Andrea Holzschuh

On the relationship between farmland biodiversity and land-use intensity in Europe

Worldwide agriculture is one of the main drivers of biodiversity decline. Effective conservation strategies depend on the type of relationship between biodiversity and land-use intensity, but to date the shape of this relationship is unknown. We linked plant species richness with nitrogen (N) input as an indicator of land-use intensity on 130 grasslands and 141 arable fields in six European countries. Using Poisson regression, we found that plant species richness was significantly negatively related to N input on both field types after the effects of confounding environmental factors had been accounted for. Subsequent analyses showed that exponentially declining relationships provided a better fit than linear or unimodal relationships and that this was largely the result of the response of rare species (relative cover less than 1%). Our results indicate that conservation benefits are disproportionally more costly on high-intensity than on low-intensity farmland. For example, reducing N inputs from 75 to 0 and 400 to 60 kg ha−1 yr−1 resulted in about the same estimated species gain for arable plants. Conservation initiatives are most (cost-)effective if they are preferentially implemented in extensively farmed areas that still support high levels of biodiversity.

Stability of pollination services decreases with isolation from natural areas despite honey bee visits

Sustainable agricultural landscapes by definition provide high magnitude and stability of ecosystem services, biodiversity and crop productivity. However, few studies have considered landscape effects on the stability of ecosystem services. We tested whether isolation from florally diverse natural and semi-natural areas reduces the spatial and temporal stability of flower-visitor richness and pollination services in crop fields. We synthesised data from 29 studies with contrasting biomes, crop species and pollinator communities. Stability of flower-visitor richness, visitation rate (all insects except honey bees) and fruit set all decreased with distance from natural areas. At 1 km from adjacent natural areas, spatial stability decreased by 25, 16 and 9% for richness, visitation and fruit set, respectively, while temporal stability decreased by 39% for richness and 13% for visitation. Mean richness, visitation and fruit set also decreased with isolation, by 34, 27 and 16% at 1 km respectively. In contrast, honey bee visitation did not change with isolation and represented > 25% of crop visits in 21 studies. Therefore, wild pollinators are relevant for crop productivity and stability even when honey bees are abundant. Policies to preserve and restore natural areas in agricultural landscapes should enhance levels and reliability of pollination services.

A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems

Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.

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.

Environmental factors driving the effectiveness of European agri‐environmental measures in mitigating pollinator loss – a meta‐analysis

In Europe, agri-environmental schemes (AES) have been introduced in response to concerns about farmland biodiversity declines. Yet, as AES have delivered variable results, a better understanding of what determines their success or failure is urgently needed. Focusing on pollinating insects, we quantitatively reviewed how environmental factors affect the effectiveness of AES. Our results suggest that the ecological contrast in floral resources created by schemes drives the response of pollinators to AES but that this response is moderated by landscape context and farmland type, with more positive responses in croplands (vs. grasslands) located in simple (vs. cleared or complex) landscapes. These findings inform us how to promote pollinators and associated pollination services in species-poor landscapes. They do not, however, present viable strategies to mitigate loss of threatened or endangered species. This indicates that the objectives and design of AES should distinguish more clearly between biodiversity conservation and delivery of ecosystem services.

How do landscape composition and configuration, organic farming and fallow strips affect the diversity of bees, wasps and their parasitoids?

1. Habitat destruction and increasing land use intensity result in habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation, and subsequently in the loss of species diversity. The fact that these factors are often highly confounded makes disentangling their effects extremely difficult, if not impossible, and their relative impact on species loss is mostly speculative. 2. In a two-year study, we analysed the relative importance of changed landscape composition (increased areas of cropped habitats), reduced habitat connectivity and reduced habitat quality on nest colonization of cavity-nesting bees, wasps and their parasitoids. We selected 23 pairs of conventional and organic wheat fields in the centre of landscape circles (500 m radius) differing in edge densities (landscape configuration) and % non-crop habitats (landscape composition). Standardized trap nests were established in the field centres and in neighbouring permanent fallow strips (making a total of 92 nesting sites). 3. Factors at all three scales affected nest colonization. While bees were enhanced by high proportions of non-crop habitat in the landscape, wasps profited from high edge densities, supporting our hypothesis that wasps are enhanced by connecting corridors. Colonization of herbivore-predating wasps was lower in field centres than in fallow strips for conventional sites, but not for organic sites, indicating a fallow-like connectivity value of organic fields. The relative importance of habitat type and farming system varied among functional groups suggesting that their perception of crop-non-crop boundaries or the availability of their food resources differed. 4. Local and landscape effects on parasitoids were mainly mediated by their hosts. Parasitism rates were marginally affected by local factors. A specialist parasitoid was more sensitive to high land use intensity than its host, whereas generalist parasitoids were less sensitive. 5. We conclude that the conversion of cropland into non-crop habitat may not be a sufficiently successful strategy to enhance wasps or other species that suffer more from isolation than from habitat loss. Interestingly, habitat connectivity appeared to be enhanced by both higher edge densities and by organic field management. Thus, we conclude that high proportions of conventionally managed and large crop fields threaten pollination and biological control services at a landscape scale.

Specialization of mutualistic interaction networks decreases toward tropical latitudes.

Species-rich tropical communities are expected to be more specialized than their temperate counterparts. Several studies have reported increasing biotic specialization toward the tropics, whereas others have not found latitudinal trends once accounting for sampling bias or differences in plant diversity. Thus, the direction of the latitudinal specialization gradient remains contentious. With an unprecedented global data set, we investigated how biotic specialization between plants and animal pollinators or seed dispersers is associated with latitude, past and contemporary climate, and plant diversity. We show that in contrast to expectation, biotic specialization of mutualistic networks is significantly lower at tropical than at temperate latitudes. Specialization was more closely related to contemporary climate than to past climate stability, suggesting that current conditions have a stronger effect on biotic specialization than historical community stability. Biotic specialization decreased with increasing local and regional plant diversity. This suggests that high specialization of mutualistic interactions is a response of pollinators and seed dispersers to low plant diversity. This could explain why the latitudinal specialization gradient is reversed relative to the latitudinal diversity gradient. Low mutualistic network specialization in the tropics suggests higher tolerance against extinctions in tropical than in temperate communities.

Bee pollination improves crop quality, shelf life and commercial value

Pollination improves the yield of most crop species and contributes to one-third of global crop production, but comprehensive benefits including crop quality are still unknown. Hence, pollination is underestimated by international policies, which is particularly alarming in times of agricultural intensification and diminishing pollination services. In this study, exclusion experiments with strawberries showed bee pollination to improve fruit quality, quantity and market value compared with wind and self-pollination. Bee-pollinated fruits were heavier, had less malformations and reached higher commercial grades. They had increased redness and reduced sugar–acid–ratios and were firmer, thus improving the commercially important shelf life. Longer shelf life reduced fruit loss by at least 11%. This is accounting for 0.32 billion US

Agricultural policies exacerbate honeybee pollination service supply-demand mismatches across Europe

of the 1.44 billion US

The potential for indirect effects between co-flowering plants via shared pollinators depends on resource abundance, accessibility and relatedness

provided by bee pollination to the total value of 2.90 billion US