Recent reports indicate that global insect populations are drastically declining, and amongst insects, bees have attracted significant attention. Decades of research on causal factors for bee population declines, indicate that extensive loss of natural habitats resulting from urbanization and agricultural intensification, has led to a dearth of critical nesting and forage resources essential for the sustenance of bees. To address these concerns and to meet the growing need for food production, simple but effective farm management practices such as restoring habitat diversity through planting pollinator habitats along field margins and underutilized areas, revegetating retired farmland with wildflowers and including pollinator-friendly forbs in cover crop mixes, have been recommended. Earlier studies have provided evidence that planting pollinator habitats along field margins and revegetating retired farmland are indeed viable ways to sustain bee pollinators. Here we report results of a case study exploring the benefits of cover cropping with a pollinator-friendly forb mix. Our results indicate that cover cropping to support pollinators can be effective, particularly when cover crops are retained until the flowering stage and that grazing of cover crops could extend support to those genera of bees that prefer grazed areas. Although the reports on global insect declines are dire, our studies show that pollinator-friendly farm management practices can offset the declines and play a significant role in supporting pollinator populations. Regular assessment of the efficacy of these practices will enable us to target efforts towards better implementation of habitat conservation programs.

The need to reduce pollinator exposure to harmful pesticides has led to calls to expedite the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM). We make the case that IPM is not explicitly ‘pollinator friendly’, but rather must be adapted to reduce impacts on pollinators and to facilitate synergies between crop pollination and pest control practices and ecosystem services. To reconcile these diverse needs, we introduce a systematic framework for ‘integrated pest and pollinator management’ (IPPM). We also highlight novel tools to unify monitoring and economic decision-making processes for IPPM and outline key policy actions and knowledge gaps. We propose that IPPM is needed to promote more coordinated, ecosystem-based strategies for sustainable food production, against the backdrop of increasing pesticide regulation and pollinator dependency in agriculture.[Display omitted]

Mitigating pollinator declines in agriculturally dominated landscapes to safeguard pollination services requires the involvement of farmers and their willingness to adopt pollinator-friendly management. However, farmer knowledge, perceptions, and actions to support on-farm pollinators and their alignment with science-based knowledge and recommendations are rarely evaluated. To close this knowledge gap, we interviewed 560 farmers from 11 countries around the world, cultivating at least one of four widely grown pollinator-dependent crops (apple, avocado, kiwifruit, oilseed rape). We particularly focused on non-bee crop pollinators which, despite being important pollinators of many crops, received less research attention than bees. We found that farmers perceived bees to be more important pollinators than other flower-visiting insects. However, around 75% of the farmers acknowledged that non-bees contributed to the pollination of their crops, seeing them as additional pollinators rather than substitutes for bees. Despite farmers rating their own observations as being most important in how they perceived the contribution of different crop pollinator taxa, their perception aligned closely with results from available scientific studies across crops and countries. Farmer perceptions were also linked with their pollinator management practices, e.g. farmers who used managed bees for crop pollination services (more than half the farmers) rated these managed bees as particularly important. Interestingly, their willingness to establish wildflower strips or manage hedgerows to enhance pollinator visitation was linked to their ecological knowledge of non-bees or to government subsidies. Farmers adapted practices to enhance pollination services depending on the crop, which indicates an understanding of differences in the pollination ecology of crops. Almost half of the farmers had changed on-farm pollination management in the past 10 years and farm practices differed greatly between countries. This suggests integrated crop pollination measures are being adapted by farmers to reach best pollinator management practices. Our findings highlight the importance of studying local knowledge as a key to co-design locally-adapted measures to facilitate pollinator-integrated food production as ecological intensification tools.

It is increasingly recognized that a sustainable future for agriculture must build on ecosystem services. Pollination is an important ecosystem service in all agroecosystems. In much of Africa the main challenge is conserving pollinator biodiversity in traditionally “ecologically-intensive” agroecosystems that are changing to meet different demands for food security and poverty alleviation, rather than safeguarding pollination in transition from conventional agricultural systems, with a high reliance on purchased inputs, to “ecologically-intensive” agroecosystems using natural inputs provided by biodiversity. Priority issues for research and development in pollination services in Africa include, inter alia: quantification and documentation of pollination deficits and finding measures to address these; socio-economic valuation of pollinator-friendly practices; assessment of lethal and sub-lethal effects of farming methods, such as pesticide use, on crop pollinators; identification of habitat management practices that enhance synergies between pollinator lifecycles and crop growing patterns; and policy analysis in relation to drivers and trends in pollination services and management.

The alarming loss of pollinator diversity world‐wide can reduce the productivity of pollinator‐dependent crops, which could have economic impacts. However, it is unclear to what extent the loss of a key native pollinator species affects crop production and farmer's profits. By experimentally manipulating the presence of colonies of a native bumblebee species Bombus pauloensis in eight apple orchards in South Argentina, we evaluated the impact of losing natural populations of a key native pollinator group on (a) crop yield, (b) pollination quality, and (c) farmer's profit. To do so, we performed a factorial experiment of pollinator exclusion (yes/no) and hand pollination (yes/no). Our results showed that biotic pollination increased ripe fruit set by 13% when compared to non‐biotic pollination. Additionally, fruit set and the number of fruits per apple tree was reduced by less than a half in those orchards where bumblebees were absent, even when honeybees were present at high densities. Consequently, farmer's profit was 2.4‐fold lower in farms lacking bumblebees than in farms hosting both pollinator species. The pollination experiment further suggested that the benefits of bumblebees could be mediated by improved pollen quality rather than quantity. Synthesis and applications. This study highlights the pervasive consequences of losing key pollinator functional groups, such as bumblebees, for apple production and local economies. Adopting pollinator‐friendly practices such as minimizing the use of synthetic inputs or restoring/maintaining semi‐natural habitats at farm and landscape scales, will have the double advantage of promoting biodiversity conservation, and increasing crop productivity and profitability for local farmers. Yet because the implementation of these practices can take time to deliver results, the management of native pollinator species can be a provisional complementary strategy to increase economic profitability of apple growers in the short term.

Loss of semi-natural habitats has been identified as a major driver for pollinator loss in agricultural landscapes. The challenge has been addressed in developed countries by creating flower strips and pollinator habitats in agricultural areas, but this approach has largely been overlooked in developing countries. However, even in countries that adopted pollinator-friendly measures, the complementarities between functional traits of plants and bees are not generally used as selection criteria for candidate species in floral strips. Furthermore, the combined effect of habitat variables that are likely to maximize bee visitation are also overlooked. In tropical developing countries, even the basic information to inform decision making is missing. This paper attempts to bridge this critical gap and reports how assemblages of different non-crop plants could be used to attract bees in tropical small landholdings by investigating non-crop plant identity, non-crop floral traits, bee traits and influential habitat variables at patch scale. Results showed that a combination of both non-crop flower density and diversity increased bee visitation at patch scale. Moreover, trait-based analyses revealed that bees with a larger inter-tegular distance, longer tongue frequently visited flowers with a longer corolla. This study demonstrates that both characteristics of non-crop flower patches and floral traits are important for effective management of non-crops in tropical farmland to attract pollinators with complementary functional traits. We have explored a range of non-crop plants that could be effectively sown to attract bees but recognise that more research is necessary in order to standardise their propagation, establishment and management techniques.

International audience | Recent insect pollinator declines, mainly due to the expansion and intensification of agricultural land use, are jeopardizing ecosystem service provisioning in agroecosystems. Organic farming has been suggested as a biodiversity-friendly alternative to conventional farming, but additional insights evaluating its effectiveness in perennial cropping systems are needed. Here, we provide a comprehensive analysis of local and landscape effects on the provided pollination services and yield in apple crops. We first used mixed models to disentangle effects of agricultural management and landscape effects on both taxonomic and functional diversity of wild bees and hoverflies during bloom in both organic and integrated pest management (IPM) apple orchards in Belgium, and then compared these biodiversity indicators with semi-natural grasslands as a benchmark. Next, we applied piecewise structural equation modeling to quantify the direct and indirect effects of orchard management type and landscape on fruit set, seed set and ultimately on crop yield. Orchards, regardless of their type of management, hosted lower taxonomic and functional pollinator diversity compared to the semi-natural benchmark. Yet, pollinator abundance and diversity were higher in orchard edges and increased with small-scale landscape diversity, which was positively associated with the presence of semi-natural habitat, as well as arable and urban land. Investigating the cascading effects on apple yield, we found that yield levels were not shaped by the observed pollinator diversity or by the measured pollination services, but were lower in organic orchards. Overall, we conclude that apple yield was likely not pollinator limited in our study system, but that conserving and restoring semi-natural habitats, maintaining and expanding orchard edges through reducing field sizes and promoting landscape diversity are the most promising avenues for pollinator conservation in orchard landscapes.