SignificanceDecades of research have fostered the now-prevalent assumption that noncrop habitat facilitates better pest suppression by providing shelter and food resources to the predators and parasitoids of crop pests. Based on our analysis of the largest pest-control database of its kind, noncrop habitat surrounding farm fields does affect multiple dimensions of pest control, but the actual responses of pests and enemies are highly variable across geographies and cropping systems. Because noncrop habitat often does not enhance biological control, more information about local farming contexts is needed before habitat conservation can be recommended as a viable pest-suppression strategy. Consequently, when pest control does not benefit from noncrop vegetation, farms will need to be carefully comanaged for competing conservation and production objectives.

We investigated the relative importance of vacant lot and urban farm habitat features and their surrounding landscape context on bee community richness, abundance, composition, and resource use patterns. Three years of pan trap collections from 16 sites yielded a rich assemblage of bees from vacant lots and urban farms, with 98 species documented. We collected a greater bee abundance from vacant lots, and the two forms of greenspace supported significantly different bee communities. Plant-pollinator networks constructed from floral visitation observations revealed that, while the average number of bees utilizing available resources, niche breadth, and niche overlap were similar, the composition of floral resources and common foragers varied by habitat type. Finally, we found that the proportion of impervious surface and number of greenspace patches in the surrounding landscape strongly influenced bee assemblages. At a local scale (100 m radius), patch isolation appeared to limit colonization of vacant lots and urban farms. However, at a larger landscape scale (1000 m radius), increasing urbanization resulted in a greater concentration of bees utilizing vacant lots and urban farms, illustrating that maintaining greenspaces provides important habitat, even within highly developed landscapes.to urban gradients [16,17]. At the same time, landscape features at the city-wide scale can act as strong environmental filters, influencing if taxa from a given species pool are able to colonize distinct greenspace patches [12]. For instance, isolation from other greenspaces can lead to reduced bee species richness within urban forest fragments [18] and connectivity with other greenspaces positively predicts bee abundance on green roofs [19]. In some cases, landscape variables also influence the functional trait distribution found within groups [17,20]. For instance, highly fragmented urban landscapes tend to favor smaller species and cavity nesting species [21,22].At a local scale, species interactions among bees and floral resources can drive patterns of pollinator community assembly [12]. Increasing bee species richness is often linked to floral species richness [23], which frequently increases with the degree of urbanization [4,24,25]. Within a city, urban greenspaces offer a varied breadth and quality of dietary resources [12,[26][27][28][29]. Exotic plant species can make up a substantial portion of the floral resources found in urban areas [30]. Although some exotic species common within vacant lots have been found to be highly attractive [31,32], these resources may also be most suitable for polylectic [33] and/or exotic bees [31]. Urban agroecosystems are likely to have a wider breadth of floral resources, including food crops, native and exotic ornamentals, and many of the same weedy species found in vacant lots. Adding flowering resources, principally native species aimed at supporting pollinators and other beneficial insects, increases available nectar and pollen resources [34] and results in a greater richness and ...

No abstract

Experimentation has been the cornerstone of much of integrated pest management (IPM) research. Here, we aim to open a discussion on the possible merits of expanding the use of observational studies, and in particular the use of data from farmers or private pest management consultants in "ecoinformatics" studies, as tools that might complement traditional, experimental research. The manifold advantages of experimentation are widely appreciated: experiments provide definitive inferences regarding causal relationships between key variables, can produce uniform and high-quality data sets, and are highly flexible in the treatments that can be evaluated. Perhaps less widely considered, however, are the possible disadvantages of experimental research. Using the yield-impact study to focus the discussion, we address some reasons why observational or ecoinformatics approaches might be attractive as complements to experimentation. A survey of the literature suggests that many contemporary yield-impact studies lack sufficient statistical power to resolve the small, but economically important, effects on crop yield that shape pest management decision-making by farmers. Ecoinformatics-based data sets can be substantially larger than experimental data sets and therefore hold out the promise of enhanced power. Ecoinformatics approaches also address problems at the spatial and temporal scales at which farming is conducted, can achieve higher levels of "external validity," and can allow researchers to efficiently screen many variables during the initial, exploratory phases of research projects. Experimental, observational, and ecoinformatics-based approaches may, if used together, provide more efficient solutions to problems in pest management than can any single approach, used in isolation.

Rich pollinator assemblages are documented in some cities despite habitat fragmentation and degradation, suggesting that urban areas have potential as pollinator refuges. To inform urban bee conservation, we assessed local‐ and landscape‐scale drivers of bee community composition and foraging within vacant lots of Cleveland, Ohio, USA. Cleveland is a shrinking city, a type of urban area that has an over‐abundance of vacated greenspaces as a result of population loss and subsequent demolition of abandoned infrastructure. As such, Cleveland represents over 350 post‐industrial cities worldwide that are all promising locations for bee conservation. Across a network of 56 residential vacant lots (each ~30 m × 12 m), we established seven unique habitats, including seeded native prairies, to investigate how vegetation management and landscape context at a 1,500 m radius influenced urban bee communities. We assessed the distribution of several bee functional traits, diversity and abundance with pan and malaise traps. Foraging frequency was determined with plant–pollinator interaction networks derived from vacuum collections of bees at flowers. We observed higher bee richness and increased abundance of smaller sized bees as the size of surrounding greenspace patches increased within a 1,500 m radius landscape buffer. Within habitats, seeded treatments had no effect on bees but greater plant biomass and shorter vegetation were correlated with increased bee richness and abundance. Plant–pollinator interaction networks were dominated by spontaneous non‐native vegetation, illustrating that this forage supports urban bees. Synthesis and applications. Our study indicates that proximity to larger greenspaces within an urban landscape promotes overall bee richness and increased occurrence of smaller bee species within residential vacant lots. While we did not observe our seeded native plants enhancing the bee community, native wildflowers were still establishing during the study and may have a greater influence when blooming at higher densities. Importantly, spontaneous non‐native vegetation provided the majority of urban bee's forage. Thus, vacant land that is minimally managed and vegetated with what many consider undesirable ‘weeds’ provides valuable habitat for bee conservation in cities.