Pollinator richness, pollination networks, and diet adjustment along local and landscape gradients of resource diversity.

Loss of habitats and native species, introduction of invasive species, and changing climate regimes lead to the homogenization of landscapes and communities, affecting the availability of habitats and resources for economically important guilds, such as pollinators. Understanding how pollinators and their interactions vary along resource diversity gradients at different scales may help to determine their adaptability to the current diversity loss related to global change. We used data on 20 plant-pollinator communities along gradients of flower richness (local diversity) and landscape heterogeneity (landscape diversity) to understand how the diversity of resources at local and landscape scales affected (1) wild pollinator abundance and richness (accounting also for honey bee abundance), (2) the structure of plant-pollinator networks, (3) the proportion of actively selected interactions (those not occurring by neutral processes), and (4) pollinator diet breadth and species' specialization in networks. Wild pollinator abundance was higher overall in flower-rich and heterogeneous habitats, while wild pollinator richness increased with flower richness (more strongly for beetles and wild bees) and decreased with honeybee abundance. Network specialization (H2 '), modularity, and functional complementarity were all positively related to floral richness and landscape heterogeneity, indicating niche segregation as the diversity of resources increases at both scales. Flower richness also increased the proportion of actively selected interactions (especially for wild bees and flies), whereas landscape heterogeneity had a weak negative effect on this variable. Overall, network-level metrics responded to larger landscape scales than pollinator-level metrics did. Higher floral richness resulted in a wider taxonomic and functional diet for all the study guilds, while functional diet increased mainly for beetles. Despite this, specialization in networks (d') increased with flower richness for all the study guilds, because pollinator species fed on a narrower subset of plants as communities became richer in species. Our study indicates that pollinators are able to adapt their diet to resource changes at local and landscape scales. However, resource homogenization might lead to poor and generalist pollinator communities, where functionally specialized interactions are lost. This study highlights the importance of including different scales to understand the effects of global change on pollination service through changes in resource diversity.

Managed bumble bees acquire parasites from their foraging environment: A case study on parasite spillback.

The use of commercially reared bumble bees in agricultural environments has been recognized as a potential threat to wild pollinators due to competition, genetic contamination, and most notably, disease transmission. Higher parasite prevalence near greenhouses where managed bumble bees are used has been linked to parasite spillover from managed to wild bees. However, pathogen transmission is not unidirectional, and can also flow from wild to managed bees. These newly infected managed bees can subsequently re-infect (other) wild bees, in a process known as spillback, which is an alternative explanation for the increased parasite prevalence near greenhouses. Reducing parasite prevalence in managed bees is key to controlling host-parasite dynamics in cases of spillover; in spillback, producing managed bees that are resilient to infection is important. Here we establish that the managed bumble bee Bombus terrestris can acquire parasites from their foraging environment, which is the major infection route for Apicystis spp. and Crithidia spp., but not for Nosema spp.. Managed B. terrestris were found to have a higher prevalence of Crithdia and a higher load of Apicystis than local wild conspecifics, showing that for these parasites, spillback is a possible risk scenario.

Complementary crops and landscape features sustain wild bee communities.

Wild bees, which are important for commercial pollination, depend on floral and nesting resources both at farms and in the surrounding landscape. Mass-flowering crops are only in bloom for a few weeks and unable to support bee populations that persist throughout the year. Farm fields and orchards that flower in succession potentially can extend the availability of floral resources for pollinators. However, it is unclear whether the same bee species or genera will forage from one crop to the next, which bees specialize on particular crops, and to what degree inter-crop visitation patterns will be mediated by landscape context. We therefore studied local- and landscape-level drivers of bee diversity and species turnover in apple orchards, blueberry fields, and raspberry fields that bloom sequentially in southern Quebec, Canada. Despite the presence of high bee species turnover, orchards and small fruit fields complemented each other phenologically by supporting two bee genera essential to their pollination: mining bees (Andrena spp.) and bumble bees (Bombus spp.). A number of bee species specialized on apple, blueberry, or raspberry blossoms, suggesting that all three crops could be used to promote regional bee diversity. Bee diversity (rarefied richness, wild bee abundance) was highest across crops in landscapes containing hedgerows, meadows, and suburban areas that provide ancillary nesting and floral resources throughout the spring and summer. Promoting phenological complementarity in floral resources at the farmstead and landscape scales is essential to sustaining diverse wild bee populations.

Increased pollinator habitat enhances cacao fruit set and predator conservation.

The unique benefits of wild pollinators to the productivity of agricultural crops have become increasingly recognized in recent decades. However, declines in populations of wild pollinator species, largely driven by the conversion of natural habitat to agricultural land and broad-spectrum pesticide use often lead reductions in the provision of pollination services and crop production. With growing evidence that targeted pollinator conservation improves crop yield and/or quality, particularly for pollination specialist crops, efforts are increasing to substitute agriculturally intensive practices with those that alleviate some of the negative impacts of agriculture on pollinators and the pollination services they provide, in part through the provision of suitable pollinator habitat. Further, similarities between the responses of some pollinators and predators to habitat management suggest that efforts to conserve pollinators may also encourage predator densities. We evaluated the effects of one habitat management practice, the addition of cacao fruit husks to a monoculture cacao farm, on the provision of pollination services and the densities of two groups of entomophagous predators. We also evaluated the impacts of cacao fruit husk addition on pollen limitation, by crossing this habitat manipulation with pollen supplementation treatments. The addition of cacao fruit husks increased the number of fruits per tree and along with hand pollination treatments, increased final yields indicating a promotion of the pollination ecosystem service provided by the specialist pollinators, midges. We also found that cacao fruit husk addition increased the densities of two predator groups, spiders and skinks. Further, the conservation of these predators did not inhibit pollination through pollinator capture or deterrence. The findings show that, with moderate habitat management, both pollinator and predator conservation can be compatible goals within a highly specialized plant-pollinator system. The effectiveness of this habitat manipulation may be attributable to the increased availability of alternative habitat and food resources for both pollinators and predators. The results exemplify a win-win relationship between agricultural production and biological conservation, whereby agricultural practices to support vital pollinators and pollination services can increase production as well as support species conservation.

Honey bee introductions displace native bees and decrease pollination of a native wildflower.

Introduced species can have cascading effects on ecological communities, but indirect effects of species introductions are rarely the focus of ecological studies. For example, managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) have been widely introduced outside their native range and are increasingly dominant floral visitors. Multiple studies have documented how honey bees impact native bee communities through floral resource competition, but few have quantified how these competitive interactions indirectly affect pollination and plant reproduction. Such indirect effects are hard to detect because honey bees are themselves pollinators and may directly impact pollination through their own floral visits. The potentially huge but poorly understood impacts that non-native honey bees have on native plant populations combined with increased pressure from beekeepers to place hives in U.S. National Parks and Forests makes exploring impacts of honey bee introductions on native plant pollination of pressing concern. In this study, we used experimental hive additions, field observations, as well as single-visit and multiple-visit pollination effectiveness trials across multiple years to untangle the direct and indirect impacts of increasing honey bee abundance on the pollination of an ecologically important wildflower, Camassia quamash. We found compelling evidence that honey bee introductions indirectly decrease pollination by reducing nectar and pollen availability and competitively excluding visits from more effective native bees. In contrast, the direct impact of honey bee visits on pollination was negligible, and, if anything, negative. Honey bees were ineffective pollinators, and increasing visit quantity could not compensate for inferior visit quality. Indeed, although the effect was not statistically significant, increased honey bee visits had a marginally negative impact on seed production. Thus, honey bee introductions may erode longstanding plant-pollinator mutualisms, with negative consequences for plant reproduction. Our study calls for a more thorough understanding of the indirect effects of species introductions and more careful coordination of hive placements.

Motivations underpinning honeybee management practices: A Q methodology study with UK beekeepers.

Beekeepers are central to pollinator health. For policymakers and beekeeping organisations to develop widely accepted strategies to sustain honeybee populations alongside wild pollinators, a structured understanding of beekeeper motivations is essential. UK beekeepers are increasing in number, with diverse management styles despite calls for coordinated practice to manage honeybee health. Our Q methodology study in Cornwall, UK, indicated five beekeeping perspectives; conventional hobbyists, natural beekeepers, black bee farmers, new-conventional hobbyists and pragmatic bee farmers. Motivations can be shared across perspectives but trade-offs (notably between economic, social responsibility and ideological motivations) result in differing practices, some of which counter 'official' UK advice and may have implications for pollinator health and competition. Honeybee conservation emerged as a key motivator behind non-conventional practices, but wild pollinator conservation was not prioritised by most beekeepers in practice. Q methodology has the potential to facilitate non-hierarchical collaboration and conceptualisation of sustainable beekeeping, moving towards co-production of knowledge to influence policy.

Time to Integrate Pollinator Science into Soybean Production.

Soybeans cover 129 million hectares globally. Soybean productivity can increase with pollinator management, but soybean cultivation practices commonly ignore biotic pollination. If pollinator habitats are created within soybean landscapes and policies to limit agricultural expansion are implemented, millions of hectares could be restored for biodiversity without loss of soybean production.

The role of insect pollinators in avocado production: A global review.

Insect pollination increases the yield and quality of many crops and therefore, understanding the role of insect pollinators in crop production is necessary to sustainably increase yields. Avocado Persea americana benefits from insect pollination, however, a better understanding of the role of pollinators and their contribution to the production of this globally important crop is needed. In this study, we carried out a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies investigating the pollination ecology of avocado to answer the following questions: (a) Are there any research gaps in terms of geographic location or scientific focus? (b) What is the effect of insect pollinators on avocado pollination and production? (c) Which pollinators are the most abundant and effective and how does this vary across location? (d) How can insect pollination be improved for higher yields? (e) What are the current evidence gaps and what should be the focus of future research? Research from many regions of the globe has been published, however, results showed that there is limited information from key avocado producing countries such as Mexico and the Dominican Republic. In most studies, insects were shown to contribute greatly to pollination, fruit set and yield. Honeybees Apis mellifera were important pollinators in many regions due to their efficiency and high abundance, however, many wild pollinators also visited avocado flowers and were the most frequent visitors in over 50% of studies. This study also highlighted the effectiveness of stingless bees (Meliponini) and blow flies (Calliphoridae) as avocado pollinators although, for the majority of flower visitors, there is a lack of data on pollinator efficiency. For optimal yields, growers should ensure a sufficient abundance of pollinators in their orchards either through increasing honeybee hive density or, for a more sustainable approach, by managing wild pollinators through practices that protect or promote natural habitat.

Confronting the Modern Gordian Knot of Urban Beekeeping.

With insect population declines, cities are important habitats for wild pollinators. Urban beekeeping is an increasingly popular activity, yet honeybees present important risks to wild insect pollinators in cities. We argue for new, scientifically evidenced urban pollinator strategies to simultaneously enhance the benefits of urban beekeeping while protecting wild pollinators.

Plant evolution can mediate negative effects from honey bees on wild pollinators.

Pollinators are introduced to agroecosystems to provide pollination services. Introductions of managed pollinators often promote ecosystem services, but it remains largely unknown whether they also affect evolutionary mutualisms between wild pollinators and plants.Here, we developed a model to assess effects of managed honey bees on mutualisms between plants and wild pollinators. Our model tracked how interactions among wild pollinators and honey bees affected pollinator and plant populations.We show that when managed honey bees have a competitive advantage over wild pollinators, or a greater carrying capacity, the honey bees displace the wild pollinator. This leads to reduced plant density because plants benefit less by visits from honey bees than wild pollinators that coevolved with the plants.As wild pollinators are displaced, plants evolve by increasing investment in traits that are attractive for honey bees but not wild pollinators. This evolutionary switch promotes wild pollinator displacement. However, higher mutualism investment costs by the plant to the honey bee can promote pollinator coexistence.Our results show plant evolution can promote displacement of wild pollinators by managed honey bees, while limited plant evolution may lead to pollinator coexistence. More broadly, effects of honey bees on wild pollinators in agroecosystems, and effects on ecosystem services, may depend on the capacity of plant populations to evolve.

Do native and invasive herbivores have an effect on Brassica rapa pollination?

Mutualistic (e.g. pollination) and antagonistic (e.g. herbivory) plant-insect interactions shape levels of plant fitness and can have interactive effects. By using experimental plots of Brassica rapa plants infested with generalist (Mamestra brassicae) and specialised (Pieris brassicae) native herbivores and with a generalist invasive (Spodoptera littoralis) herbivore, we estimated both pollen movement among treatments and the visiting behaviour of honeybees versus other wild pollinators. Overall, we found that herbivory has weak effects on plant pollen export, either in terms of inter-treatment movements or of dispersion distance. Plants infested with the native specialised herbivore tend to export less pollen to other plants with the same treatment. Other wild pollinators preferentially visit non-infested plants that differ from those of honeybees, which showed no preferences. Honeybees and other wild pollinators also showed different behaviours on plants infested with different herbivores, with the former tending to avoid revisiting the same treatment and the latter showing no avoidance behaviour. When taking into account the whole pollinator community, i.e. the interactive effects of honeybees and other wild pollinators, we found an increased avoidance of plants infested by the native specialised herbivore and a decreased avoidance of plants infested by the invasive herbivore. Taken together, our results suggest that herbivory may have an effect on B. rapa pollination, but this effect depends on the relative abundance of honeybees and other wild pollinators.

Diversity matters: Effects of density compensation in pollination service during rainfall shift.

Extreme weather events are increasing in frequency due to the warming climate. Such extremities can jeopardize ecosystem services and create economic imbalances. Tropical developing countries are predicted to suffer the maximum consequences of such events.We examined the impact of such an event-extreme rainfall fluctuation-on a critical ecosystem service-pollination, which can be intricately linked to a country's economy. We performed this study in a dominant peri-urban vegetable hub of an agriculture-dependent developing country.We found that the yield of all pollinator-dependent crops grown across a large spatial scale (district) over multiple years (six) drastically declined with the decrease in rainfall.At the local scale, we found that the dominant crop (representative horticultural crop) had a significant drop in yield during drought, likely due to the production of fewer female flowers and a significant shift in the pollinator community.We found that Trigona sp. (one of the four pollinators) was the critical pollinator positively influencing fruit-to-flower ratio (FFR) (an indicator of pollination service) in the normal rainfall year. However, despite its sharp decline during drought, the FFR remained unaffected. We found that during drought, Apis dorsata was crucial in maintaining FFR and compensated for the decline of the critical pollinator across 67% farmlands.Our study demonstrates the role of ecosystem stabilizing mechanism rescuing the crucial ecosystem service during climatic variability over the temporal scale.

Pesticides and reduced-risk insecticides, native bees and pantropical stingless bees: pitfalls and perspectives.

Although invertebrates generally have a low public profile, the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., is a flagship species whose popularity likely derives from the products it provides and its perceived ecological services. Therefore, the raging debate regarding honey bee decline has surpassed the realm of beekeepers, academia, industry and regulatory agencies and now also encompasses non-governmental agencies, media, fiction writers and the general public. The early interest and concern about honey bee colony collapse disorder (CCD) soon shifted to the bigger issue of pollinator decline, with a focus on the potential involvement of pesticides in such a phenomenon. Pesticides were previously recognised as the potential culprits of the reported declines, particularly the neonicotinoid insecticides owing to their widespread and peculiar use in agriculture. However, the evidence for the potential pivotal role of these neonicotinoids in honey bee decline remains a matter of debate, with an increased recognition of the multifactorial nature of the problem and the lack of a direct association between the noted decline and neonicotinoid use. The focus on the decline of honey bee populations subsequently spread to other species, and bumblebees became another matter of concern, particularly in Europe and the United States. Other bee species, ones that are particularly important in other regions of the world, remain the object of little concern (unjustifiably so). Furthermore, the continuous focus on neonicotinoids is also in need of revision, as the current evidence suggests that a broad spectrum of compounds deserve attention. Here we address both shortcomings.