Search

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.

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects.

These data include information on fruit set and fruit quality (size, weight, seed number, sugar content and firmness) of apples grown under different pollination treatments including pollinator exclusion (no visitation by insects), open pollination (visitation by insects) and supplementary pollination (hand pollinated). Data were collected as part of several projects, and include data on multiple different varieties of apples from several different countries.

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.

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects.

The importance of wild bees for crop pollination is well established, but less is known about which species contribute to service delivery to inform agricultural management, monitoring and conservation. Using sites in Great Britain as a case study, we use a novel qualitative approach combining ecological information and field survey data to establish a national list of crop pollinating bees for four economically important crops (apple, field bean, oilseed rape and strawberry). A traits data base was used to establish potential pollinators, and combined with field data to identify both dominant crop flower visiting bee species and other species that could be important crop pollinators, but which are not presently sampled in large numbers on crops flowers. Whilst we found evidence that a small number of common, generalist species make a disproportionate contribution to flower visits, many more species were identified as potential pollinators, including rare and specialist species. Furthermore, we found evidence of substantial variation in the bee communities of different crops. Establishing a national list of crop pollinators is important for practitioners and policy makers, allowing targeted management approaches for improved ecosystem services, conservation and species monitoring. Data can be used to make recommendations about how pollinator diversity could be promoted in agricultural landscapes. Our results suggest agri-environment schemes need to support a higher diversity of species than at present, notably of solitary bees. Management would also benefit from targeting specific species to enhance crop pollination services to particular crops. Whilst our study is focused upon Great Britain, our methodology can easily be applied to other countries, crops and groups of pollinating insects., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Question: Human‐mediated dispersal (HMD) comprises human‐vectored dispersal (HVD; direct movement of organisms by people) and human‐altered dispersal (HAD; indirect change in dispersal patterns through human alteration of ecosystems). In the vegetation dynamics literature, human influence has primarily been studied in terms of perturbations to natural communities. Except for non‐native invasions, the role of HMD in vegetation dynamics has rarely been considered. Given the increasing human population and its pervasive impacts across the world, it is necessary to understand the different ways in which HMD drives changes in vegetation dynamics. Importantly how large are these influences and how do they disrupt natural processes? Method: We reviewed studies examining aspects of HMD in relation to vegetation dynamics and used the broader literature to inform a conceptual synthesis of the impacts of HMD on vegetation dynamics. Results & Conclusions: The propensity to be affected by HMD varies among species, and this is related to seed and plant traits. Together, these effects combine to determine whether HMD disrupts or enhances seed dispersal into a community. The ultimate consequences of changed arrival of seeds into a community are determined by the strength of the environmental and biotic filters, which govern the establishment and persistence of species. The effect of accidental HVD depends whether it follows the same rules as for natural dispersal; indeed humans might replace lost natural dispersers and thus enhance community resilience. Intentional HVD through sowing or planting will generally be highly disruptive especially as it often involves associated management. Traditionally, HAD has been considered to disrupt vegetation dynamics through, e.g., fragmentation or loss of natural dispersers. However, an HMD perspective can inform actions related to HAD that increase resilience, e.g., green infrastructure or vegetation management. Our framework encourages resear

© The Author(s), 2020. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Beckman, N. G., Asian, C. E., Rogers, H. S., Kogan, O., Bronstein, J. L., Bullock, J. M., Hartig, F., HilleRisLambers, J., Zhou, Y., Zurell, D., Brodie, J. F., Bruna, E. M., Cantrell, R. S., Decker, R. R., Efiom, E., Fricke, E. C., Gurski, K., Hastings, A., Johnson, J. S., Loiselle, B. A., Miriti, M. N., Neubert, M. G., Pejchar, L., Poulsen, J. R., Pufal, G., Razafindratsima, O. H., Sandor, M. E., Shea, K., Schreiber, S., Schupp, E. W., Snell, R. S., Strickland, C., & Zambrano, J. Advancing an interdisciplinary framework to study seed dispersal ecology. Aob Plants, 12(2), (2020): plz048, doi:10.1093/aobpla/plz048., Although dispersal is generally viewed as a crucial determinant for the fitness of any organism, our understanding of its role in the persistence and spread of plant populations remains incomplete. Generalizing and predicting dispersal processes are challenging due to context dependence of seed dispersal, environmental heterogeneity and interdependent processes occurring over multiple spatial and temporal scales. Current population models often use simple phenomenological descriptions of dispersal processes, limiting their ability to examine the role of population persistence and spread, especially under global change. To move seed dispersal ecology forward, we need to evaluate the impact of any single seed dispersal event within the full spatial and temporal context of a plant’s life history and environmental variability that ultimately influences a population’s ability to persist and spread. In this perspective, we provide guidance on integrating empirical and theoretical approaches that account for the context dependency of seed dispersal to improve our ability to generalize and predict the consequences of dispersal, and its anthropogenic alteration, across systems. We synthesize suitable theoretical frameworks for this work and discuss concepts, approaches and available data from diverse subdisciplines to help operationalize concepts, highlight recent breakthroughs across research areas and discuss ongoing challenges and open questions. We address knowledge gaps in the movement ecology of seeds and the integration of dispersal and demography that could benefit from such a synthesis. With an interdisciplinary perspective, we will be able to better understand how global change will impact seed dispersal processes, and potential cascading effects on plant population persistence, spread and biodiversity., Ideas for this manuscript initiated during the Seed Dispersal Workshop held in May 2016 at the Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center in Annapolis, MD and supported by the US National Science Foundation Grant DEB-1548194 to N.G.B. and the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center under the US National Science Foundation Grant DBI-1052875. D.Z. received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF, grant: PZ00P3_168136/1) and from the German Science Foundation (DFG, grant: ZU 361/1-1).

The distribution and abundance of plants across the world depends in part on their ability to move, which is commonly characterized by a dispersal kernel. For seeds, the total dispersal kernel (TDK) describes the combined influence of all primary, secondary and higher-order dispersal vectors on the overall dispersal kernel for a plant individual, population, species or community. Understanding the role of each vector within the TDK, and their combined influence on the TDK, is critically important for being able to predict plant responses to a changing biotic or abiotic environment. In addition, fully characterizing the TDK by including all vectors may affect predictions of population spread. Here, we review existing research on the TDK and discuss advances in empirical, conceptual modelling and statistical approaches that will facilitate broader application. The concept is simple, but few examples of well-characterized TDKs exist. We find that significant empirical challenges exist, as many studies do not account for all dispersal vectors (e.g. gravity, higher-order dispersal vectors), inadequately measure or estimate long-distance dispersal resulting from multiple vectors and/or neglect spatial heterogeneity and context dependence. Existing mathematical and conceptual modelling approaches and statistical methods allow fitting individual dispersal kernels and combining them to form a TDK; these will perform best if robust prior information is available. We recommend a modelling cycle to parameterize TDKs, where empirical data inform models, which in turn inform additional data collection. Finally, we recommend that the TDK concept be extended to account for not only where seeds land, but also how that location affects the likelihood of establishing and producing a reproductive adult, i.e. the total effective dispersal kernel.

© The Author(s), 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Aslan, C., Beckman, N. G., Rogers, H. S., Bronstein, J., Zurell, D., Hartig, F., Shea, K., Pejchar, L., Neubert, M., Poulsen, J., HilleRisLambers, J., Miriti, M., Loiselle, B., Effiom, E., Zambrano, J., Schupp, G., Pufal, G., Johnson, J., Bullock, J. M., Brodie, J., Bruna, E., Cantrell, R. S., Decker, R., Fricke, E., Gurski, K., Hastings, A., Kogan, O., Razafindratsima, O., Sandor, M., Schreiber, S., Snell, R., Strickland, C., & Zhou, Y. Employing plant functional groups to advance seed dispersal ecology and conservation. AoB Plants, 11(2), (2019):plz006, doi:10.1093/aobpla/plz006., Seed dispersal enables plants to reach hospitable germination sites and escape natural enemies. Understanding when and how much seed dispersal matters to plant fitness is critical for understanding plant population and community dynamics. At the same time, the complexity of factors that determine if a seed will be successfully dispersed and subsequently develop into a reproductive plant is daunting. Quantifying all factors that may influence seed dispersal effectiveness for any potential seed-vector relationship would require an unrealistically large amount of time, materials and financial resources. On the other hand, being able to make dispersal predictions is critical for predicting whether single species and entire ecosystems will be resilient to global change. Building on current frameworks, we here posit that seed dispersal ecology should adopt plant functional groups as analytical units to reduce this complexity to manageable levels. Functional groups can be used to distinguish, for their constituent species, whether it matters (i) if seeds are dispersed, (ii) into what context they are dispersed and (iii) what vectors disperse them. To avoid overgeneralization, we propose that the utility of these functional groups may be assessed by generating predictions based on the groups and then testing those predictions against species-specific data. We suggest that data collection and analysis can then be guided by robust functional group definitions. Generalizing across similar species in this way could help us to better understand the population and community dynamics of plants and tackle the complexity of seed dispersal as well as its disruption., Ideas for this manuscript initiated during the Seed Dispersal Workshop held in May 2016 at the Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center in Annapolis, MD and supported by the US National Science Foundation Grant DEB-1548194 to N.G.B. and the National Socio‐Environmental Synthesis Center under the US National Science Foundation Grant DBI‐1052875. D.Z. received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF, grant: PZ00P3_168136/1) and from the German Science Foundation (DFG, grant: ZU 361/1- 1). Contributions by the authors C.A. led the development of the concepts, writing, and revising of the manuscript with input from N.G.B. and H.S.R. All authors contributed to the development of concepts and are listed in order of contribution and alphabetical order within each level of contribution.

Pollination by insects is a key input into many crops, with managed honeybees often being hired to support pollination services. Despite substantial research into pollination management, no European studies have yet explored how and why farmers managed pollination services and few have explored why beekeepers use certain crops. Using paired surveys of beekeepers and farmers in 10 European countries, this study examines beekeeper and farmer perceptions and motivations surrounding crop pollination. Almost half of the farmers surveyed believed they had pollination service deficits in one or more of their crops. Less than a third of farmers hired managed pollinators; however, most undertook at least one form of agri‐environment management known to benefit pollinators, although few did so to promote pollinators. Beekeepers were ambivalent towards many mass‐flowering crops, with some beekeepers using crops for their honey that other beekeepers avoid because of perceived pesticide risks. The findings highlight a number of largely overlooked knowledge gaps that will affect knowledge exchange and co‐operation between the two groups.