless substantial contributions. Honeybees actively managed for pollination services did not make significant contributions. Our results show that wild pollinators are an undervalued agricultural input and managing for enhancing pollinators makes sense economically in high‐revenue insect‐pollinated cropping systems.

The sustainability of agriculture can be improved by integrating management of ecosystem services, such as insect pollination, into farming practices. However, large‐scale adoption of ecosystem services‐based practices in agriculture is lacking, possibly because growers undervalue the benefits of ecosystem services compared to those of conventional management practices. Here we show that, under representative real‐world conditions, pollination and plant quality made similar contributions to marketable seed yield of hybrid leek (Allium porrum). Relative to the median, a 25% improvement of plant quality and pollination increased crop value by an estimated $18 007 and $17 174 ha−1 respectively. Across five crop lines, bumblebees delivered most pollination services, while other wild pollinator groups made less frequent but nevertheless substantial contributions. Honeybees actively managed for pollination services did not make significant contributions. Our results show that wild pollinators are an undervalued agricultural input and managing for enhancing pollinators makes sense economically in high‐revenue insect‐pollinated cropping systems.

Understanding the spatial-temporal variability in ecosystem services (ES) demand can help anticipate externalities of land use change. This study presents new operational approaches to quantify and map demand for three non-commodity ES on a global scale: animal pollination, wild medicinal plants and outdoor recreation. We show how the demand for these ES differs between beneficiaries and world regions. While the demand for animal pollination is accounted for via the consumption preferences for pollinator-dependent crop products, the demand for wild medicinal plants is quantified by the direct reliance on wild medicinal plants for basic healthcare needs. The demand for outdoor recreation is represented by the possibility and interest to participate in related activities. For animal pollination and outdoor recreation, demand is highest in industrial countries; demand for wild medicinal plants is highest in least developed countries, given their direct reliance on this ES for healthcare. Spatial demand-supply mismatches can cause trade-offs between ES in distant provisioning areas and can lead to unintended impacts on human well-being. The study reveals that quantifying and mapping spatial patterns of ES demand on a global scale requires clear conceptualization and operationalization of specific ES to select the most appropriate methods and arrive at meaningful results.

Wild bees are highly valuable pollinators. Along with managed honey bees, they provide a critical ecosystem service by ensuring stable pollination to agriculture and wild plant communities. Increasing concern about the welfare of both wild and managed pollinators, however, has prompted recent calls for national evaluation and action. Here, for the first time to our knowledge, we assess the status and trends of wild bees and their potential impacts on pollination services across the coterminous United States. We use a spatial habitat model, national land-cover data, and carefully quantified expert knowledge to estimate wild bee abundance and associated uncertainty. Between 2008 and 2013, modeled bee abundance declined across 23% of US land area. This decline was generally associated with conversion of natural habitats to row crops. We identify 139 counties where low bee abundances correspond to large areas of pollinator-dependent crops. These areas of mismatch between supply (wild bee abundance) and demand (cultivated area) for pollination comprise 39% of the pollinator-dependent crop area in the United States. Further, we find that the crops most highly dependent on pollinators tend to experience more severe mismatches between declining supply and increasing demand. These trends, should they continue, may increase costs for US farmers and may even destabilize crop production over time. National assessments such as this can help focus both scientific and political efforts to understand and sustain wild bees. As new information becomes available, repeated assessments can update findings, revise priorities, and track progress toward sustainable management of our nation's pollinators.

Mass-flowering crops (MFCs) are increasingly cultivated and might influence pollinator communities in MFC fields and nearby semi-natural habitats (SNHs). Across six European regions and 2 years, we assessed how landscape-scale cover of MFCs affected pollinator densities in 408 MFC fields and adjacent SNHs. In MFC fields, densities of bumblebees, solitary bees, managed honeybees and hoverflies were negatively related to the cover of MFCs in the landscape. In SNHs, densities of bumblebees declined with increasing cover of MFCs but densities of honeybees increased. The densities of all pollinators were generally unrelated to the cover of SNHs in the landscape. Although MFC fields apparently attracted pollinators from SNHs, in landscapes with large areas of MFCs they became diluted. The resulting lower densities might negatively affect yields of pollinator-dependent crops and the reproductive success of wild plants. An expansion of MFCs needs to be accompanied by pollinator-supporting practices in agricultural landscapes.

Mass-flowering crops (MFCs) are increasingly cultivated and might influence pollinator communities in MFC fields and nearby semi-natural habitats (SNHs). Across six European regions and 2 years, we assessed how landscape-scale cover of MFCs affected pollinator densities in 408 MFC fields and adjacent SNHs. In MFC fields, densities of bumblebees, solitary bees, managed honeybees and hoverflies were negatively related to the cover of MFCs in the landscape. In SNHs, densities of bumblebees declined with increasing cover of MFCs but densities of honeybees increased. The densities of all pollinators were generally unrelated to the cover of SNHs in the landscape. Although MFC fields apparently attracted pollinators from SNHs, in landscapes with large areas of MFCs they became diluted. The resulting lower densities might negatively affect yields of pollinator-dependent crops and the reproductive success of wild plants. An expansion of MFCs needs to be accompanied by pollinator-supporting practices in agricultural landscapes.

Understanding the inter-play plant–pollinator is essential to develop ecosystem services of faba bean and improved populations for low-input systems. We analyzed the phenotypic selection exerted by pollinators on floral traits involved in the plant pollinator inter-play. We test whether variation in pollinator-related floral traits is associated with differences among plants in seed production patterns. We used open pollination and pollinator-exclusion environments to examine pollinator mediated selection and selection for autonomous selfing in six gene-pools of Vicia faba over three consecutive years. We recorded, by using Digital Image Analysis, functional floral traits related to attraction, sexual dimension, and vector matching/pollen transfer efficiency. Nine production components were measured to categorize seed production patterns. Our approach used a series of Multivariate Regression Analyses (MRA) to explore which floral traits provided the best models to explain seed production patterns in each gene-pool and pollination environment. MRA showed that variation in the incidence of pollinator-mediated selection on floral traits or in the selection for autonomous selfing can substantially contribute to differences in seed patterns. The underlying floral mechanisms are specific to the gene-pool and largely unrelated among gene-pools. Consistent results among gene-pools involved no evidence of pollinator-mediated selection as result of the floral traits under study on the main predictors of crop yield, pods and seeds per plant. However, relevant predictors of crop yield such as pod length and seed dimensions and weight were pollinator-dependent because of pollinator-mediated selection on sexual dimension, floral display and vector matching traits. We caution against dismissing pollinator-mediated selection as driver of seed production patterns variation which may be influenced by the gene-pool and by the gene-pool × pollination environment interaction.

Research on ecosystem services has grown rapidly over the last decade. Two conceptual frameworks have been published to guide ecological assessments of organisms that deliver services-the concepts of service-providing units (SPUs) and ecosystem service providers (ESPs). Here, we unite these frameworks and present an SPU-ESP continuum that offers a coherent conceptual approach for synthesizing the latest developments in ecosystem service research, and can direct future studies at all levels of organization. In particular, we show how the service-provider concept call be applied tit the population, functional group, and community levels, We strongly emphasize the need to identify and quantify the organisms and their characteristics (e.g., functional traits) that provide services, and to assess service provision relative to the demands of human beneficiaries. We use key examples from the literature to illustrate the new approach and to highlight gaps in knowledge, particularly in relation to the impact of species interactions and ecosystem dynamics on service provision.

Certain pollinator populations are threatened globally due to habitat fragmentation and alteration, pesticides, disease and infestations by parasites. Localized population declines have prompted interest on the part of various stakeholders in restoring and maintaining pollinator-friendly habitats on working landscapes, particularly private agricultural lands. Recommendations from the National Research Council's report, Status of Pollinators in North America, include informing the agricultural community about ways to manage pollinators and conducting studies to improve restoration protocols and to understand land managers' willingness to adopt pollinator-friendly practices (NRC 2007). Interdisciplinary in nature, this research follows NRC's recommendations and incorporates methods from environmental science, ecology and anthropology to investigate and evaluate the opportunities and challenges to native bee conservation in Mid-Atlantic sustainable agriculture. I censused sustainable agriculture farms to assess the diversity of bees in different habitats and collected and identified over 3100 individuals representing five families, 26 genera and 81 species. Native bee abundance measures indicated a temporal shift in foraging among habitats with more bees moving into crops in mid-summer. I investigated floral constancy and visitation rates among native bees at Blandy Experimental Farm in Boyce, VA and found that bees move primarily among conspecific flowers and that particular flowers are more attractive to certain bee genera. I also investigated pollination of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) and bell pepper (Capsicum annuum) and examined importance of native bees to Mid-Atlantic vegetable crops. Additionally, I conducted a survey to examine similarities and differences in beliefs and values of Mid-Atlantic sustainable agriculture producers and pollinator scientists/managers in relation to native bee conservation. Sustainable agriculture farmers already hold beliefs, valu