Search

Wild pollinators are shown to be declining in many parts of the world where data and evidence exist; trends could be similar in other regions, but data and evidence are lacking. Land-use change is recognized as the top driver of biodiversity loss, including pollinator loss. In this study, we focused on coffee plantations in Indigenous land holdings in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve in the Western Ghats of India, where changing agricultural practices and reducing tree shade diversity and/or changing tree cover type may threaten pollinator communities. We assessed pollinator abundance, through scan sampling of flowers, in ten coffee farms — five of which had (Grevillea robusta) silver oak as shade trees and five of which had native tree species. We then evaluated the combined effect of (a) tree cover type, (b) distance from the forest edge, and (c) area under coffee cultivation on the abundance of four dominant coffee pollinators (Apis dorsata, A. cerana, A. florea, and Tetragonula iridipennis) and the abundance of Xylocopa sp., which is also known as a coffee pollinator. We found that the abundances of all five species were associated positively with the area under coffee cultivation. The abundance of A. cerana and T. iridipennis were also associated with the distance from the forest edge; the closer a farm to the forest, the more individuals of A. cerana and T. iridipennis were found visiting coffee flowers on the farm. Lastly, we found no statistically significant relationship between the abundances of the five species examined and tree cover type (either mixed native forest trees or silver oak (G. robusta)). The absence of a pattern may have been driven partly by our relatively small sample size since the abundances of A. cerana, A. florea, and T. iridipennis were on average higher in farms with native tree species. Our results suggest that maintaining forests near coffee systems increases insect pollinator abundance (i.e., delivery of pollination services) in the case of A. cerana and T. iridipennis and maintaining forest cover with native tree species composition plays a role in supporting pollinator habitats as well as providing foraging resources. Implications for insect conservation In working with Indigenous land holdings in India, our results show that forests and land use (area under cultivation) play a key role in maintaining bee pollinators in coffee agroecosystems and further investigation is needed to clarify the role of tree cover type and insect populations. more...

A COVID-19 járvány világszerte drámai és soha nem látott hatást gyakorolt az egészségügyre és a gazdaságra. Sok kormány gazdasági mentőcsomagot állít össze, hogy segítse a normális működéshez való visszatérést, ám az IPBES (Biológiai Sokféleség és Ökoszisztéma-szolgáltatás Kormányközi Testület) 2019-ben elfogadott Globális Felmérése szerint a gazdaság megszokott működése az ökoszisztémák állapotának nagyfokú és széleskörű romlásához vezetett az elmúlt időkben. A pandémia utáni világrendnek lehetősége van megfékezni azokat a gazdasági folyamatokat, amelyek mindeddig súlyosbították az ökológiai vészhelyzetet. Tanulmányunk ebből a szemszögből vizsgálja meg a különböző érintettek számára rendelkezésre álló gazdaságpolitikai eszközöket, legyenek azok rövidtávú ösztönzők vagy a globális, nemzeti és helyi gazdaságot hosszabb távon megreformáló, átfogó intézkedések. Olyan beavatkozásokat mutatunk be e két kategória mentén, amelyek az ökológiai rendszer rugalmas alkalmazkodóképességét fenntartó tevékenységeket helyezik előtérbe a biodiverzitást károsító tevékenységek helyett – ilyenek például a pénzügyi támogatások, a jogszabályi korlátozások, valamint a gazdaság- és foglalkoztatáspolitikai intézkedések. Ha a pandémia nyomán kialakult krízist a globális gazdaság átalakítására nyíló lehetőségként tekintjük, esélyünk lehet az évtizedek óta zajló természetkárosító folyamatok visszafordítására. more...

There have been calls for greater inclusion of Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in applied ecosystems research and ecological assessments. The Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Global Assessment (GA) is the first global scale assessment to systematically engage with ILK and issues of concern to Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC). In this paper, we review and reflect on how the GA worked with ILK and lessons learned. The GA engaged in critical evaluation and synthesis of existing evidence from multiple sources, using several deliberative steps: having specific authors and questions focus on ILK; integrating inputs from ILK across all chapters; organizing dialogue workshops; issuing calls for contributions to identify other forms and systems of knowledge; and encouraging IPLC to be key stakeholders and contributors. We identify content areas where attention to ILK was particularly important for questions in applied ecology. These include: (a) enriching understandings of nature and its contributions to people, including ecosystem services; (b) assisting in assessing and monitoring ecosystem change; (c) contributing to international targets and scenario development to achieve global goals like the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the Sustainable Development Goals and (d) generating inclusive and policy‐relevant options for people and nature. However, challenges in engaging different knowledge systems were also encountered. Policy implications. The Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Global Assessment (GA) demonstrated the importance of Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) to global biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management. Initiatives seeking to engage Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) can learn from the experience of the GA. Successfully bringing ILK into assessment processes and policy arenas requires a deliberate framework and approach from the start that facilitates recognition of different knowledge systems, identifies questions relevant at various scales, mobilizes funding and recognizes time required and engages networks of stakeholders with diverse worldviews. In turn, fostering inclusion of ILK and partnering with IPLC can help future assessments understand how natural and cultural systems co‐produce each other, identify trends of change through diverse biocultural indicators and improve sustainable development goals and policies. more...

International audience; The two most urgent and interlinked environmental challenges humanity faces are climate change and biodiversity loss. We are entering a pivotal decade for both the international biodiversity and climate change agendas with the sharpening of ambitious strategies and targets by the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Within their respective Conventions, the biodiversity and climate interlinked challenges have largely been addressed separately. There is evidence that conservation actions that halt, slow or reverse biodiversity loss can simultaneously slow anthropogenic mediated climate change significantly. This review highlights conservation actions which have the largest potential for mitigation of climate change. We note that conservation actions have mainly synergistic benefits and few antagonistic trade-offs with climate change mitigation. Specifically, we identify direct co-benefits in 14 out of the 21 action targets of the draft post-2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity, notwithstanding the many indirect links that can also support both biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. These relationships are context and scale-dependent; therefore, we showcase examples of local biodiversity conservation actions that can be incentivized, guided and prioritized by global objectives and targets. The close interlinkages between biodiversity, climate change mitigation, other nature's contributions to people and good quality of life are seldom as integrated as they should be in management and policy. This review aims to re-emphasize the vital relationships between biodiversity conservation actions and climate change mitigation in a timely manner, in support to major Conferences of Parties that are about to negotiate strategic frameworks and international goals for the decades to come. more...

Altres ajuts: Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-M Transformative governance is key to addressing the global environmental crisis. We explore how transformative governance of complex biodiversity-climate-society interactions can be achieved, drawing on the first joint report between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to reflect on the current opportunities, barriers, and challenges for transformative governance. We identify principles for transformative governance under a biodiversity-climate-society nexus frame using four case studies: forest ecosystems, marine ecosystems, urban environments, and the Arctic. The principles are focused on creating conditions to build multifunctional interventions, integration, and innovation across scales; coalitions of support; equitable approaches; and positive social tipping dynamics. We posit that building on such transformative governance principles is not only possible but essential to effectively keep climate change within the desired 1.5 degrees Celsius global mean temperature increase, halt the ongoing accelerated decline of global biodiversity, and promote human well-being. more...

Fil: Dicks, Lynn V. University of Cambridge. Department of Zoology. Reino Unido. Fil: Breeze, Tom D. Reading University. School of Agriculture, Policy and Development. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research. Reino Unido. Fil: Ngo, Hien T. IPBES Secretariat. Alemania. Fil: Senapathi, Deepa. Reading University. School of Agriculture, Policy and Development. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research. Reino Unido. Fil: An, Jiandong. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Institute of Apicultural Research. China. Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Río Negro, Argentina. Fil: Basu, Parthiba. University of Calcutta. Department of Zoology. India. Fil: Buchori, Damayanti. IPB University. Center for Transdisciplinary and Sustainability Sciences. Indonesia. Fil: Galetto, Leonardo. Universidad de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Córdoba, Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina. Fil: Gemmill-Herren, Barbara. World Agroforestry Centre. Kenia. Fil: Howlett, Brad G. The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited. Nueva Zelanda. Fil: Imperatriz-Fonseca, Vera L. University of Sao Paulo. Biosciences Institute. Brasil Fil: Johnson, Steven D. University of KwaZulu-Natal. School of Life Sciences. Centre for Functional Biodiversity. Sudáfrica. Fil: Kovács-Hostyánszki, Anikó. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany. Hungría. Fil: Jung Kwon, Yong. Kyungpook National University. School of Applied Biosciences. Corea del Sur. Fil: Lattorff, H. Michael G. International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology. Kenia. Fil: Lungharwo, Thingreipi. Naga Women’s Union. India. Fil: Seymour, Colleen L. Kirstenbosch Research Centre. South African National Biodiversity Institute. Sudáfrica. Fil: Vanbergen, Adam J. University of Bourgogne Franche-Comté. Francia. Fil: Potts, Simon G. Reading University. School of Agriculture, Policy and Development.Centre for Agri-Environmental Research. Reino Unido. Pollinator decline has attracted global attention and substantial efforts are underway to respond through national pollinator strategies and action plans. These policy responses require clarity on what is driving pollinator decline and what risks it generates for society in different parts of the world. Using a formal expert elicitation process, we evaluated the relative regional and global importance of eight drivers of pollinator decline and ten consequent risks to human well-being. Our results indicate that global policy responses should focus on reducing pressure from changes in land cover and configuration, land management and pesticides, as these were considered very important drivers in most regions. We quantify how the importance of drivers and risks from pollinator decline, differ among regions. For example, losing access to managed pollinators was considered a serious risk only for people in North America, whereas yield instability in pollinator-dependent crops was classed as a serious or high risk in four regions but only a moderate risk in Europe and North America. Overall, perceived risks were substantially higher in the Global South. Despite extensive research on pollinator decline, our analysis reveals considerable scientific uncertainty about what this means for human society. more...

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused dramatic and unprecedented impacts to both global health and economies. Many governments are now proposing recovery packages to get back to normal, but the 2019 Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Global Assessment indicated that business as usual has created widespread ecosystem degradation. Therefore, a post-COVID world needs to tackle the economic drivers that create ecological disruptions. In this Perspective, we discuss a number of tools across a range of actors for both short-term stimulus measures and longer-term revamping of global, national, and local economies that take biodiversity into account. These include measures to shift away from activities that damage biodiversity and towards those supporting ecosystem resilience, including through incentives, regulations, fiscal policy and employment programs. By treating the crisis as an opportunity to reset the global economy, we have a chance to reverse decades of biodiversity and ecosystem losses., The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented impacts to global economies, and recovery from this pandemic needs to tackle the drivers that create ecological disruptions in the first place. We discuss a number of tools across a range of actors for both short-term stimulus measures and longer-term revamping of global, national, and local economies that take biodiversity into account. By treating the crisis as an opportunity to reset the global economy, we can reverse decades of biodiversity and ecosystem losses. more...

Pollinator decline has attracted global attention, and substantial efforts are underway to respond, through national pollinator strategies and action plans. These policy responses require clarity on what is driving pollinator decline, and what risks it generates for society, in different parts of the world. Using a formal expert elicitation process, we evaluated relative regional and global importance of eight pressures driving pollinator decline, and ten consequent risks to human well-being. Our results indicate that global policy responses should focus on reducing pressure from changes in land cover and configuration, land management, and pesticides, as these were considered very important drivers in most regions. We quantify for the first time how the importance of drivers, and risks from pollinator decline, differ among regions. For example, losing access to managed pollinators was only considered a serious risk to people in North America, whereas yield instability in pollinator-dependent crops, classed as a serious or high risk in four regions, presented only moderate risk in Europe and North America. Overall, perceived risks were substantially higher in the Global South. Despite extensive, research on pollinator decline, our analysis reveals considerable scientific uncertainty about what this means for human society. more...

Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre-emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision-making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non-substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling-up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. Fil: Chan, Kai M. A.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Boyd, David R.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Gould, Rachelle. University of Vermont; Estados Unidos Fil: Jetzkowitz, Jens. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; Alemania Fil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Muraca, Bárbara. University of Oregon; Estados Unidos Fil: Naidoo, Robin. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Beck, Paige. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Satterfield, Terre. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica Fil: Singh, Gerald G.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Sumaila, Rashid. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Ngo, Hien T.. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Alemania Fil: Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Agard, John. The University Of The West Indies; Trinidad y Tobago Fil: de Aguiar, Ana Paula D.. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Armenteras, Dolors. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Colombia Fil: Balint, Lenke. BirdLife International; Reino Unido Fil: Barrington-Leigh, Christopher. Mcgill University; Canadá Fil: Cheung, William W. L.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Driscoll, John. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Esler, Karen. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica Fil: Eyster, Harold. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Gregr, Edward J.. University of British Columbia; Canadá Fil: Hashimoto, Shizuka. The University Of Tokyo; Japón Fil: Hernández Pedraza, Gladys Cecilia. The World Economy Research Center; Cuba Fil: Hickler, Thomas. Goethe Universitat Frankfurt; Alemania Fil: Kok, Marcel. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Lazarova, Tanya. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Mohamed, Assem A. A.. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; Egipto Fil: Murray-Hudson, Mike. University Of Botswana; Botsuana Fil: O'Farrell, Patrick. University of Cape Town; Sudáfrica Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; España Fil: Saysel, Ali Kerem. Boğaziçi University; Turquía Fil: Seppelt, Ralf. Martin-universität Halle-wittenberg; Alemania Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research-iDiv; Alemania Fil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina; Brasil Fil: Xue, Dayuan. Minzu University Of China; China Fil: Brondízio, Eduardo S.. Indiana University; Estados Unidos more...

We agree with Ceddia that investment can play a key role in achieving the transformative change that is necessary to reverse nature's ongoing decline. In our Review, we pointed to the large impact of extractive industries, the unequal distribution of wealth associated with trade flows, and the handful of transnational corporations that control the majority of supply chains in agriculture, fishing, logging, and mining. Changing investment in these sectors can profoundly affect the future of nature. More broadly, the impact of both public and private investment deserves more visibility ([ 1 ][1], [ 2 ][2]). It is also important to focus on the role that public policy and public opinion (including a more holistic view of economics and quality of life) can have in shaping investment ([ 3 ][3], [ 4 ][4]). A new economic system should build on and enhance the fabric of life rather than erode it. By rewarding actions that promote sustainability and penalizing actions that result in environmental deterioration, policies and attitudes can create powerful incentives for change in global financial and economic systems toward this vision. 1. [↵][5]1. E. S. Brondizio et al. 1. P. Balvanera et al ., in Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, E. S. Brondizio et al., Eds. (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, 2019). 2. [↵][6]1. E. S. Brondizio et al. 1. K. A. Brauman et al ., in Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, E. S. Brondizio et al., Eds. (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, 2019). 3. [↵][7]1. E. S. Brondizio et al. 1. K. M. A. Chan et al ., in Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, E. S. Brondizio et al., Eds. (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, 2019) 4. [↵][8]1. E. S. Brondizio et al. 1. J. Razzaque et al ., in Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, E. S. Brondizio et al., Eds. (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, 2019). [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-2 [3]: #ref-3 [4]: #ref-4 [5]: #xref-ref-1-1 "View reference 1 in text" [6]: #xref-ref-2-1 "View reference 2 in text" [7]: #xref-ref-3-1 "View reference 3 in text" [8]: #xref-ref-4-1 "View reference 4 in text" more...

Bees are the predominant pollinating taxa, providing a critical ecosystem service upon which many angiosperms rely for successful reproduction. Available data suggests that bee populations worldwide are declining, but scarce data in tropical regions precludes assessing their status and distribution, impact on ecological services, and response to management actions. Herein, we reviewed >150 papers that used six common sampling methods (pan traps, baits, Malaise traps, sweep nets, timed observations and aspirators) to better understand their strengths and weaknesses, and help guide method selection to meet research objectives and development of multi-species monitoring approaches. Several studies evaluated the effectiveness of sweep nets, pan traps, and malaise traps, but only one evaluated timed observations, and none evaluated aspirators. Only five studies compared two or more of the remaining four sampling methods to each other. There was little consensus regarding which method would be most reliable for sampling multiple species. However, we recommend that if the objective of the study is to estimate abundance or species richness, malaise traps, pan traps and sweep nets are the most effective sampling protocols in open tropical systems; conversely, malaise traps, nets and baits may be the most effective in forests. Declining bee populations emphasize the critical need in method standardization and reporting precision. Moreover, we recommend reporting a catchability coefficient, a measure of the interaction between the resource (bee) abundance and catching effort. Melittologists could also consider existing methods, such as occupancy models, to quantify changes in distribution and abundance after modeling heterogeneity in trapping probability, and consider the possibility of developing monitoring frameworks that draw from multiple sources of data. more...

Fil: Vanbergen, Adam J. Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté. AgroSup Dijon. Agroécologie. Francia. Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Rio Negro, Argentina. Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas de Argentina. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Rio Negro, Argentina. Fil: Cordeau, Stephane. Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté. AgroSup Dijon. Agroécologie. Francia. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina. Fil: Garratt, Michael P. D. Reading University. School of Agriculture, Policy and Development. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research. Reino Unido. Fil: Kovács-Hostyánszki, Anikó. Institute of Ecology and Botany. Centre for Ecological Research. Hungría. Fil: Lecuyer, Lou. Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté. AgroSup Dijon. Agroécologie. Francia. Fil: Ngo, Hien T. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Alemania. Fil: Potts, Simon G. Reading University. School of Agriculture, Policy and Development. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research. Reino Unido. Fil: Settele, Josef. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research. Department of Community Ecology. Alemania. Fil: Skrimizea, Eirini. Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté. AgroSup Dijon. Agroécologie. Francia. Fil: Young, Juliette C. Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté. AgroSup Dijon. Agroécologie. Francia. Multiple anthropogenic challenges threaten nature's contributions to human well-being. Agricultural expansion and conventional intensification are degrading biodiversity and ecosystem functions, thereby undermining the natural foundations on which agriculture is itself built. Averting the worst effects of global environmental change and assuring ecosystem benefits, requires a transformation of agriculture. Alternative agricultural systems to conventional intensification exist, ranging from adjustments to efficiency (e.g. sustainable intensification) to a redesign (e.g. ecological intensification, climate-smart agriculture) of the farm management system. These alternatives vary in their reliance on nature or technology, the level of systemic change required to operate, and impacts on biodiversity, landscapes and agricultural production. Different socio-economic, ecological and political settings mean there is no universal solution, instead there are a suite of interoperable practices that can be adapted to different contexts to maximise efficiency, sustainability and resilience. Social, economic, technological and demographic issues will influence the form of sustainable agriculture and effects on landscapes and biodiversity. These include: (1) the socio-technical-ecological architecture of agricultural and food systems and trends such as urbanisation in affecting the mode of production, diets, lifestyles and attitudes; (2) emerging technologies, such as gene editing, synthetic biology and 3D bioprinting of meat; and (3) the scale or state of the existing farm system, especially pertinent for smallholder agriculture. Agricultural transformation will require multifunctional landscape planning with cross-sectoral and participatory management to avoid unintended consequences and ultimately depends on people's capacity to accept new ways of operating in response to the current environmental crisis. more...

The global increase in the proportion of land cultivated with pollinator‐dependent crops implies increased reliance on pollination services. Yet agricultural practices themselves can profoundly affect pollinator supply and pollination. Extensive monocultures are associated with a limited pollinator supply and reduced pollination, whereas agricultural diversification can enhance both. Therefore, areas where agricultural diversity has increased, or at least been maintained, may better sustain high and more stable productivity of pollinator‐dependent crops. Given that >80% of all crops depend, to varying extents, on insect pollination, a global increase in agricultural pollinator dependence over recent decades might have led to a concomitant increase in agricultural diversification. We evaluated whether an increase in the area of pollinator‐dependent crops has indeed been associated with an increase in agricultural diversity, measured here as crop diversity, at the global, regional, and country scales for the period 1961–2016. Globally, results show a relatively weak and decelerating rise in agricultural diversity over time that was largely decoupled from the strong and continually increasing trend in agricultural dependency on pollinators. At regional and country levels, there was no consistent relationship between temporal changes in pollinator dependence and crop diversification. Instead, our results show heterogeneous responses in which increasing pollinator dependence for some countries and regions has been associated with either an increase or a decrease in agricultural diversity. Particularly worrisome is a rapid expansion of pollinator‐dependent oilseed crops in several countries of the Americas and Asia that has resulted in a decrease in agricultural diversity. In these regions, reliance on pollinators is increasing, yet agricultural practices that undermine pollination services are expanding. Our analysis has thereby identified world regions of particular concern where environmentally damaging practices associated with large‐scale, industrial agriculture threaten key ecosystem services that underlie productivity, in addition to other benefits provided by biodiversity., Increasing cultivation of pollinator‐dependent crops has placed a stress on global pollination capacity, which could have been ameliorated by a concomitant increase in agricultural diversification. However, this study reports a relatively weak and decelerating rise in agricultural diversity over time that was largely decoupled from the strong and continually increasing trend in agricultural dependency on pollinators. Particularly worrisome is a rapid expansion of pollinator‐dependent monocultures in several countries of the Americas and Asia that has resulted in a decrease in agricultural diversity. In these regions, reliance on pollinators is increasing, yet agricultural practices that undermine pollination services are expanding. more...

In tropical regions, habitat change and fragmentation partly occur due to urbanization. This change of land-use can affect many ecosystem services and their providers, such as pollination and pollinators. Within agricultural systems, monoculture systems and pesticide application are the most detrimental to pollinators and insect communities. In this study, we investigated the effect of distance from natural habitat on the diversity of insect pollinators and cucumber productivity. As the independent variable, distance from natural habitats was classified into two different groups i.e. agricultural area near to (less than 200m) and far from (more than 1km) the natural habitat. We found that the abundance of insect pollinators was significantly lower in agricultural areas near to natural habitats compared to those located far from natural habitats. Cucumber farms located near to natural habitats had 54% similar species composition of insect pollinators with cucumber farms located far from natural habitats. The productivity of cucumbers did not differ between cucumber farms near to and far from natural habitats. An expected result was the positive correlation between pollinator abundance (i.e. Xylocopa spp.) and the productivity of cucumber. Our findings suggest that the diversity of pollinators in tropical agricultural landscape is influenced more by a landscape composition of high natural habitat fragments than spatial distance between cropland and natural habitats. more...

Fil: Díaz, Sandra. Consejo Nacional de investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina. Fil: Díaz, Sandra. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales; Argentina. Fil: Settele, Josef. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research–UFZ. Department of Community Ecology; Alemania. Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research–iDiv; Alemania. Fil: Brondízio, Eduardo S. Indiana University. Department of Anthropology; Estados Unidos. Fil: Ngo, Hien T. Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Secretariat; Alemania. Fil: Agard, John. University of the West Indies. Department of Life Sciences; Trinidad y Tobago. Fil: Arneth, Almut. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research. Atmospheric Environmental Research; Alemania. Fil: Balvanera, Patricia. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad; México. Fil: Brauman, Kate A. University of Minnesota. Institute on the Environment; Estados Unidos. Fil: Butchart, Stuart H. BirdLife International; Reino Unido. Fil: Butchart, Stuart H. University of Cambridge. Department of Zoology; Reino Unido. Fil: Chan, Kai M. The University of British Columbia. Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability; Canada. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina. Fil: Ichii, Kazuhito. Chiba University. Center for Environmental Remote Sensing; Japón. Fil: Ichii, Kazuhito. National Institute for Environmental Studies. Center for Global Environmental Research; Japón. Fil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability; Estados Unidos. Fil: Subramanian, Suneetha M. United Nations University. Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability; Japón. Fil: Subramanian, Suneetha M. United Nations University. International Institute for Global Health; Malasia. Fil: Midgley, Guy F. Stellenbosch University. Department of Botany and Zoology. Global Change Biology Group; Sudáfrica. Fil: Miloslavich, Patricia. University of Tasmania. Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies; Australia. Fil: Miloslavich, Patricia. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. Oceans and Atmosphere; Australia. Fil: Miloslavich, Patricia. Universidad Simón Bolívar. Departamento de Estudios Ambientales; Venezuela. Fil: Molnár, Zsolt. Magyar Tudományos Akadémia. Centre for Ecological Research Institute of Ecology and Botany; Hungría. Fil: Obura, David. Coastal Oceans Research and Development - Indian Ocean; Kenia. Fil: Obura, David. The University of Queensland. Global Climate Institute; Australia. Fil: Pfaff, Alexander. Duke University. Sanford School of Public Policy; Estados Unidos. Fil: Polasky, Stephen. University of Minnesota. Department of Applied Economics; Estados Unidos. Fil: Polasky, Stephen. University of Minnesota. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior; Estados Unidos. Fil: Purvis, Andy. Natural History Museum. Department of Life Sciences; Reino Unido. Fil: Purvis, Andy. Imperial College London. Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment; Reino Unido. Fil: Razzaque, Jona. University of the West of England. Faculty of Business and Law. Department of Law; Reino Unido. Fil: Reyers, Belinda. Stockholm University. Stockholm Resilience Centre; Suecia. Fil: Reyers, Belinda. Stellenbosch University. Department of Conservation Ecology; Sudáfrica. Fil: Roy Chowdhury, Rinku. Clark University. Graduate School of Geography; Estados Unidos. Fil: Shin, Yunne J. University of Montpellier; Francia. Fil: Shin, Yunne J. University of Cape Town. Marine Research Institute. Department of Biological Sciences; Sudáfrica. Fil: Visseren Hamakers, Ingrid. George Mason University. Department of Environmental Science and Policy; Estados Unidos. Fil: Visseren Hamakers, Ingrid. Radboud University. Institute for Management Research; Países Bajos. Fil: Willis, Katherine J. Royal Botanic Gardens; Reino Unido. Fil: Willis, Katherine J. University of Oxford. Department of Zoology. Long-Term Ecology Laboratory; Reino Unido. Fil: Zayas, Cynthia N. University of the Philippines. Center for International Studies; Filipinas. The human impact on life on Earth has increased sharply since the 1970s, driven by the demands of a growing population with rising average per capita income. Nature is currently supplying more materials than ever before, but this has come at the high cost of unprecedented global declines in the extent and integrity of ecosystems, distinctness of local ecological communities, abundance and number of wild species, and the number of local domesticated varieties. Such changes reduce vital benefits that people receive from nature and threaten the quality of life of future generations. Both the benefits of an expanding economy and the costs of reducing nature’s benefits are unequally distributed. The fabric of life on which we all depend—nature and its contributions to people—is unravelling rapidly. Despite the severity of the threats and lack of enough progress in tackling them to date, opportunities exist to change future trajectories through transformative action. Such action must begin immediately, however, and address the root economic, social, and technological causes of nature’s deterioration. more...

Conservation action for species of concern requires that “designatable units” (e.g., species, subspecies, geographic races, genetically distinct forms) are clearly defined, or that the species complex is treated as a whole. Several species of bumble bee are currently threatened, and some of these have cryptic colouration (resembling other species), or form complexes that vary considerably in colour patterning. Here we address the taxonomy and distribution of Bombus occidentalis Greene and B. terricola Kirby, both of which are currently of conservation concern in North America. Bombus occidentalis includes two apparently monophyletic groups of COI barcode haplotypes (recently considered as subspecies) with ranges mostly separated by that of their sister species, B. terricola. The southern B. o. occidentalis ranges throughout the western United States and into western Canada from southern Saskatchewan and Alberta, and throughout British Columbia north to ca. 55°N; the northern B. o. mckayi Ashmead, is restricted to north of this in British Columbia, westernmost Northwest Territories, Yukon Territory and Alaska. Bombus o. mckayi exists, as far as is known, only with a “banded” colour pattern. By contrast, B. o. occidentalis occurs in both banded and non-banded colour patterns, although the southern banded colour pattern is geographically isolated from the northern subspecies. Bombus o. occidentalis has declined throughout its range, perhaps due in part to exposure to novel parasites. Despite having similar levels of parasitism (ca. 40 %) as the southern subspecies, B. o. mckayi appears to have stable populations at present. There is therefore compelling evidence that the two subspecies should be distinguished for conservation and management purposes. We present the evidence for their distinction and provide tools for subspecies recognition. more...

Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina. Fil: Carvalheiro, Luísa G. Universidade de Brasília. Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro. Departamento de Ecologia; Brasil. Fil: Carvalheiro, Luísa G. Universidade de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências. Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes (CE3C); Portugal. Fil: Carvalheiro, Luísa G. Naturalis Biodiversity Center; Países Bajos. Fil: Vaissière, Bernard E. Institut national de la recherche agronomique; Francia. Fil: Gemmill Herren, Barbara. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Italia. Fil: Hipólito, Juliana. Universidade Federal da Bahia. Campus de Ondina. Departamento de Zoologia. Instituto de Biologia; Brasil. Fil: Freitas, Breno M. Universidade Federal do Ceará. Campus Universitário do Pici. Departamento de Zootecnia. Centro de Ciências Agrárias; Brasil. Fil: Ngo, Hien T. Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). UN Campus. IPBES Secretaria; Alemania. Fil: Azzu, Nadine. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Italia. Fil: Sáez, Agustín. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Laboratorio Ecotono; Argentina. Fil: Sáez, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnica. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Laboratorio Ecotono; Argentina. Fil: Åström, Jens. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research; Noruega. Fil: An, Jiandong. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Institute of Apicultural Research. Key Laboratory for Insect-Pollinator Biology of the Ministry of Agriculture; China. Fil: Blochtein, Betina. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS); Brasil. Fil: Buchori, Damayanti. Bogor Agricultural University. Faculty of Agriculture. Department of Plant Protection; Indonesia. Fil: Chamorro García, Fermín J. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Departamento de Biología. Laboratorio investigaciones en Abejas (LABUN); Colombia. Fil: Oliveira da Silva, Fabiana. Universidade Federal de Sergipe. Campus do Sertão. Departamento de Educação em Ciências Agrárias e da Terra; Brasil. Fil: Devkota, Kedar. Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science; Nepal. Fil: de Fátima Ribeiro, Márcia. Embrapa Semiárido; Brasil. Fil: Freitas, Leandro. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro (JBRJ); Brasil. Fil: Gaglianone, Maria C. Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense Darcy Ribeiro. Laboratório de Ciências Ambientais; Brasil. Fil: Goss, Maria. University of Zimbabwe. Faculty of Agriculture. Crop Science Department; Zimbabue. Fil: Irshad, Mohammad. National Agricultural Research Centre. Honey Bee Research Institute. Conservation and Management of Pollinators for Sustainable Agriculture through Ecosystem Approach project; Pakistán. Fil: Kasina, Muo. Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation-Sericulture; Kenia. Fil: Pacheco Filho, Alípio J. Universidade Federal do Ceará. Campus Universitário do Pici. Departamento de Zootecnia. Centro de Ciências Agrárias; Brasil. Fil: Piedade Kiill, Lucia H. Embrapa Semiárido; Brasil. Fil: Kwapong, Peter. University of Cape Coast. School of Biological Sciences. College of Agriculture and Natural Sciences; Ghana. Fil: Nates Parra, Guiomar. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Departamento de Biología. Laboratorio investigaciones en Abejas (LABUN); Colombia. Fil: Pires, Carmen. Parque Estação Biológica. Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia; Brasil. Fil: Pires, Viviane. Instituto do Meio Ambiente e Recursos Hídricos (INEMA)–UR Extremo Sul; Brasil. Fil: Rawal, Ranbeer S. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development; India. Fil: Rizali, Akhmad. University of Brawijaya. Faculty of Agriculture. Department of Plant Pest Diseases; Indonesia. Fil: Saraiva, Antonio M. Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Politécnica; Brasil. Fil: Veldtman, Ruan. Kirstenbosch Research Centre. South African National Biodiversity Institute; Sudáfrica. Fil: Veldtman, Ruan. Stellenbosch University. Conservation Ecology and Entomology; Sudáfrica. Fil: Viana, Blandina F. Universidade Federal da Bahia. Campus de Ondina. Departamento de Zoologia. Instituto de Biologia; Brasil. Fil: Witter, Sidia. Fundação Estadual de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Fepagro Vale do Taquari). Centro de Pesquisa Emílio Schenk; Brasil. Fil: Zhang, Hong. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Institute of Apicultural Research. Key Laboratory for Insect-Pollinator Biology of the Ministry of Agriculture; China. Ecological intensification, or the improvement of crop yield through enhancement of biodiversity, may be a sustainable pathway toward greater food supplies. Such sustainable increases may be especially important for the 2 billion people reliant on small farms, many of which are undernourished, yet we know little about the efficacy of this approach. Using a coordinated protocol across regions and crops, we quantify to what degree enhancing pollinator density and richness can improve yields on 344 fields from 33 pollinator-dependent crop systems in small and large farms from Africa, Asia, and Latin America. For fields less than 2 hectares, we found that yield gaps could be closed by a median of 24% through higher flower-visitor density. For larger fields, such benefits only occurred at high flower-visitor richness. Worldwide, our study demonstrates that ecological intensification can create synchronous biodiversity and yield outcomes. more...

Even though Arabica coffee (Coffea arabica Linnaeus, Rubiaceae) can self-pollinate, bees are important pollinators, without which there is lower fruit quality and yield. We studied bee diversity in coffee agroecosystems in Costa Rica during two coffee flowering seasons (2005 and 2006). Malaise traps were used as a passive sampling method to collect bees during coffee blooms. We collected 1012 bee individuals from three different site types: nonagricultural fields and shaded and unshaded coffee farms. Unshaded coffee farms had significantly higher species richness (S) and number of bee individuals (n) than did the shaded coffee farms and nonagricultural sites. Overall bee diversity did not differ among site types but evenness (J′) was significantly lower in unshaded coffee farms. Using a more detailed community analysis, there was a significant association between functional groups and habitat type with more species and individuals of small-bodied ground-nesting bees (Lasioglossum (Dialictus) Robertson) associated with unshaded coffee farms. A large proportion (49%) of bees collected were of this subgenus, which was never before reported as common in coffee agroecosystems. Further studies should establish whether Dialictus is important in coffee pollination. We propose strategies involving conservation of native bees through simple habitat management for small-scale coffee farms that may improve crop quality and quantity. more...

Scenarios are powerful tools toenvision how nature might respondto different pathways of futurehuman development and policy choices1.Most scenarios developed for globalenvironmental assessments have exploredimpacts of society on nature, such asbiodiversity loss, but have not includednature as a component of socioeconomicdevelopment2. They ignore policyobjectives related to nature protectionand neglect nature?s role in underpinningdevelopment and human well-being.This approach is becoming untenablebecause targets for human developmentare increasingly connected with targetsfor nature, such as in the United Nations?Sustainable Development Goals. The nextgeneration of scenarios should explorealternative pathways to reach theseintertwined targets, including potentialsynergies and trade-offs between natureconservation and other developmentgoals, as well as address feedbacks betweennature, nature?s contributions to people,and human well-being. The developmentof these scenarios would benefit from theuse of participatory approaches, integratingstakeholders from multiple sectors (forexample, fisheries, agriculture, forestry)and should address decision-makersfrom the local to the global scale3, therebysupporting assessments being undertakenby the Intergovernmental Platformon Biodiversity and EcosystemServices (IPBES). Fil: Rosa, Isabel M. D.. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Martin-universitat Halle-wittenberg; Alemania Fil: Pereira, Henrique M.. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Martin-universitat Halle-wittenberg; Alemania. Universidad de Porto; Portugal Fil: Ferrier, Simon. Csiro Land And Water; Australia Fil: Alkemade, Rob. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Acosta, Lilibeth A.. University Of The Philippines Los Banos; Filipinas Fil: Akcakaya, H. Resit. Stony Brook University; Estados Unidos Fil: Den Belder, Eefje. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos. Wageningen University And Research Centre; Países Bajos Fil: Fazel, Asghar M.. Eco Institute Of Environmental Science And Technology; Irán. University Of Environment; Irán Fil: Fujimori, Shinichiro. International Institute For Applied Systems Analysis; Austria. National Institute For Environmental Studies Of Japan; Japón Fil: Harfoot, Mike. United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre; Reino Unido Fil: Harhash, Khaled A.. Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency; Egipto Fil: Harrison, Paula A.. Lancaster University; Reino Unido Fil: Hauck, Jennifer. Coknow Consulting; Alemania. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania Fil: Hendriks, Rob J. J.. Ministry Of Economic Affairs; Países Bajos Fil: Hernández, Gladys. Centre For World Economy Studies; Cuba Fil: Jetz, Walter. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. University of Yale; Estados Unidos Fil: Karlsson Vinkhuyzen, Sylvia I.. Wageningen University And Research Centre; Países Bajos Fil: Kim, Hyejin. National Institute Of Ecology; Corea del Sur Fil: King, Nicholas. North-west University; Sudáfrica Fil: Kok, Marcel T. J.. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Kolomytsev, Grygoriy O.. Schmalhausen Institute of Zoology of National Academy of Sciences of Ukrain; Ucrania Fil: Lazarova, Tanya. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Leadley, Paul. Université Paris Sud; Francia Fil: Lundquist, Carolyn J.. National Institute Of Water And Atmospheric Research; Nueva Zelanda. The University of Auckland; Nueva Zelanda Fil: García Márquez, Jaime. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin; Alemania Fil: Meyer, Carsten. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. University of Yale; Estados Unidos Fil: Navarro, Laetitia M.. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Martin-universitat Halle-wittenberg; Alemania Fil: Nesshöver, Carsten. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania Fil: Ngo, Hien T.. Ipbes Secretariat; Alemania Fil: Ninan, Karachepone N.. Centre For Economics, Environment And Society; India Fil: Palomo, Maria Gabriela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”; Argentina Fil: Pereira, Laura M.. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Peterson, Garry D.. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia Fil: Pichs, Ramon. Centre For World Economy Studies; Cuba Fil: Popp, Alexander. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research; Alemania Fil: Purvis, Andy. Natural History Museum; Reino Unido Fil: Ravera, Federica. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Centre de Recerca Ecológica I Aplicacions Forestals; España. University Of Évora; Portugal. Universitat Central De Catalunya; España Fil: Rondinini, Carlo. Università degli studi di Roma "La Sapienza"; Italia Fil: Sathyapalan, Jyothis. Centre For Economic And Social Studies; India Fil: Schipper, Aafke M.. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos Fil: Seppelt, Ralf. Coknow Consulting; Alemania. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania Fil: Sitas, Nadia. The Council For Scientific And Industrial Research; Sudáfrica Fil: Van Vuuren, Detlef. Pbl Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos more...

Values of pollinators and pollination 1. Animal pollination plays a vital role as a regulating ecosystem service in nature. Globally, nearly 90 per cent of wild flowering plant species depend, at least in part, on the transfer of pollen by animals. These plants are critical for the continued functioning of ecosystems as they provide food, form habitats, and provide other resources for a wide range of other species. 2. More than three quarters of the leading types of global food crops rely to some extent on animal pollination for yield and/or quality. Pollinator-dependent crops contribute to 35 per cent of global crop production volume. 3. Given that pollinator-dependent crops rely on animal pollination to varying degrees, it is estimated that 5–8 per cent of current global crop production is directly attributed to animal pollination with an annual market value of $235 billion–$577 billion (in 2015, United States dollars1) worldwide. more...

Fil: Potts, Simon G. University of Reading; Reino Unido Fil: Imperatriz Fonseca, Vera L. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil Fil: Ngo, Hien T. Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Alemania Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; Argentina Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche; Argentina Fil: Aizen, Marcelo A. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentina Fil: Biesmeijer, Jacobus C. Naturalis Biodiversity Center; Países Bajos Fil: Biesmeijer, Jacobus C. University of Amsterdam; Países Bajos Fil: Breeze, Thomas D. University of Reading; Reino Unido Fil: Dicks, Lynn V. University of East Anglia; Reino Unido Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; Argentina. Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro; Argentina Fil: Hill, Rosemary. CSIRO Land and Water and James Cook University Division of Tropical Environments and Societies; Francia Fil: Settele, Josef. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania. Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania Fil: Vanbergen, Adam J. NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology; Alemania Wild and managed pollinators provide a wide range of benefits to society in terms of contributions to food security, farmer and beekeeper livelihoods, social and cultural values, as well as the maintenance of wider biodiversity and ecosystem stability. Pollinators face numerous threats, including changes in landuse and management intensity, climate change, pesticides and genetically modified crops, pollinator management and pathogens, and invasive alien species. There are well documented declines in some wild and managed pollinators in several regions of the world. However, many effective policy and management responses can be implemented to safeguard pollinators and sustain pollination services. more...

Cellulose triacetate was investigated as a chiral stationary phase for preparatively separating the enantiomers of lineatin, frontalin, exo-brevicomin, endo-brevicomin, verbenone, (E)-conophthorin, and grandisol. Tens of milligrams of both enantiomers were efficiently prepared in high percentage enantiomeric excess from one injection of each compound except grandisol. We prepared grandisyl acetate, benzoate, and 4-bromobenzoate to determine if derivatization of the free alcohol might improve separation. Of these, grandisyl 4-bromobenzoate provided the best separation but was still not very well resolved. Preparative separation of enantiomers on cellulose triacetate is a viable alternative to stereoselective synthesis when semiochemicals of very high enantiomeric purity are required for biological testing. more...

The islands of the south west Pacific (SWP) are highly biodiverse, yet records of their bee fauna suggest a region depauperate of a key pollinator suite. Studies of the bees of Fiji based on molecular data have revealed a recent origin with the majority of species having arrived since the last glacial maximum or introduced since human colonization. Here we use DNA barcodes to provide the first detailed account of Apidae bees from Vanuatu, Fiji, and Samoa. We show that most if not all species in these archipelagos have been recently introduced from Australia and south east Asia, with a further species introduced from the New World. Some of these species have become regionally abundant and we discuss the potential impact of introduced pollinators on endemic plant-pollinator associations. Given the wide-reaching role of native pollinators in island systems, yet lack of understanding of SWP pollinator suites, our study highlights the urgent need for more detailed pollinator research in the region. Refereed/Peer-reviewed more...

Bees are key pollinators in almost all terrestrial ecosystems and can have major roles in agricultural production. Records of bees in the Southwest Pacific indicate a very low diversity, with the Fijian bee fauna one of the least diverse, despite an otherwise rich biota. Megachilid bees represent a large proportion of the bee fauna for almost all island groups in the Southwest Pacific and, because they are wood- and stem-nesting, their wide distribution is likely to have been influenced by rafting and anthropogenic maritime trade. Our study is the first to apply molecular techniques to the study of megachilid bees in this region and indicates between four and five recent introductions to Fiji, likely from Southeast Asia. The study also provides the first record of Heriades (Michenerella) in the Southwest Pacific and the first record of the subgenus Megachile (Callomegachile) in Fiji. These results indicate that a large proportion of the Fijian bee fauna is likely to have been introduced only very recently and, therefore, has had only a very recent role in Fijian ecosystems, despite their current abundance. This has very wide implications for understanding Fijian plant-pollinator relationships. We argue that there is a strong need to understand ancient plant-pollinator relationships that may have evolved in Fiji before the mid late Pleistocene and Holocene and whether these could be disrupted by recent bee introductions. Refereed/Peer-reviewed more...

The goal of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is to strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services towards conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development. To achieve this goal, the Platform has four functions: (i) Knowledge generation: to identify knowledge needs of decision makers, and catalyse efforts to generate new knowledge; (ii) Assessment: to deliver global, regional and thematic assessments, and promote and catalyse support for sub-global assessment; (iii) Policy support tools: to identify policy relevant tools/methodologies, facilitate their use, and promote and catalyse their further development; and (iv) Capacity building: to prioritize key capacity building needs, and provide and call for financial and other support for priority needs. This report assesses the current knowledge on pollinators, pollination and their links to food production. The overall aim of the thematic assessment of Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production is to assess animal pollination as a regulating ecosystem service underpinning food production in the context of its contribution to nature’s gifts to people and supporting a good quality of life. To achieve this, the focus is on the role of native and exotic pollinators, the status of, and trends in pollinators and pollinator-plant networks and pollination, drivers of change, impacts on human well-being, food production in response to pollination declines and deficits and the effectiveness of responses from various governance systems to pollination declines and deficits. The scope is global, covering all continents except Antarctica, where no pollinators are known. The assessment brings together contributions not only from natural, social and economic science perspectives but also from knowledge of indigenous and local community stakeholders and practitioners. The assessment strives to critically review the broadest range of evidence and make its findings readily available to support policy and management responses to declines and deficits in pollination. The report represents the first IPBES thematic assessment deliverable that aims to identify policy-relevant findings for decision-making in government, the private sector and civil society, as well as helping to demonstrate how an essential ecosystem service could potentially contribute to the post-2015 development agenda1. more...