While pollinators are widely acknowledged as important contributors to seed production in plant communities, we do not yet have a good understanding of the importance of pollinator specialists for this ecosystem service. Determination of the prevalence of pollinator specialists is often hindered by the occurrence of cryptic species and the limitations of observational data on pollinator visitation rates, two areas where DNA barcoding of pollinators and pollen can be useful. Further, the demonstrated adequacy of pollen DNA barcoding from historical records offers opportunities to observe the effects of pollinator loss over longer timescales, and phylogenetic approaches can elucidate the historical rates of extinction of specialist lineages. In this Viewpoint article, we review how advances in DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of plants and pollinators have brought important developments to our understanding of specialization in plant–pollinator interactions. We then put forth several lines of inquiry that we feel are especially promising for providing insight on changes in plant–pollinator interactions over space and time. Obtaining estimates of the effects of reductions in specialists will contribute to forecasting the loss of ecosystem services that will accompany the erosion of plant and pollinator diversity.

Evidence shows that pollinator abundance has declined and, consequently, so has their services, which has possible negative impacts on ecosystem functioning. The goal of this study was to evaluate the influence of landscape context at multiple spatial scales on the abundance of bee pollinators of tomato crops in Brazil. Pollinator abundance was obtained from tomato crops grown in a conventional system in the Cerrado region. Around each tomato field circular buffers of 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, and 3 km radius were defined. Inside each buffer the landscapes were manually classified into native and non-native cover and, the proportion of native vegetation, the relative largest patch size, and the distance of the nearest native vegetation to each field were calculated. Pollinator species were categorized into five groups: Exomalopsis, Centris, Bombus/Eulaema, Halictidae, and all buzz pollinators combined (Buzzers). The results showed that the landscape context influenced the abundance of the five groups of tomato pollinators. Bees with a smaller body size, such as Exomalopsis spp., responded at smaller scales, while bees with a larger body size, such as the Centris and Bombus/Eulaema groups, responded at larger scales. The abundance of all pollinator groups increased with native vegetation cover. Most groups showed higher abundances in landscapes with similar-size fragments. The results reinforce the recommendation for maintaining natural habitats around crop areas, even if fragmented, for the conservation of the tomato pollinator assemblage. These findings are valuable for planning landscape management in the studied area to improve bee conservation, ecosystem services, and food production.

Intensive forest management, together with fire suppression, have decreased structural complexity and altered dynamics of boreal forests profoundly. Such management threatens forest biodiversity and can reduce the provision of ecosystem services. Although the importance of ecosystem services is widely acknowledged, conservation strategies are hindered by poor knowledge about diversity patterns of service provider species as well as on mechanisms affecting these assemblages at different spatial and temporal scales. In this study, we assessed the effect of disturbance management on forest pollinator communities. To do so, we used a large‐scale ecological experiment conducted in the year 2000, where forest complexity was manipulated with different harvest regimes and prescribed fire. Results were consistent with a positive response of pollinators to increasing habitat heterogeneity driven by past disturbances. Harvested sites harbored a diverse pollinator community, and showed higher spatial and temporal turnover in species richness. Conversely, old‐growth forest communities were a nested subset of harvested sites and contained half of their total diversity. Variation in community composition (β diversity) was primarily affected by species temporal turnover. Throughout the season, β diversity was controlled by fire and harvesting legacies, which provide environmental heterogeneity in the form of flowering and nesting resources over space and time. Conservation strategies may undervalue ecosystem services in dynamic, naturally disturbance‐driven, landscapes when relying solely on undisturbed forests areas. However, maintaining natural dynamics in early successional forests, by emulating natural disturbances at harvesting, hold promise for the conservation of both biodiversity and ecosystem services in boreal forests.

María J. Suso, Penelope J. Bebeli, Stefanie Christmann, Julian Mateus, Valeria Negri, Miguel A. A. Pinheiro de Carvalho, Renzo Torricelli, Maria Manuela Veloso. (18/3/2016). Enhancing Legume Ecosystem Services through an Understanding of Plant�??Pollinator Interplay. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7. | Legumes are bee-pollinated, but to a different extent. The importance of the plant�??pollinator interplay (PPI), in flowering crops such as legumes lies in a combination of the importance of pollination for the production service and breeding strategies, plus the increasing urgency in mitigating the decline of pollinators through the development and implementation of conservation measures. To realize the full potential of the PPI, a multidisciplinary approach is required. This article assembles an international team of genebank managers, geneticists, plant breeders, experts on environmental governance and agro-ecology, and comprises several sections. The contributions in these sections outline both the state of the art of knowledge in the field and the novel aspects under development, and encompass a range of reviews, opinions and perspectives. The first three sections explore the role of PPI in legume breeding strategies. PPI based approaches to crop improvement can make it possible to adapt and re-design breeding strategies to meet both goals of: (1) optimal productivity, based on an efficient use of pollinators, and (2) biodiversity conservation. The next section deals with entomological aspects and focuses on the protection of the �??pest control service�?� and pollinators in legume crops. The final section addresses general approaches to encourage the synergy between food production and pollination services at farmer field level. Two basic approaches are proposed: (a) Farming with Alternative Pollinators and (b) Crop Design System

Agricultural intensification structures arable plant communities, including shifts in species assemblages and trait distributions, which affect the provision of ecosystem services. We used a response-effect trait framework to characterize the impact of agricultural intensification on two ecosystem services delivered by arable plants to pollinator and non-pollinator insects and birds. Agricultural intensification was characterized by field position as a gradient of the impact of crop management at field scale and the surrounding landscape heterogeneity, which can be divided into compositional and configurational heterogenenity. Shifts in functional assemblages of response and effect traits were analyzed by multivariate analyses, whereas changes in single trait metrics were analyzed by mixed-model effects. At field scale, we found a trade-off between ruderal and competitive species. The contrasting disturbance regime from boundaries to inner-fields overflows the potential shifts in functional assemblages both for response and effect traits due to the gradient of landscape heterogeneity. Conversely, some response and effect single trait metrics changed along gradients of landscape heterogeneity. We thus propose a response-effect trait framework to capture functional relationships along different trophic levels. Compositional heterogeneity affected traits linked to the provision of suitable habitat for insects and birds, whereas configurational heterogeneity affected traits linked to pollination. Incorporating this framework into decision-making processes may help to focus conservation efforts on maintaining the delivery of ecosystem services.

The unique benefits of wild pollinators to the productivity of agricultural crops have become increasingly recognized in recent decades. However, declines in populations of wild pollinator species, largely driven by the conversion of natural habitat to agricultural land and broad‐spectrum pesticide use often lead reductions in the provision of pollination services and crop production. With growing evidence that targeted pollinator conservation improves crop yield and/or quality, particularly for pollination specialist crops, efforts are increasing to substitute agriculturally intensive practices with those that alleviate some of the negative impacts of agriculture on pollinators and the pollination services they provide, in part through the provision of suitable pollinator habitat. Further, similarities between the responses of some pollinators and predators to habitat management suggest that efforts to conserve pollinators may also encourage predator densities. We evaluated the effects of one habitat management practice, the addition of cacao fruit husks to a monoculture cacao farm, on the provision of pollination services and the densities of two groups of entomophagous predators. We also evaluated the impacts of cacao fruit husk addition on pollen limitation, by crossing this habitat manipulation with pollen supplementation treatments. The addition of cacao fruit husks increased the number of fruits per tree and along with hand pollination treatments, increased final yields indicating a promotion of the pollination ecosystem service provided by the specialist pollinators, midges. We also found that cacao fruit husk addition increased the densities of two predator groups, spiders and skinks. Further, the conservation of these predators did not inhibit pollination through pollinator capture or deterrence. The findings show that, with moderate habitat management, both pollinator and predator conservation can be compatible goals within a highly specialized plant–pollinator system. The effectiveness of this habitat manipulation may be attributable to the increased availability of alternative habitat and food resources for both pollinators and predators. The results exemplify a win‐win relationship between agricultural production and biological conservation, whereby agricultural practices to support vital pollinators and pollination services can increase production as well as support species conservation.

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) held its 5th plenary session in Bonn during March 2017. After last year’s pollinator assessment, the biodiversity assessments currently being undertaken are shortly to be available for peer review. The scientific community can play an important role in both conducting assessments and in the peer-review process. Independent scientists can contribute to ensure that these assessments are comprehensive with respect to the current state and future trends of biodiversity and the ecosystem services. We outline possibilities for deeper involvement of the scientific community in the IPBES process and draw attention to upcoming reviews in 2017.

Pollination is a key ecosystem service. Pollinators, however, are in decline and their service is increasingly threatened. The decline is driven by several factors, most of which are related to agricultural management. However, the complexity of the landscape system, consisting of both cropped and non-cropped areas, makes it difficult to address or even quantify the role of farming practices in pollinator abundance. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to improve our understanding of the relationships between pollinator abundance and their habitat use. We intend to identify and quantify the driving environmental factors that determine pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes on the crop and landscape scale. These information helps us to design algorithms that can be used as a basis for predicting pollinator abundance on agricultural fields. To integrate varying environmental conditions data sampling was performed on farms in three different regions in Germany. Pollinators were classified into different groups with three aggregation levels. We observed crop parameters as well as landscape parameters in the areas surrounding fields in addition to temporal aspects. Generalized linear models (GLMs) were then calculated. Our results showed that both crop and landscape parameters affect pollinator abundance on agricultural fields. However, the explanatory power of the included parameters varied strongly among the particular pollinator groups and between aggregation levels. Furthermore, differentiation between species groups improves the explanatory power compared to models that are more aggregated. We also found that the temporal match between main activity periods of the particular pollinator groups and resource supply by the crop species is a key factor when analysing pollinator abundance. In conclusion, we demonstrated that the assessment and support of pollination services should be carried out with regard to individual pollinator groups. When studying pollinator abundance, the crop as well as the landscape scale should be addressed. A range of different habitat requirements and different activity periods of the pollinator groups must be covered to maintain pollination services, and therefore both diverse landscapes and diverse crop rotations are of crucial importance.

Pollination is a key ecosystem service. Pollinators, however, are in decline and their service is increasingly threatened. The decline is driven by several factors, most of which are related to agricultural management. However, the complexity of the landscape system, consisting of both cropped and non-cropped areas, makes it difficult to address or even quantify the role of farming practices in pollinator abundance. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to improve our understanding of the relationships between pollinator abundance and their habitat use. We intend to identify and quantify the driving environmental factors that determine pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes on the crop and landscape scale. These information helps us to design algorithms that can be used as a basis for predicting pollinator abundance on agricultural fields. To integrate varying environmental conditions data sampling was performed on farms in three different regions in Germany. Pollinators were classified into different groups with three aggregation levels. We observed crop parameters as well as landscape parameters in the areas surrounding fields in addition to temporal aspects. Generalized linear models (Gl.Ms) were then calculated. Our results showed that both crop and landscape parameters affect pollinator abundance on agricultural fields. However, the explanatory power of the included parameters varied strongly among the particular pollinator groups and between aggregation levels. Furthermore, differentiation between species groups improves the explanatory power compared to models that are more aggregated. We also found that the temporal match between main activity periods of the particular pollinator groups and resource supply by the crop species is a key factor when analysing pollinator abundance. ln conclusion, we demonstrated that the assessment and support of pollination services should be carried out with regard to individual pollinator groups. When studying pollinator abundance, the crop as well as the landscape scale should be addressed. A range of different habitat requirements and different activity periods of the pollinator groups must be covered to maintain pollination services, and therefore both diverse landscapes and diverse crop rotations are of crucial importance.

The negative effects of climate change on cocoa production are often enhanced through agricultural intensification, while research institutions and enterprises try to minimize yield gaps with production strategies mitigating climate risk. Ecological intensification is such a production strategy, whereby yield increase is promoted through reduced agrochemical inputs and increased regulating ecosystem services such as pollination. However, we still know little about cocoa pollination ecology and services, although they appear to be key to understand yield functions. Here, we provide an extensive literature review on cocoa pollination focusing on three main aspects: non-plant (external) and plant regulated (internal) factors affecting pollination, pollinator agents, and ecological intensification management for enhancing pollination success and yield. Pollination services by many arthropod groups such as ants, bees, and parasitic wasps, and not only ceratopogonids, may be a way to increase cocoa productivity and secure smallholders income, but their role is unknown. Several environmental and socioeconomic factors can blur potential pollination benefits. Current knowledge gaps preclude our understanding of how to (i) identify the major pollinator species, (ii) disentangle the direct or indirect role of ants in pollination, (iii) design effective habitat improvements for pollination (by litter and shade management), and (iv) quantify the yield gaps due to pollination limitation. Optimizing cocoa pollination alone appears to be a powerful ecological tool to increase the yield of smallholders, but experimental research is required to validate these results in a realistic setting. In general, industry, governments and smallholders need to develop more joined efforts to ecological production strategies. In particular, farm-base management innovations based on robust scientific evidence must be designed to meet the increasing demand for chocolate and to mitigate cocoa yield gaps. This review suggests that diversified systems and associated ecosystem services, such as pollination, can help to achieve such goals.