Literature DB >> 21830716

Bumble bee species' responses to a targeted conservation measure depend on landscape context and habitat quality.

C Carvell1, J L Osborne, A F G Bourke, S N Freeman, R F Pywell, M S Heard.   

Abstract

The global decline of insect pollinators, especially bees, is cause for concern, and there is an urgent need for cost-effective conservation measures in agricultural landscapes. While landscape context and habitat quality are known to influence species richness and abundance of bees, there is a lack of evidence from manipulative field experiments on bees' responses to adaptive management across differently structured landscapes. We present the results of a large-scale study that investigated the effects of a targeted agri-environment scheme (AES) on bumble bees (Bombus spp.) over three years in the United Kingdom. Forage patches of different sizes were sown with a conservation flower mixture across eight sites covering a broad range of agricultural land use types. Species richness and worker densities (especially of the longer-tongued Bombus species for which the mixture was targeted) were significantly higher on sown forage patches than on existing non-crop control habitats throughout the three-year study, but the strength of this response depended on both the proportions of arable land and abundance of herbaceous forb species in the surrounding landscape. The size of sown patches also affected worker density, with smaller patches (0.25 ha) attracting higher densities of some species than larger patches (1.0 ha). Our models show that a targeted AES can deliver greater net benefits in more intensively farmed areas, in terms of the number and species richness of bumble bees supported, than in heterogeneous landscapes where other foraging habitats exist. These findings serve to strengthen the evidence base for extending agri-environment schemes to boost declining pollinator populations to a larger number of agricultural landscapes across the globe.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21830716     DOI: 10.1890/10-0677.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Appl        ISSN: 1051-0761            Impact factor:   4.657


  21 in total

1.  A comparison of techniques for assessing farmland bumblebee populations.

Authors:  T J Wood; J M Holland; D Goulson
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Demographic benefits of early season resources for bumble bee (B. vosnesenskii) colonies.

Authors:  Rosemary L Malfi; Elizabeth Crone; Neal Williams
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States.

Authors:  Insu Koh; Eric V Lonsdorf; Neal M Williams; Claire Brittain; Rufus Isaacs; Jason Gibbs; Taylor H Ricketts
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Colour patterns do not diagnose species: quantitative evaluation of a DNA barcoded cryptic bumblebee complex.

Authors:  James C Carolan; Tomás E Murray; Úna Fitzpatrick; John Crossley; Hans Schmidt; Björn Cederberg; Luke McNally; Robert J Paxton; Paul H Williams; Mark J F Brown
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Habitat and forage associations of a naturally colonising insect pollinator, the tree bumblebee Bombus hypnorum.

Authors:  Liam P Crowther; Pierre-Louis Hein; Andrew F G Bourke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Fine-scale spatial genetic structure of common and declining bumble bees across an agricultural landscape.

Authors:  Stephanie Dreier; John W Redhead; Ian A Warren; Andrew F G Bourke; Matthew S Heard; William C Jordan; Seirian Sumner; Jinliang Wang; Claire Carvell
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 6.185

7.  The Allometry of Bee Proboscis Length and Its Uses in Ecology.

Authors:  Daniel P Cariveau; Geetha K Nayak; Ignasi Bartomeus; Joseph Zientek; John S Ascher; Jason Gibbs; Rachael Winfree
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Apple Pollination: Demand Depends on Variety and Supply Depends on Pollinator Identity.

Authors:  M P D Garratt; T D Breeze; V Boreux; M T Fountain; M McKerchar; S M Webber; D J Coston; N Jenner; R Dean; D B Westbury; J C Biesmeijer; S G Potts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

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

Authors:  Lynn V Dicks; Mathilde Baude; Stuart P M Roberts; James Phillips; Mike Green; Claire Carvell
Journal:  Ecol Entomol       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 2.465

10.  The identity of crop pollinators helps target conservation for improved ecosystem services.

Authors:  M P D Garratt; D J Coston; C L Truslove; M G Lappage; C Polce; R Dean; J C Biesmeijer; S G Potts
Journal:  Biol Conserv       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.990

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.