Mass-flowering monoculture attracts bees, amplifying parasite prevalence.

As the global agricultural footprint expands, it is increasingly important to address the link between the resource pulses characteristic of monoculture farming and wildlife epidemiology. To understand how mass-flowering crops impact host communities and subsequently amplify or dilute parasitism, we surveyed wild and managed bees in a monoculture landscape with varying degrees of floral diversification. We screened 1509 bees from 16 genera in sunflower fields and in non-crop flowering habitat across 200 km2 of the California Central Valley. We found that mass-flowering crops increase bee abundance. Wild bee abundance was subsequently associated with higher parasite presence, but only in sites with a low abundance of non-crop flowers. Bee traits related to higher dispersal ability (body size) and diet breadth (pollen lecty) were also positively related to parasite presence. Our results highlight the importance of non-crop flowering habitat for supporting bee communities. We suggest monoculture alone cannot support healthy bees.

The effectiveness of flower strips and hedgerows on pest control, pollination services and crop yield: a quantitative synthesis.

Floral plantings are promoted to foster ecological intensification of agriculture through provisioning of ecosystem services. However, a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of different floral plantings, their characteristics and consequences for crop yield is lacking. Here we quantified the impacts of flower strips and hedgerows on pest control (18 studies) and pollination services (17 studies) in adjacent crops in North America, Europe and New Zealand. Flower strips, but not hedgerows, enhanced pest control services in adjacent fields by 16% on average. However, effects on crop pollination and yield were more variable. Our synthesis identifies several important drivers of variability in effectiveness of plantings: pollination services declined exponentially with distance from plantings, and perennial and older flower strips with higher flowering plant diversity enhanced pollination more effectively. These findings provide promising pathways to optimise floral plantings to more effectively contribute to ecosystem service delivery and ecological intensification of agriculture in the future.

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) pollination in California's Central Valley is limited by native bee nest site location.

The delivery of ecosystem services by mobile organisms depends on the distribution of those organisms, which is, in turn, affected by resources at local and landscape scales. Pollinator-dependent crops rely on mobile animals like bees for crop production, and the spatial relationship between floral resources and nest location for these central-place foragers influences the delivery of pollination services. Current models that map pollination coverage in agricultural regions utilize landscape-level estimates of floral availability and nesting incidence inferred from expert opinion, rather than direct assessments. Foraging distance is often derived from proxies of bee body size, rather than direct measurements of foraging that account for behavioral responses to floral resource type and distribution. The lack of direct measurements of nesting incidence and foraging distances may lead to inaccurate mapping of pollination services. We examined the role of local-scale floral resource presence from hedgerow plantings on nest incidence of ground-nesting bees in field margins and within monoculture, conventionally managed sunflower fields in California's Central Valley. We tracked bee movement into fields using fluorescent powder. We then used these data to simulate the distribution of pollination services within a crop field. Contrary to expert opinion, we found that ground-nesting native bees nested both in fields and edges, though nesting rates declined with distance into field. Further, we detected no effect of field-margin floral enhancements on nesting. We found evidence of an exponential decay rate of bee movement into fields, indicating that foraging predominantly occurred in less than 1% of medium-sized bees' predicted typical foraging range. Although we found native bees nesting within agricultural fields, their restricted foraging movements likely centralize pollination near nest sites. Our data thus predict a heterogeneous distribution of pollination services within sunflower fields, with edges receiving higher coverage than field centers. To generate more accurate maps of services, we advocate directly measuring the autecology of ecosystem service providers, which vary by crop system, pollinator species, and region. Improving estimates of the factors affecting pollinator populations can increase the accuracy of pollination service maps and help clarify the influence of farming practices on wild bees occurring in agricultural landscapes.

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.