Showing papers by "Riccardo Bommarco published in 2016"

Non-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination

Abstract: 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.

How Agricultural Intensification Affects Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Abstract: As the world's population continues to grow, the demand for food, fodder, fibre and bioenergy will increase. In Europe, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has driven the intensification of agriculture, promoting the simplification and specialization of agroecosystems through the decline in landscape heterogeneity, the increased use of chemicals per unit area, and the abandonment of less fertile areas. In combination, these processes have eroded the quantity and quality of habitat for many plants and animals, and hence decreased biodiversity and the abundance of species across a hierarchy of trophic levels and spatial scales within Europe. This biodiversity loss has led to profound changes in the functioning of European agroecosystems over the last 50 years. Here, we synthesize the findings from a large-scale pan-European investigation of the combined effects of agricultural intensification on a range of agroecosystem services. These include (1) the persistence of high conservation value species; (2) the level of biological control of agricultural pests and (3) the functional diversity of a number of taxonomic groups, including birds, beetles and arable weeds. The study encompasses a gradient of geography-bioclimate and agricultural intensification that enables the large-scale measurement of ecological impacts of agricultural intensification across European agroecosystems. We provide an overview of the role of the CAP as a driver of agricultural intensification in the European Union, and we demonstrate compelling negative relationships between the application of pesticides and the various components of biodiversity studied on a pan-European scale.

Mass‐flowering crops dilute pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes across Europe

Abstract: Mass-flowering crops (MFCs) are increasingly cultivated and might influence pollinator communities in MFC fields and nearby semi-natural habitats (SNHs). Across six European regions and 2 years, we assessed how landscape-scale cover of MFCs affected pollinator densities in 408 MFC fields and adjacent SNHs. In MFC fields, densities of bumblebees, solitary bees, managed honeybees and hoverflies were negatively related to the cover of MFCs in the landscape. In SNHs, densities of bumblebees declined with increasing cover of MFCs but densities of honeybees increased. The densities of all pollinators were generally unrelated to the cover of SNHs in the landscape. Although MFC fields apparently attracted pollinators from SNHs, in landscapes with large areas of MFCs they became diluted. The resulting lower densities might negatively affect yields of pollinator-dependent crops and the reproductive success of wild plants. An expansion of MFCs needs to be accompanied by pollinator-supporting practices in agricultural landscapes.

Ten policies for pollinators

Abstract: Earlier this year, the first global thematic assessment from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) evaluated the state of knowledge about pollinators and pollination ( 1 , 2 ). It confirmed evidence of large-scale wild pollinator declines in northwest Europe and North America and identified data shortfalls and an urgent need for monitoring elsewhere in the world. With high-level political commitments to support pollinators in the United States ( 3 ), the United Kingdom ( 4 ), and France ( 5 ); encouragement from the Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD's) scientific advice body ( 6 ); and the issue on the agenda for next month's Conference of the Parties to the CBD, we see a chance for global-scale policy change. We extend beyond the IPBES report, which we helped to write, and suggest 10 policies that governments should seriously consider to protect pollinators and secure pollination services. Our suggestions are not the only available responses but are those we consider most likely to succeed, because of synergy with international policy objectives and strategies or formulation of international policy creating opportunities for change. We make these suggestions as independent scientists and not on behalf of IPBES.

Data from: Mass-flowering crops dilute pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes across Europe

Abstract: Mass-flowering crops (MFCs) are increasingly cultivated and might influence pollinator communities in MFC fields and nearby semi-natural habitats (SNHs). Across six European regions and 2 years, we assessed how landscape-scale cover of MFCs affected pollinator densities in 408 MFC fields and adjacent SNHs. In MFC fields, densities of bumblebees, solitary bees, managed honeybees and hoverflies were negatively related to the cover of MFCs in the landscape. In SNHs, densities of bumblebees declined with increasing cover of MFCs but densities of honeybees increased. The densities of all pollinators were generally unrelated to the cover of SNHs in the landscape. Although MFC fields apparently attracted pollinators from SNHs, in landscapes with large areas of MFCs they became diluted. The resulting lower densities might negatively affect yields of pollinator-dependent crops and the reproductive success of wild plants. An expansion of MFCs needs to be accompanied by pollinator-supporting practices in agricultural landscapes.

Experimental evidence that honeybees depress wild insect densities in a flowering crop

Abstract: While addition of managed honeybees (Apis mellifera) improves pollination of many entomophilous crops, it is unknown if it simultaneously suppresses the densities of wild insects through competition. To investigate this, we added 624 honeybee hives to 23 fields of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) over 2 years and made sure that the areas around 21 other fields were free from honeybee hives. We demonstrate that honeybee addition depresses the densities of wild insects (bumblebees, solitary bees, hoverflies, marchflies, other flies, and other flying and flower-visiting insects) even in a massive flower resource such as oilseed rape. The effect was independent of the complexity of the surrounding landscape, but increased with the size of the crop field, which suggests that the effect was caused by spatial displacement of wild insects. Our results have potential implications both for the pollination of crops (if displacement of wild pollinators offsets benefits achieved by adding honeybees) and for conservation of wild insects (if displacement results in negative fitness consequences).

Large-scale pollination experiment demonstrates the importance of insect pollination in winter oilseed rape.

Abstract: Insect pollination, despite its potential to contribute substantially to crop production, is not an integrated part of agronomic planning. A major reason for this are knowledge gaps in the contribution of pollinators to yield, which partly result from difficulties in determining area-based estimates of yield effects from insect pollination under field conditions. We have experimentally manipulated honey bee Apis mellifera densities at 43 oilseed rape Brassica napus fields over 2 years in Scandinavia. Honey bee hives were placed in 22 fields; an additional 21 fields without large apiaries in the surrounding landscape were selected as controls. Depending on the pollination system in the parental generation, the B. napus cultivars in the crop fields are classified as either open-pollinated or first-generation hybrids, with both types being open-pollinated in the generation of plants cultivated in the fields. Three cultivars of each type were grown. We measured the activity of flower-visiting insects during flowering and estimated yields by harvesting with small combine harvesters. The addition of honey bee hives to the fields dramatically increased abundance of flower-visiting honey bees in those fields. Honey bees affected yield, but the effect depended on cultivar type (p = 0.04). Post-hoc analysis revealed that open-pollinated cultivars, but not hybrid cultivars, had 11% higher yields in fields with added honey bees than those grown in the control fields (p = 0.07). To our knowledge, this is the first whole-field study in replicated landscapes to assess the benefit of insect pollination in oilseed rape. Our results demonstrate that honey bees have the potential to increase oilseed rape yields, thereby emphasizing the importance of pollinator management for optimal cultivation of oilseed rape.

Interactive effects of pests increase seed yield.

Abstract: Loss in seed yield and therefore decrease in plant fitness due to simultaneous attacks by multiple herbivores is not necessarily additive, as demonstrated in evolutionary studies on wild plants. However, it is not clear how this transfers to crop plants that grow in very different conditions compared to wild plants. Nevertheless, loss in crop seed yield caused by any single pest is most often studied in isolation although crop plants are attacked by many pests that can cause substantial yield losses. This is especially important for crops able to compensate and even overcompensate for the damage. We investigated the interactive impacts on crop yield of four insect pests attacking different plant parts at different times during the cropping season. In 15 oilseed rape fields in Sweden, we estimated the damage caused by seed and stem weevils, pollen beetles, and pod midges. Pest pressure varied drastically among fields with very low correlation among pests, allowing us to explore interactive impacts on yield from attacks by multiple species. The plant damage caused by each pest species individually had, as expected, either no, or a negative impact on seed yield and the strongest negative effect was caused by pollen beetles. However, seed yield increased when plant damage caused by both seed and stem weevils was high, presumably due to the joint plant compensatory reaction to insect attack leading to overcompensation. Hence, attacks by several pests can change the impact on yield of individual pest species. Economic thresholds based on single species, on which pest management decisions currently rely, may therefore result in economically suboptimal choices being made and unnecessary excessive use of insecticides.

Aboveground insect herbivory increases plant competitive asymmetry, while belowground herbivory mitigates the effect

Abstract: Insect herbivores can shift the composition of a plant community, but the mechanism underlying such shifts remains largely unexplored. A possibility is that insects alter the competitive symmetry between plant species. The effect of herbivory on competition likely depends on whether the plants are subjected to aboveground or belowground herbivory or both, and also depends on soil nitrogen levels. It is unclear how these biotic and abiotic factors interactively affect competition. In a greenhouse experiment, we measured competition between two coexisting grass species that respond differently to nitrogen deposition: Dactylis glomerata L., which is competitively favoured by nitrogen addition, and Festuca rubra L., which is competitively favoured on nitrogen-poor soils. We predicted: (1) that aboveground herbivory would reduce competitive asymmetry at high soil nitrogen by reducing the competitive advantage of D. glomerata; and (2), that belowground herbivory would relax competition at low soil nitrogen, by reducing the competitive advantage of F. rubra. Aboveground herbivory caused a 46% decrease in the competitive ability of F. rubra, and a 23% increase in that of D. glomerata, thus increasing competitive asymmetry, independently of soil nitrogen level. Belowground herbivory did not affect competitive symmetry, but the combined influence of above- and belowground herbivory was weaker than predicted from their individual effects. Belowground herbivory thus mitigated the increased competitive asymmetry caused by aboveground herbivory. D. glomerata remained competitively dominant after the cessation of aboveground herbivory, showing that the influence of herbivory continued beyond the feeding period. We showed that insect herbivory can strongly influence plant competitive interactions. In our experimental plant community, aboveground insect herbivory increased the risk of competitive exclusion of F. rubra. Belowground herbivory appeared to mitigate the influence of aboveground herbivory, and this mechanism may play a role for plant species coexistence.

Insecticide resistance in pollen beetles over 7 years – a landscape approach

Abstract: BACKGROUND In spite of considerable interest in the impact of pesticides on pest populations, few attempts have been made to link resistance patterns of insect pests to land-use features across spatial and temporal scales. We hypothesise that pollen beetle pesticide resistance increases in areas with a high proportion of oilseed rape and with an even mixture of winter and spring oilseed rape owing to high pesticide selection pressure in such areas. RESULTS Here, we investigated 7 years of lambda-cyhalothrin (Karate®) resistance in field-collected pollen beetle adults from a total of 180 sampling points across ten regions in Sweden. We found a positive effect on pollen beetle pesticide resistance of proportion of oilseed rape and even spring–winter oilseed rape mixture. However, this was true only for the regional spatial scale. Significant land-use effects in the long-term models, with oilseed rape data averaged over a longer (4 years) period of time, suggested an effect of regional landscape history on current pest resistance. CONCLUSION For successful control of pollen beetle pesticide resistance, we suggest a long-term regional strategy for oilseed rape management. This land-use approach provides a framework for further investigations that integrate resistance management into landscape research. © 2015 Society of Chemical Industry

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

Abstract: Author(s): Kleijn, David; Winfree, Rachael; Bartomeus, Ignasi; Carvalheiro, Luisa G; Henry, Mickael; Isaacs, Rufus; Klein, Alexandra-Maria; Kremen, Claire; M'Gonigle, Leithen K; Rader, Romina; Ricketts, Taylor H; Williams, Neal M; Adamson, Nancy Lee; Ascher, John S; Baldi, Andras; Batary, Peter; Benjamin, Faye; Biesmeijer, Jacobus C; Blitzer, Eleanor J; Bommarco, Riccardo; Brand, Mariette R; Bretagnolle, Vincent; Button, Lindsey; Cariveau, Daniel P; Chifflet, Remy; Colville, Jonathan F; Danforth, Bryan N; Elle, Elizabeth; Garratt, Michael PD; Herzog, Felix; Holzschuh, Andrea; Howlett, Brad G; Jauker, Frank; Jha, Shalene; Knop, Eva; Krewenka, Kristin M; Le Feon, Violette; Mandelik, Yael; May, Emily A; Park, Mia G; Pisanty, Gideon; Reemer, Menno; Riedinger, Verena; Rollin, Orianne; Rundlof, Maj; Sardinas, Hillary S; Scheper, Jeroen; Sciligo, Amber R; Smith, Henrik G; Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf; Thorp, Robbin; Tscharntke, Teja; Verhulst, Jort; Viana, Blandina F; Vaissiere, Bernard E; Veldtman, Ruan; Ward, Kimiora L; Westphal, Catrin; Potts, Simon G