Search

Seventy five percent of the world's food crops benefit from insect pollination. Hence, there has been increased interest in how global change drivers impact this critical ecosystem service. Because standardized data on crop pollination are rarely available, we are limited in our capacity to understand the variation in pollination benefits to crop yield, as well as to anticipate changes in this service, develop predictions, and inform management actions. Here, we present CropPol, a dynamic, open, and global database on crop pollination. It contains measurements recorded from 202 crop studies, covering 3,394 field observations, 2,552 yield measurements (i.e., berry mass, number of fruits, and fruit density [kg/ha], among others), and 47,752 insect records from 48 commercial crops distributed around the globe. CropPol comprises 32 of the 87 leading global crops and commodities that are pollinator dependent. Malus domestica is the most represented crop (32 studies), followed by Brassica napus (22 studies), Vaccinium corymbosum (13 studies), and Citrullus lanatus (12 studies). The most abundant pollinator guilds recorded are honey bees (34.22% counts), bumblebees (19.19%), flies other than Syrphidae and Bombyliidae (13.18%), other wild bees (13.13%), beetles (10.97%), Syrphidae (4.87%), and Bombyliidae (0.05%). Locations comprise 34 countries distributed among Europe (76 studies), North America (60), Latin America and the Caribbean (29), Asia (20), Oceania (10), and Africa (7). Sampling spans three decades and is concentrated on 2001-2005 (21 studies), 2006-2010 (40), 2011-2015 (88), and 2016-2020 (50). This is the most comprehensive open global data set on measurements of crop flower visitors, crop pollinators and pollination to date, and we encourage researchers to add more datasets to this database in the future. This data set is released for non-commercial use only. Credits should be given to this paper (i.e., proper citation), and the products generated with this database should be shared under the same license terms (CC BY-NC-SA)., (© 2021 The Ecological Society of America.)

Most of the world's crops depend on pollinators, so declines in both managed and wild bees raise concerns about food security. However, the degree to which insect pollination is actually limiting current crop production is poorly understood, as is the role of wild species (as opposed to managed honeybees) in pollinating crops, particularly in intensive production areas. We established a nationwide study to assess the extent of pollinator limitation in seven crops at 131 locations situated across major crop-producing areas of the USA. We found that five out of seven crops showed evidence of pollinator limitation. Wild bees and honeybees provided comparable amounts of pollination for most crops, even in agriculturally intensive regions. We estimated the nationwide annual production value of wild pollinators to the seven crops we studied at over $1.5 billion; the value of wild bee pollination of all pollinator-dependent crops would be much greater. Our findings show that pollinator declines could translate directly into decreased yields or production for most of the crops studied, and that wild species contribute substantially to pollination of most study crops in major crop-producing regions.

Concerns over the availability of honeybees ( Apis mellifera L.) to meet pollination demands have elicited interest in alternative pollinators to mitigate pressures on the commercial beekeeping industry. The blue orchard bee, Osmia lignaria (Say), is a commercially available native bee that can be employed as a copollinator with, or alternative pollinator to, honeybees in orchards. To date, their successful implementation in agriculture has been limited by poor recovery of bee progeny for use during the next spring. This lack of reproductive success may be tied to an inadequate diversity and abundance of alternative floral resources during the foraging period. Managed, supplementary wildflower plantings may promote O. lignaria reproduction in California almond orchards. Three wildflower plantings were installed and maintained along orchard edges to supplement bee forage. Plantings were seeded with native wildflower species that overlapped with and extended beyond almond bloom. We measured bee visitation to planted wildflowers, bee reproduction, and progeny outcomes across orchard blocks at variable distances from wildflower plantings during 2015 and 2016. Pollen provision composition was also determined to confirm O. lignaria wildflower pollen use. Osmia lignaria were frequently observed visiting wildflower plantings during, and after, almond bloom. Most O. lignaria nesting occurred at orchard edges. The greatest recovery of progeny occurred along the orchard edges having the closest proximity (80 m) to managed wildflower plantings versus edges farther away. After almond bloom, O. lignaria nesting closest to the wildflower plantings collected 72% of their pollen from Phacelia spp., which supplied 96% of the managed floral area. Phacelia spp. pollen collection declined with distance from the plantings, but still reached 17% 800 m into the orchard. This study highlights the importance of landscape context and proximity to supplementary floral resources in promoting the propagation of solitary bees as alternative managed pollinators in commercial agriculture., Competing Interests: None declared., (© 2020 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Pollination services provided by managed bees are essential for California almond (Prunus dulcis Mill.; Rosales: Rosaceae) production. Currently, pollination needs are met by rented or owned Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae; honey bee) colonies. Excessive demand on a challenged A. mellifera industry to provide strong colonies in early spring has caused sharp increases in rental prices over the past decade, inviting the consideration of alternative pollinators in addition to, or in place of, A. mellifera. Osmia lignaria Say (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae; the blue orchard bee) is an excellent pollinator of fruit and nut trees, but its pollination impacts when used in tandem with A. mellifera have yet to be evaluated in commercial almond orchards. A 2-yr study was conducted in California orchards to compare almond pollination and production using A. mellifera as sole pollinator to an alternative practice of adding O. lignaria as a co-pollinator with A. mellifera. Almond orchard managerial decisions, such as for pesticide use and irrigation intensity, vary between almond growing regions because of local climates. Therefore, both north-central and southern sites of California's San Joaquin Valley are represented. We compared bee visitation, nut set, and nut yield between orchards and between tree rows within orchards. Also, O. lignaria reproductive success was recorded to assure that these bees remained in the orchards as pollinators and to assess the ability to sustain these bees under regional orchard conditions. We demonstrated that augmenting large commercial almond orchards with O. lignaria can significantly increase nut set and sometimes nut yield in both regions evaluated.

Native managed bees can improve crop pollination, but a general framework for evaluating the associated economic costs and benefits has not been developed. We conducted a cost-benefit analysis to assess how managing blue orchard bees (Osmia lignaria Say [Hymenoptera: Megachildae]) alongside honey bees (Apis mellifera Linnaeus [Hymenoptera: Apidae]) can affect profits for almond growers in California. Specifically, we studied how adjusting three strategies can influence profits: (1) number of released O. lignaria bees, (2) density of artificial nest boxes, and (3) number of nest cavities (tubes) per box. We developed an ecological model for the effects of pollinator activity on almond yields, validated the model with published data, and then estimated changes in profits for different management strategies. Our model shows that almond yields increase with O. lignaria foraging density, even where honey bees are already in use. Our cost-benefit analysis shows that profit ranged from -US$1,800 to US$2,800/acre given different combinations of the three strategies. Adding nest boxes had the greatest effect; we predict an increase in profit between low and high nest box density strategies (2.5 and 10 boxes/acre). In fact, the number of released bees and the availability of nest tubes had relatively small effects in the high nest box density strategies. This suggests that growers could improve profits by simply adding more nest boxes with moderate number of tubes in each. Our approach can support grower decisions regarding integrated crop pollination and highlight the importance of a comprehensive ecological economic framework for assessing these decisions., (© The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The engineering of flowering agricultural field borders has emerged as a research and policy priority to mitigate threats to pollinators. Studies have, however, rarely addressed the potential that flowering field borders might compete with neighboring crops for pollinator visits if they both are in bloom at the same time, despite this being a concern expressed by growers. We evaluated how wildflower plantings added to orchard borders in a large (512 ha) commercial almond orchard affected honey bee and wild bee visitation to orchard borders and the crop. The study was conducted over two consecutive seasons using three large (0.48 ha) wildflower plantings paired with control orchard borders in a highly simplified agricultural landscape in California. Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) and wild bee visitation to wildflower plots were at least an order of magnitude higher than to control plots, but increased honey bee visitation to wildflower plots did not lead to any detectable shifts in honey bee visitation to almond flowers in the neighboring orchard. Wild bees were rarely observed visiting almond flowers irrespective of border treatment, indicating a limited short-term potential for augmenting crop pollination using wild bees in highly simplified agricultural landscapes. Although further studies are warranted on bee visitation and crop yield from spatially independent orchards, this study indicates that growers can support bees with alternative forage in almond orchards without risking competition between the wildflower plantings and the crop., (© The Authors 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This article provides surgical pathologists an overview of health information systems (HISs): what they are, what they do, and how such systems relate to the practice of surgical pathology. Much of this article is dedicated to the electronic medical record. Information, in how it is captured, transmitted, and conveyed, drives the effectiveness of such electronic medical record functionalities. So critical is information from pathology in integrated clinical care that surgical pathologists are becoming gatekeepers of not only tissue but also information. Better understanding of HISs can empower surgical pathologists to become stakeholders who have an impact on the future direction of quality integrated clinical care., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is a growing body of empirical evidence showing that wild and managed bees are negatively impacted by various pesticides that are applied in agroecosystems around the world. The lethal and sublethal effects of two widely used fungicides and one adjuvant were assessed in cage studies in California on blue orchard bees, Osmia lignaria, and in cage studies in Utah on alfalfa leafcutting bees, Megachile rotundata. The fungicides tested were Rovral 4F (iprodione) and Pristine (mixture of pyraclostrobin + boscalid), and the adjuvant tested was N-90, a non-ionic wetting agent (90% polyethoxylated nonylphenol) added to certain tank mixtures of fungicides to improve the distribution and contact of sprays to plants. In separate trials, we erected screened cages and released 20 paint-marked females plus 30-50 males per cage to document the behavior of nesting bees under treated and control conditions. For all females in each cage, we recorded pollen-collecting trip times, nest substrate-collecting trip times (i.e., mud for O. lignaria and cut leaf pieces for M. rotundata), cell production rate, and the number of attempts each female made to enter her own or to enter other nest entrances upon returning from a foraging trip. No lethal effects of treatments were observed on adults, nor were there effects on time spent foraging for pollen and nest substrates and on cell production rate. However, Rovral 4F, Pristine, and N-90 disrupted the nest recognition abilities of O. lignaria females. Pristine, N-90, and Pristine + N-90 disrupted nest recognition ability of M. rotundata females. Electroantennogram responses of antennae of O. lignaria females maintained in the laboratory did not differ significantly between the fungicide-exposed and control bees. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that two commonly used fungicides and a non-ionic adjuvant can disrupt nest recognition in two managed solitary bee species.

This article provides surgical pathologists an overview of health information systems (HISs): what they are, what they do, and how such systems relate to the practice of surgical pathology. Much of this article is dedicated to the electronic medical record. Information, in how it is captured, transmitted, and conveyed, drives the effectiveness of such electronic medical record functionalities. So critical is information from pathology in integrated clinical care that surgical pathologists are becoming gatekeepers of not only tissue but also information. Better understanding of HISs can empower surgical pathologists to become stakeholders who have an impact on the future direction of quality integrated clinical care., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)