Claire Carvell

Habitat use and conservation of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) under different grassland management regimes

Declines in the natural populations of several bumblebee species across Britain and Europe are an increasing cause for concern. In this study the habitat use of bumblebees was investigated on Salisbury Plain Training Area, the largest remaining area of unimproved chalk grassland in north-west Europe. Habitat characteristics influencing the overall abundance, species richness and foraging activity of bumblebees included the diversity and abundance of flowering plant species (particularly of favoured forage plants such as Trifolium pratense), vegetation structure and height. It is suggested that different Bombus species respond to these habitat characteristics depending on their specific foraging and nesting requirements, the case of Bombus humilis being especially relevant. The effects of several grassland management practices were considered in terms of their suitability for the conservation of bumblebee habitats. Cattle grazing was shown to be preferable to both sheep grazing and the absence of any management, although the timing and intensity of such grazing was important. Small-scale disturbances caused by vehicle activity were also of value in producing locally abundant forage resources in less intensively managed grasslands.

Landscape context not patch size determines bumble-bee density on flower mixtures sown for agri-environment schemes

Bumble-bee declines across Europe have been linked to loss of habitat and forage availability due to agricultural intensification. These declines may have severe ecological and commercial consequences since bumble-bees pollinate a range of wildflowers and crops. In England, attempts are being made to reintroduce forage resources through agri-environment schemes, yet there are few data on how the area of forage, or the landscape context in which it is provided, affects their success. We investigated the effects of sown forage patches on bumble-bees across sites varying in landscape characteristics. Bumble-bee densities were higher on sown patches compared with control habitats but did not vary with patch size, i.e. total forager numbers were proportional to patch area. Importantly, the relative response to sown forage patches varied widely across a landscape gradient such that their impact in terms of attracting foraging bumble-bees was greatest where the proportion of arable land was highest.

Identifying key knowledge needs for evidence-based conservation of wild insect pollinators: A collaborative cross-sectoral exercise

In response to evidence of insect pollinator declines, organisations in many sectors, including the food and farming industry, are investing in pollinator conservation. They are keen to ensure that their efforts use the best available science. We convened a group of 32 ‘conservation practitioners’ with an active interest in pollinators and 16 insect pollinator scientists. The conservation practitioners include representatives from UK industry (including retail), environmental non‐government organisations and nature conservation agencies. We collaboratively developed a long list of 246 knowledge needs relating to conservation of wild insect pollinators in the UK. We refined and selected the most important knowledge needs, through a three‐stage process of voting and scoring, including discussions of each need at a workshop. We present the top 35 knowledge needs as scored by conservation practitioners or scientists. We find general agreement in priorities identified by these two groups. The priority knowledge needs will structure ongoing work to make science accessible to practitioners, and help to guide future science policy and funding. Understanding the economic benefits of crop pollination, basic pollinator ecology and impacts of pesticides on wild pollinators emerge strongly as priorities, as well as a need to monitor floral resources in the landscape.

How much flower‐rich habitat is enough for wild pollinators? Answering a key policy question with incomplete knowledge

In 2013, an opportunity arose in England to develop an agri‐environment package for wild pollinators, as part of the new Countryside Stewardship scheme launched in 2015. It can be understood as a ‘policy window’, a rare and time‐limited opportunity to change policy, supported by a narrative about pollinator decline and widely supported mitigating actions. An agri‐environment package is a bundle of management options that together supply sufficient resources to support a target group of species. This paper documents information that was available at the time to develop such a package for wild pollinators. Four questions needed answering: (1) Which pollinator species should be targeted? (2) Which resources limit these species in farmland? (3) Which management options provide these resources? (4) What area of each option is needed to support populations of the target species? Focussing on wild bees, we provide tentative answers that were used to inform development of the package. There is strong evidence that floral resources can limit wild bee populations, and several sources of evidence identify a set of agri‐environment options that provide flowers and other resources for pollinators. The final question could only be answered for floral resources, with a wide range of uncertainty. We show that the areas of some floral resource options in the basic Wild Pollinator and Farmland Wildlife Package (2% flower‐rich habitat and 1 km flowering hedgerow), are sufficient to supply a set of six common pollinator species with enough pollen to feed their larvae at lowest estimates, using minimum values for estimated parameters where a range was available. We identify key sources of uncertainty, and stress the importance of keeping the Package flexible, so it can be revised as new evidence emerges about how to achieve the policy aim of supporting pollinators on farmland.

A comparison of green lanes and field margins as bumblebee habitat in an arable landscape

There have been major changes in agricultural practice over the past 50 years. The increasing efficiency of arable production has led to larger field sizes with the associated removal of many hedgerow field boundaries. This, together with high input farming practices, has had a deleterious effect on the quality of the rural landscape as a wildlife habitat. This study focuses on green lanes, that is, trackways bounded on both sides by hedgerows, and the adjacent field margins of arable crops and examines each habitat to determine their relative resource value to bumblebees. The vegetation communities within 15 green lane sites and those of the adjacent field margins were recorded, and subsequent analysis showed that species richness was significantly higher within the green lanes. Bee numbers were recorded at each site during 10 visits, both along the inside of green lane hedges and the outside of the opposite hedge on the field margins of the arable crops. At each visit the flower abundance of 10 plant groups was recorded for each habitat type. The results show that bumblebee abundance was significantly higher within the green lane habitat than on the field margins and that this difference was directly related to the abundance of flowers within the habitat.

The potential impact of global warming on the efficacy of field margins sown for the conservation of bumble-bees

Climate change is expected to drive species extinct by reducing their survival, reproduction and habitat. Less well appreciated is the possibility that climate change could cause extinction by changing the ecological interactions between species. If ecologists, land managers and policy makers are to manage farmland biodiversity sustainably under global climate change, they need to understand the ways in which species interact with each other as this will affect the way they respond to climate change. Here, we consider the ability of nectar flower mixtures used in field margins to provide sufficient forage for bumble-bees under future climate change. We simulated the effect of global warming on the network of plant–pollinator interactions in two types of field margin: a four-species pollen and nectar mix and a six-species wildflower mix. While periods without flowering resources and periods with no food were rare, curtailment of the field season was very common for the bumble-bees in both mixtures. The effect of this, however, could be ameliorated by adding extra species at the start and end of the flowering season. The plant species that could be used to future-proof margins against global warming are discussed.

Effects of resource availability and social parasite invasion on field colonies of Bombus terrestris

Abstract 1. The survival, growth and fecundity of bumblebee colonies are affected by the availability of food resources and presence of natural enemies. Social parasites (cuckoo bumblebees and other bumblebees) can invade colonies and reduce or halt successful reproduction; however, little is known about the frequency of invasion or what environmental factors determine their success in the field.

Bumblebee family lineage survival is enhanced in high-quality landscapes

Insect pollinators such as bumblebees (Bombus spp.) are in global decline. A major cause of this decline is habitat loss due to agricultural intensification. A range of global and national initiatives aimed at restoring pollinator habitats and populations have been developed. However, the success of these initiatives depends critically upon understanding how landscape change affects key population-level parameters, such as survival between lifecycle stages, in target species. This knowledge is lacking for bumblebees, because of the difficulty of systematically finding and monitoring colonies in the wild. We used a combination of habitat manipulation, land-use and habitat surveys, molecular genetics and demographic and spatial modelling to analyse between-year survival of family lineages in field populations of three bumblebee species. Here we show that the survival of family lineages from the summer worker to the spring queen stage in the following year increases significantly with the proportion of high-value foraging habitat, including spring floral resources, within 250–1,000 m of the natal colony. This provides evidence for a positive impact of habitat quality on survival and persistence between successive colony cycle stages in bumblebee populations. These findings also support the idea that conservation interventions that increase floral resources at a landscape scale and throughout the season have positive effects on wild pollinators in agricultural landscapes.

Effects of habitat composition and landscape structure on worker foraging distances of five bumble bee species

Bumble bees (Bombus spp.) are important pollinators of both crops and wildflowers. Their contribution to this essential ecosystem service has been threatened over recent decades by changes in land use, which have led to declines in their populations. In order to design effective conservation measures, it is important to understand the effects of variation in landscape composition and structure on the foraging activities of worker bumble bees. This is because the viability of individual colonies is likely to be affected by the trade-off between the energetic costs of foraging over greater distances and the potential gains from access to additional resources. We used field surveys, molecular genetics, and fine resolution remote sensing to estimate the locations of wild bumble bee nests and to infer foraging distances across a 20-km² agricultural landscape in southern England, UK. We investigated five species, including the rare B. ruderatus and ecologically similar but widespread B. hortorum. We compared worker foraging distances between species and examined how variation in landscape composition and structure affected foraging distances at the colony level. Mean worker foraging distances differed significantly between species. Bombus terrestris, B. lapidarius, and B. ruderatus exhibited significantly greater mean foraging distances (551, 536, and 501 m, respectively) than B. hortorum and B. pascuorum (336 and 272 m, respectively). There was wide variation in worker foraging distances between colonies of the same species, which was in turn strongly influenced by the amount and spatial configuration of available foraging habitats. Shorter foraging distances were found for colonies where the local landscape had high coverage and low fragmentation of semi-natural vegetation, including managed agri-environmental field margins. The strength of relationships between different landscape variables and foraging distance varied between species, for example the strongest relationship for B. ruderatus being with floral cover of preferred forage plants. Our findings suggest that management of landscape composition and configuration has the potential to reduce foraging distances across a range of bumble bee species. There is thus potential for improvements in the design and implementation of landscape management options, such as agri-environment schemes, aimed at providing foraging habitat for bumble bees and enhancing crop pollination services.