Silvopastoral systems benefit invertebrate biodiversity on tropical livestock farms in Caquetá, Colombia.

In the Colombian Amazon, there has been long-term and sustained loss of primary forest threatening biodiversity and climate change mitigation. Silvopastoral practices that integrate trees into livestock production could help address both local economic and wider environmental challenges.We aimed to assess the effects of silvopastoral practices on invertebrate communities on smallholder farms in Caquetá, Colombia. Using sweep nets and malaise trapping, invertebrate communities were compared between traditional pasture, silvopasture and forest edge habitats.Invertebrate communities collected using sweep nets were contrasting among habitat types, communities were significantly different between traditional pasture and forest edge habitats and diversity and evenness were greatest in forest edges compared to traditional pastures. It appears that silvopasture areas, by supporting similar invertebrate assemblages to both traditional pasture and forest edges, may be acting as an intermediate habitat.When individual invertebrate orders were compared, Lepidoptera and Coleoptera were found in greater abundance in the forest edge habitats, while Hemiptera were more abundant in traditional pasture. Hemipterans are often pests of forage plants in pasture systems and these differences in abundance may have implications for ecosystem services and disservices.Silvopastoral approaches cannot replace the unique biodiversity supported by native forests but could deliver benefits for invertebrate conservation and ecosystem services if integrated into landscapes.

Resumen: En la Amazonía colombiana ha habido una pérdida sostenida y a largo plazo de bosque primario que amenaza la biodiversidad y la mitigación del cambio climático. Las prácticas silvopastoriles que integran los árboles en la producción ganadera podrían ayudar a abordar tanto los desafíos económicos locales como los ambientales.Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar los efectos de las prácticas silvopastoriles en comunidades de invertebrados en pequeñas fincas en Caquetá, Colombia. Las comunidades de invertebrados se compararon entre las pasturas nativas, el sistema silvopastoril y los hábitats del borde del bosque mediante el uso redes entomológicas de barrido y trampas Malaise.Las comunidades de invertebrados recolectadas usando redes entomológicas de barrido contrastaban entre los tipos de hábitat. Las comunidades eran significativamente diferentes entre las pasturas nativas y el borde de bosque. Pareciera que las áreas de silvopastoreo, al soportar conjuntos de invertebrados similares tanto a las pasturas nativas como a los bordes del bosque, pueden estar actuando como un hábitat intermedio.Cuando se compararon los órdenes individuales de invertebrados, los lepidópteros y los coleópteros se encontraron en mayor abundancia en los hábitats del borde del bosque, mientras que los hemípteros eran más abundantes en las pasturas nativas. Los hemípteros son a menudo plagas de plantas forrajeras en sistemas de pastoreo y estas diferencias en abundancia pueden tener implicaciones y perjuicios para los servicios ecosistémicos.Los sistemas silvopastoriles no pueden reemplazar la biodiversidad única apoyada por los bosques nativos, pero podrían ofrecer beneficios para la conservación de invertebrados y los servicios ecosistémicos si se integran en los paisajes.

Neither sulfoxaflor, Crithidia bombi, nor their combination impact bumble bee colony development or field bean pollination.

Many pollinators, including bumble bees, are in decline. Such declines are known to be driven by a number of interacting factors. Decreases in bee populations may also negatively impact the key ecosystem service, pollination, that they provide. Pesticides and parasites are often cited as two of the drivers of bee declines, particularly as they have previously been found to interact with one another to the detriment of bee health. Here we test the effects of an insecticide, sulfoxaflor, and a highly prevalent bumble bee parasite, Crithidia bombi, on the bumble bee Bombus terrestris. After exposing colonies to realistic doses of either sulfoxaflor and/or Crithidia bombi in a fully crossed experiment, colonies were allowed to forage on field beans in outdoor exclusion cages. Foraging performance was monitored, and the impacts on fruit set were recorded. We found no effect of either stressor, or their interaction, on the pollination services they provide to field beans, either at an individual level or a whole colony level. Further, there was no impact of any treatment, in any metric, on colony development. Our results contrast with prior findings that similar insecticides (neonicotinoids) impact pollination services, and that sulfoxaflor impacts colony development, potentially suggesting that sulfoxaflor is a less harmful compound to bee health than neonicotinoids insecticides.

Functional and Behavioral Responses of the Natural Enemy Anthocoris nemoralis to Cacopsylla pyri, at Different Temperatures.

Anthocoris nemoralis is the dominant predator of pear sucker (Cacopsylla pyri) in the UK. Anthocoris nemoralis migrates into orchards in spring or is introduced as a biocontrol agent, reaching peak population levels in July-August, contributing to effective control of summer pear sucker populations. However, due to temperature dependent development and metabolism there are concerns that C. pyri populations or feeding rates may increase due to changing climatic conditions. Thus, how A. nemoralis responds to temperature, impacts its ability as a biocontrol agent. Functional response assays, monitoring attack rate and handling time of A. nemoralis and behavioral assays, using Ethovision tracking software occurred, to assess the impact of temperature on predation. Experiments were conducted at current and future July-August mean temperatures, predicted using RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 (medium and high, representative concentration pathway) emissions scenarios, using 2018 UK Climate Projections (UKCP18). All treatments demonstrated a Type II functional response, with female anthocorids demonstrating shorter handling times and higher attack rates than males. Males showed longer prey handling times at 18 °C compared to 23 °C and more time was spent active at lower temperatures for both sexes. Females did not show significant differences in attack rate or handling time in response to temperature. Overall prey consumption was also not significantly affected by temperature for either sex. This study suggests that anthocorids are likely to remain effective natural enemies under future predicted temperatures, due to non-significant differences in prey consumption. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10905-023-09836-5.

Location and Creation of Nest Sites for Ground-Nesting Bees in Apple Orchards.

Wild ground-nesting bees are key pollinators of apple (Malus domestica). We explored, (1) where they choose to nest, (2) what influences site selection and (3) species richness in orchards. Twenty-three orchards were studied over three years; twelve were treated with additional herbicide to increase bare ground with the remainder as untreated controls. Vegetation cover, soil type, soil compaction, nest number and location, and species were recorded. Fourteen species of ground-nesting solitary/eusocial bee were identified. Most nests were in areas free of vegetation and areas treated with additional herbicide were utilised by ground nesting bees within three years of application. Nests were also evenly distributed along the vegetation-free strips underneath the apple trees. This area was an important ground-nesting bee habitat with mean numbers of nests at peak nest activity of 873 per ha (range 44-5705), and 1153 per ha (range 0-4082) in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Increasing and maintaining areas of bare ground in apple orchards during peak nesting events could improve nesting opportunities for some species of ground-nesting bee and, combined with flowers strips, be part of a more sustainable pollinator management approach. The area under the tree row is an important contributor to the ground-nesting bee habitat and should be kept bare during peak nesting.

Characterization Factors to Assess Land Use Impacts on Pollinator Abundance in Life Cycle Assessment.

While wild pollinators play a key role in global food production, their assessment is currently missing from the most commonly used environmental impact assessment method, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This is mainly due to constraints in data availability and compatibility with LCA inventories. To target this gap, relative pollinator abundance estimates were obtained with the use of a Delphi assessment, during which 25 experts, covering 16 nationalities and 45 countries of expertise, provided scores for low, typical, and high expected abundance associated with 24 land use categories. Based on these estimates, this study presents a set of globally generic characterization factors (CFs) that allows translating land use into relative impacts to wild pollinator abundance. The associated uncertainty of the CFs is presented along with an illustrative case to demonstrate the applicability in LCA studies. The CFs based on estimates that reached consensus during the Delphi assessment are recommended as readily applicable and allow key differences among land use types to be distinguished. The resulting CFs are proposed as the first step for incorporating pollinator impacts in LCA studies, exemplifying the use of expert elicitation methods as a useful tool to fill data gaps that constrain the characterization of key environmental impacts.

Addressing pollination deficits in orchard crops through habitat management for wild pollinators.

There is increasing evidence that farmers in many areas are achieving below maximum yields due to insufficient pollination. Practical and effective approaches are needed to maintain wild pollinator populations within agroecosystems so they can deliver critical pollination services that underpin crop production. We established nesting and wildflower habitat interventions in 24 UK apple orchards and measured effects on flower-visiting insects and the pollination they provide, exploring how this was affected by landscape context. We quantified the extent of pollination deficits and assessed whether the management of wild pollinators can reduce deficits and deliver improved outcomes for growers over 3 years. Wildflower interventions increased solitary bee numbers visiting apple flowers by over 20%, but there was no effect of nesting interventions. Other pollinator groups were influenced by both local and landscape-scale factors, with bumblebees and hoverflies responding to the relative proportion of semi-natural habitat at larger spatial scales (1000 m), while honeybees and other flies responded at 500 m or less. By improving fruit number and quality, pollinators contributed more than £16 k per hectare. However, deficits (where maximum potential was not being reached due to a lack of pollination) were recorded and the extent of these varied across orchards, and from year to year, with a 22% deficit in output in the worst (equivalent to ~£14 k/ha) compared to less than 3% (equivalent to ~£2 k/ha) in the best year. Although no direct effect of our habitat interventions on deficits in gross output was observed, initial fruit set and seed set deficits were reduced by abundant bumblebees, and orchards with a greater abundance of solitary bees saw lower deficits in fruit size. The abundance of pollinators in apple orchards is influenced by different local and landscape factors that interact and vary between years. Consequently, pollination, and the extent of economic output deficits, also vary between orchards and years. We highlight how approaches, including establishing wildflower areas and optimizing the ratio of cropped and non-cropped habitats can increase the abundance of key apple pollinators and improve outcomes for growers.

Animal pollination increases stability of crop yield across spatial scales.

The benefits of animal pollination to crop yield are well known. In contrast, the effects of animal pollination on the spatial or temporal stability (the opposite of variability) of crop yield remain poorly understood. We use meta-analysis to combine variability information from 215 experimental comparisons between animal-pollinated and wind- or self-pollinated control plants in apple, oilseed rape and faba bean. Animal pollination increased yield stability (by an average of 32% per unit of yield) at between-flower, -plant, -plot and -field scales. Evidence suggests this occurs because yield benefits of animal pollination become progressively constrained closer to the maximum potential yield in a given context, causing clustering. The increase in yield stability with animal pollination is greatest when yield benefits of animal pollination are greatest, indicating that managing crop pollination to increase yield also increases yield stability. These additional pollination benefits have not yet been included in economic assessments but provide further justification for policies to protect pollinators.

Establishment and management of wildflower areas for insect pollinators in commercial orchards.

Sown wildflower areas are increasingly recommended as an agri-environmental intervention measure, but evidence for their success is limited to particular insect groups or hampered by the challenges of establishing seed mixes and maintaining flower abundance over time. We conducted a replicated experiment to establish wildflower areas to support insect pollinators in apple orchards. Over three years, and across 23 commercial UK orchards with and without sown wildflowers, we conducted 828 transect surveys across various non-crop habitats. We found that the abundance of flower-visiting solitary bees, bumblebees, honeybees, and beetles was increased in sown wildflower areas, compared with existing non-crop habitats in control orchards, from the second year following floral establishment. Abundance of hoverflies and other non-syrphid flies was increased in wildflower areas from the first year. Beyond the effect of wildflower areas, solitary bee abundance was also positively related to levels of floral cover in other local habitats within orchards, but neither local nor wider landscape-scale context affected abundance of other studied insect taxa within study orchards. There was a change in plant community composition on the sown wildflower areas between years, and in patterns of flowering within and between years, showing a succession from unsown weedy species towards a dominance of sown species over time. We discuss how the successful establishment of sown wildflower areas and delivery of benefits for different insect taxa relies on appropriate and reactive management practices as a key component of any such agri-environment scheme.

Rapid assessment of insect pollination services to inform decision-making.

Pollinator declines have prompted efforts to assess how land-use change affects insect pollinators and pollination services in agricultural landscapes. Yet many tools to measure insect pollination services require substantial landscape-scale data and technical expertise. In expert workshops, 3 straightforward methods (desk-based method, field survey, and empirical manipulation with exclusion experiments) for rapid insect pollination assessment at site scale were developed to provide an adaptable framework that is accessible to nonspecialist with limited resources. These methods were designed for TESSA (Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-Based Assessment) and allow comparative assessment of pollination services at a site of conservation interest and in its most plausible alternative state (e.g., converted to agricultural land). We applied the methods at a nature reserve in the United Kingdom to estimate the value of insect pollination services provided by the reserve. The economic value of pollination services provided by the reserve ranged from US$6163 to US$11,546/year. The conversion of the reserve to arable land would provide no insect pollination services and a net annual benefit from insect-pollinated crop production of approximately $1542/year (US$24∙ha-1 ∙year-1 ). The methods had wide applicability and were readily adapted to different insect-pollinated crops: rape (Brassica napus) and beans (Vicia faba) crops. All methods were rapidly employed under a low budget. The relatively less robust methods that required fewer resources yielded higher estimates of annual insect pollination benefit.

Diversidad y Conservación de Gasterópodos Subterráneos de Agua Dulce en los Estados Unidos y en México Resumen Las declinaciones de los polinizadores han impulsado los esfuerzos por evaluar cómo el cambio del uso de suelo afecta a los insectos polinizadores y los servicios de polinización en los paisajes agrícolas. Aun así, muchas de las herramientas para medir los servicios de los insectos polinizadores requieren datos sustanciales a escala de paisaje y el conocimiento de expertos. Desarrollamos tres métodos sencillos (método de gabinete, censo de campo y manipulación empírica con experimentos de exclusión) durante algunos talleres de expertos para la evaluación rápida de la polinización por insectos a escala de sitio con el objetivo de proporcionar un marco de trabajo adaptable y accesible para quienes no son especialistas y cuentan con recursos limitados. Estos métodos fueron diseñados para TESSA (Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-Based Assessment, en inglés) y permiten la evaluación comparativa de los servicios de polinización en los sitios de interés para la conservación y su estado alternativo más plausible (p. ej.: convertido a suelo agrícola). Aplicamos los métodos en una reserva natural del Reino Unido para estimar el valor de los servicios de polinización por insectos que proporciona la reserva. El valor económico de los servicios de polinización que proporciona la reserva varió desde US$6,163 a US$11,546 al año-1 . La conversión de la reserva a suelo arable no proporcionaría servicios de polinización por insectos, pero sí un beneficio anual neto a partir de la producción de cultivos polinizados por insectos de aproximadamente $1,542 al año-1 (US$24 ha-1 año-1 ). Los métodos tuvieron una aplicabilidad generalizada y estaban ya adaptados a los diferentes cultivos polinizados por insectos: cultivos de colza (Brassica napus) y habas (Vicia faba). Todos los métodos pudieron usarse con bajo presupuesto. Los métodos relativamente menos robustos que requirieron menos recursos produjeron estimados más elevados del beneficio anual de la polinización por insectos.

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.

Opportunities to reduce pollination deficits and address production shortfalls in an important insect-pollinated crop.

Pollinators face multiple pressures and there is evidence of populations in decline. As demand for insect-pollinated crops increases, crop production is threatened by shortfalls in pollination services. Understanding the extent of current yield deficits due to pollination and identifying opportunities to protect or improve crop yield and quality through pollination management is therefore of international importance. To explore the extent of "pollination deficits," where maximum yield is not being achieved due to insufficient pollination, we used an extensive dataset on a globally important crop, apples. We quantified how these deficits vary between orchards and countries and we compared "pollinator dependence" across different apple varieties. We found evidence of pollination deficits and, in some cases, risks of overpollination were even apparent for which fruit quality could be reduced by too much pollination. In almost all regions studied we found some orchards performing significantly better than others in terms of avoiding a pollination deficit and crop yield shortfalls due to suboptimal pollination. This represents an opportunity to improve production through better pollinator and crop management. Our findings also demonstrated that pollinator dependence varies considerably between apple varieties in terms of fruit number and fruit quality. We propose that assessments of pollination service and deficits in crops can be used to quantify supply and demand for pollinators and help to target local management to address deficits although crop variety has a strong influence on the role of pollinators.

Wild insect diversity increases inter-annual stability in global crop pollinator communities.

While an increasing number of studies indicate that the range, diversity and abundance of many wild pollinators has declined, the global area of pollinator-dependent crops has significantly increased over the last few decades. Crop pollination studies to date have mainly focused on either identifying different guilds pollinating various crops, or on factors driving spatial changes and turnover observed in these communities. The mechanisms driving temporal stability for ecosystem functioning and services, however, remain poorly understood. Our study quantifies temporal variability observed in crop pollinators in 21 different crops across multiple years at a global scale. Using data from 43 studies from six continents, we show that (i) higher pollinator diversity confers greater inter-annual stability in pollinator communities, (ii) temporal variation observed in pollinator abundance is primarily driven by the three-most dominant species, and (iii) crops in tropical regions demonstrate higher inter-annual variability in pollinator species richness than crops in temperate regions. We highlight the importance of recognizing wild pollinator diversity in agricultural landscapes to stabilize pollinator persistence across years to protect both biodiversity and crop pollination services. Short-term agricultural management practices aimed at dominant species for stabilizing pollination services need to be considered alongside longer term conservation goals focussed on maintaining and facilitating biodiversity to confer ecological stability.

A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production.

Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield-related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.

The interplay of landscape composition and configuration: new pathways to manage functional biodiversity and agroecosystem services across Europe.

Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity and ecosystem services is a key aim of a sustainable agriculture. However, how the spatial arrangement of crop fields and other habitats in landscapes impacts arthropods and their functions is poorly known. Synthesising data from 49 studies (1515 landscapes) across Europe, we examined effects of landscape composition (% habitats) and configuration (edge density) on arthropods in fields and their margins, pest control, pollination and yields. Configuration effects interacted with the proportions of crop and non-crop habitats, and species' dietary, dispersal and overwintering traits led to contrasting responses to landscape variables. Overall, however, in landscapes with high edge density, 70% of pollinator and 44% of natural enemy species reached highest abundances and pollination and pest control improved 1.7- and 1.4-fold respectively. Arable-dominated landscapes with high edge densities achieved high yields. This suggests that enhancing edge density in European agroecosystems can promote functional biodiversity and yield-enhancing ecosystem services.

Policies for Ecological Intensification of Crop Production.

Ecological intensification aims to increase crop productivity by enhancing biodiversity and associated ecosystem services, while minimizing the use of synthetic inputs and cropland expansion. Policies to promote ecological intensification have emerged in different countries, but they are still scarce and vary widely across regions. Here, we propose ten policy targets that governments can follow for ecological intensification.

Combined effects of agrochemicals and ecosystem services on crop yield across Europe.

Simultaneously enhancing ecosystem services provided by biodiversity below and above ground is recommended to reduce dependence on chemical pesticides and mineral fertilisers in agriculture. However, consequences for crop yield have been poorly evaluated. Above ground, increased landscape complexity is assumed to enhance biological pest control, whereas below ground, soil organic carbon is a proxy for several yield-supporting services. In a field experiment replicated in 114 fields across Europe, we found that fertilisation had the strongest positive effect on yield, but hindered simultaneous harnessing of below- and above-ground ecosystem services. We furthermore show that enhancing natural enemies and pest control through increasing landscape complexity can prove disappointing in fields with low soil services or in intensively cropped regions. Thus, understanding ecological interdependences between land use, ecosystem services and yield is necessary to promote more environmentally friendly farming by identifying situations where ecosystem services are maximised and agrochemical inputs can be reduced.

Non-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination.

Wild and managed bees are well documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25-50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines.

Neonicotinoid pesticide exposure impairs crop pollination services provided by bumblebees.

Recent concern over global pollinator declines has led to considerable research on the effects of pesticides on bees. Although pesticides are typically not encountered at lethal levels in the field, there is growing evidence indicating that exposure to field-realistic levels can have sublethal effects on bees, affecting their foraging behaviour, homing ability and reproductive success. Bees are essential for the pollination of a wide variety of crops and the majority of wild flowering plants, but until now research on pesticide effects has been limited to direct effects on bees themselves and not on the pollination services they provide. Here we show the first evidence to our knowledge that pesticide exposure can reduce the pollination services bumblebees deliver to apples, a crop of global economic importance. Bumblebee colonies exposed to a neonicotinoid pesticide provided lower visitation rates to apple trees and collected pollen less often. Most importantly, these pesticide-exposed colonies produced apples containing fewer seeds, demonstrating a reduced delivery of pollination services. Our results also indicate that reduced pollination service delivery is not due to pesticide-induced changes in individual bee behaviour, but most likely due to effects at the colony level. These findings show that pesticide exposure can impair the ability of bees to provide pollination services, with important implications for both the sustained delivery of stable crop yields and the functioning of natural ecosystems.

Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation.

There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.