21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Contrasting Pollinators and Pollination in Native and Non-Native Regions of Highbush Blueberry Production

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Highbush blueberry yields are dependent on pollination by bees, and introduction of managed honey bees is the primary strategy used for pollination of this crop. Complementary pollination services are also provided by wild bees, yet highbush blueberry is increasingly grown in regions outside its native range where wild bee communities may be less adapted to the crop and growers may still be testing appropriate honey bee stocking densities. To contrast crop pollination in native and non-native production regions, we sampled commercial ‘Bluecrop’ blueberry fields in British Columbia and Michigan with grower-selected honey bee stocking rates (0–39.5 hives per ha) to compare bee visitors to blueberry flowers, pollination and yield deficits, and how those vary with local- and landscape-scale factors. Observed and Chao-1 estimated species richness, as well as Shannon diversity of wild bees visiting blueberries were significantly higher in Michigan where the crop is within its native range. The regional bee communities were also significantly different, with Michigan farms having greater dissimilarity than British Columbia. Blueberry fields in British Columbia had fewer visits by honey bees than those in Michigan, irrespective of stocking rate, and they also had lower berry weights and a significant pollination deficit. In British Columbia, pollination service increased with abundance of wild bumble bees, whereas in Michigan the abundance of honey bees was the primary predictor of pollination. The proportion of semi-natural habitat at local and landscape scales was positively correlated with wild bee abundance in both regions. Wild bee abundance declined significantly with distance from natural borders in Michigan, but not in British Columbia where large-bodied bumble bees dominated the wild bee community. Our results highlight the varying dependence of crop production on different types of bees and reveal that strategies for pollination improvement in the same crop can vary greatly across production regions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bee foraging ranges and their relationship to body size.

          Bees are the most important pollinator taxon; therefore, understanding the scale at which they forage has important ecological implications and conservation applications. The foraging ranges for most bee species are unknown. Foraging distance information is critical for understanding the scale at which bee populations respond to the landscape, assessing the role of bee pollinators in affecting plant population structure, planning conservation strategies for plants, and designing bee habitat refugia that maintain pollination function for wild and crop plants. We used data from 96 records of 62 bee species to determine whether body size predicts foraging distance. We regressed maximum and typical foraging distances on body size and found highly significant and explanatory nonlinear relationships. We used a second data set to: (1) compare observed reports of foraging distance to the distances predicted by our regression equations and (2) assess the biases inherent to the different techniques that have been used to assess foraging distance. The equations we present can be used to predict foraging distances for many bee species, based on a simple measurement of body size.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems.

            Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Abundance of common species, not species richness, drives delivery of a real-world ecosystem service.

              Biodiversity-ecosystem functioning experiments have established that species richness and composition are both important determinants of ecosystem function in an experimental context. Determining whether this result holds for real-world ecosystem services has remained elusive, however, largely due to the lack of analytical methods appropriate for large-scale, associational data. Here, we use a novel analytical approach, the Price equation, to partition the contribution to ecosystem services made by species richness, composition and abundance in four large-scale data sets on crop pollination by native bees. We found that abundance fluctuations of dominant species drove ecosystem service delivery, whereas richness changes were relatively unimportant because they primarily involved rare species that contributed little to function. Thus, the mechanism behind our results was the skewed species-abundance distribution. Our finding that a few common species, not species richness, drive ecosystem service delivery could have broad generality given the ubiquity of skewed species-abundance distributions in nature.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                8 July 2016
                2016
                : 11
                : 7
                : e0158937
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America
                [2 ]Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
                University of Guelph, CANADA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: JG EE RI. Performed the experiments: JG EE KB TH RI. Analyzed the data: JG EE KB TH RI. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: EE RI. Wrote the paper: JG EE KB TH RI.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-39831
                10.1371/journal.pone.0158937
                4938509
                27391969
                dcf33a6b-ea36-43fd-bad7-947b09db93db
                © 2016 Gibbs et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 9 September 2015
                : 24 June 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 9, Tables: 4, Pages: 24
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100005825, National Institute of Food and Agriculture;
                Award ID: 2012-01534
                Award Recipient :
                The authors acknowledge funding provided by the United States Department of Agriculture -National Institute for Food and Agriculture Specialty Crop Research Initiative ( http://nifa.usda.gov), from project 2012-01534: Developing Sustainable Pollination Strategies for U.S Specialty Crops awarded to RI (principal investigator) and EE (co-prinicipal investigator). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Hymenoptera
                Bees
                Honey Bees
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Plants
                Flowering Plants
                Pollination
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Plant Science
                Plant Physiology
                Pollination
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Crop Science
                Crops
                Fruits
                Berries
                Blueberries
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Plants
                Fruits
                Berries
                Blueberries
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Hymenoptera
                Bees
                People and places
                Geographical locations
                North America
                United States
                Michigan
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Crop Science
                Crops
                Fruits
                Berries
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Plants
                Fruits
                Berries
                People and places
                Geographical locations
                North America
                Canada
                British Columbia
                Earth Sciences
                Geography
                Human Geography
                Land Use
                Social Sciences
                Human Geography
                Land Use
                Custom metadata
                Data are available from Figshare (DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.2060475).

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article