TY - JOUR A1 - Bartomeus, Ignasi A1 - Potts, Simon G. A1 - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf A1 - Vaissiere, Bernard E. A1 - Woyciechowski, Michal A1 - Krewenka, Kristin M. A1 - Tscheulin, Thomas A1 - Roberts, Stuart P. M. A1 - Szentgyoergyi, Hajnalka A1 - Westphal, Catrin A1 - Bommarco, Riccardo T1 - Contribution of insect pollinators to crop yield and quality varies with agricultural intensification JF - PEERJ N2 - Background. Up to 75% of crop species benefit at least to some degree from animal pollination for fruit or seed set and yield. However, basic information on the level of pollinator dependence and pollinator contribution to yield is lacking for many crops. Even less is known about how insect pollination affects crop quality. Given that habitat loss and agricultural intensification are known to decrease pollinator richness and abundance, there is a need to assess the consequences for different components of crop production. Methods. We used pollination exclusion on flowers or inflorescences on a whole plant basis to assess the contribution of insect pollination to crop yield and quality in four flowering crops (spring oilseed rape, field bean, strawberry, and buckwheat) located in four regions of Europe. For each crop, we recorded abundance and species richness of flower visiting insects in ten fields located along a gradient from simple to heterogeneous landscapes. Results. Insect pollination enhanced average crop yield between 18 and 71% depending on the crop. Yield quality was also enhanced in most crops. For instance, oilseed rape had higher oil and lower chlorophyll contents when adequately pollinated, the proportion of empty seeds decreased in buckwheat, and strawberries' commercial grade improved; however, we did not find higher nitrogen content in open pollinated field beans. Complex landscapes had a higher overall species richness of wild pollinators across crops, but visitation rates were only higher in complex landscapes for some crops. On the contrary, the overall yield was consistently enhanced by higher visitation rates, but not by higher pollinator richness. Discussion. For the four crops in this study, there is clear benefit delivered by pollinators on yield quantity and/or quality, but it is not maximized under current agricultural intensification. Honeybees, the most abundant pollinator, might partially compensate the loss of wild pollinators in some areas, but our results suggest the need of landscape-scale actions to enhance wild pollinator populations. KW - biodiversity KW - pollination KW - honeybee KW - wild bees KW - agroecosystems KW - native pollinators KW - species richness KW - bee pollinators KW - wild KW - ecosystemservices KW - fruit-quality KW - oilseed rape KW - land-use KW - honey KW - patterns Y1 - 2014 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-116928 SN - 2167-9843 VL - 2 IS - e328 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kleijn, David A1 - Winfree, Rachael A1 - Bartomeus, Ignasi A1 - Carvalheiro, Luísa G. A1 - Henry, Mickael A1 - Isaacs, Rufus A1 - Klein, Alexandra-Maria A1 - Kremen, Claire A1 - M'Gonigle, Leithen K. A1 - Rader, Romina A1 - Ricketts, Taylor H. A1 - Williams, Neal M. A1 - Adamson, Nancy Lee A1 - Ascher, John S. A1 - Báldi, András A1 - Batáry, Péter A1 - Benjamin, Faye A1 - Biesmeijer, Jacobus C. A1 - Blitzer, Eleanor J. A1 - Bommarco, Riccardo A1 - Brand, Mariette R. A1 - Bretagnolle, Vincent A1 - Button, Lindsey A1 - Cariveau, Daniel P. A1 - Chifflet, Rémy A1 - Colville, Jonathan F. A1 - Danforth, Bryan N. A1 - Elle, Elizabeth A1 - Garratt, Michael P. D. A1 - Herzog, Felix A1 - Holzschuh, Andrea A1 - Howlett, Brad G. A1 - Jauker, Frank A1 - Jha, Shalene A1 - Knop, Eva A1 - Krewenka, Kristin M. A1 - Le Féon, Violette A1 - Mandelik, Yael A1 - May, Emily A. A1 - Park, Mia G. A1 - Pisanty, Gideon A1 - Reemer, Menno A1 - Riedinger, Verena A1 - Rollin, Orianne A1 - Rundlöf, Maj A1 - Sardiñas, Hillary S. A1 - Scheper, Jeroen A1 - Sciligo, Amber R. A1 - Smith, Henrik G. A1 - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf A1 - Thorp, Robbin A1 - Tscharntke, Teja A1 - Verhulst, Jort A1 - Viana, Blandina F. A1 - Vaissière, Bernard E. A1 - Veldtman, Ruan A1 - Ward, Kimiora L. A1 - Westphal, Catrin A1 - Potts, Simon G. T1 - Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation JF - Nature Communications N2 - 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. KW - ecosystem services KW - european countries KW - abundance KW - native bees KW - biodiversity conservation KW - plant diversity KW - fruit set KW - productivity KW - decline KW - pollen Y1 - 2015 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-151879 VL - 6 IS - 7414 ER -