There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.

Wild and managed bees are well documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25-50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines.unmanaged pollinator | insect pollinator | fly | bee | beetle

No abstract

No abstract

1 Declining numbers in honeybees and various wild bee species pose a threat to global pollination services. The identification and quantification of the pollination service provided by different taxa within the pollinator guild is a prerequisite for the successful establishment of nature conservation and crop management regimes. 2 Wild bees and hoverflies are considered to be valuable pollinators in agricultural and natural systems. Although some information on pollination efficiency of individual pollinator species is available, comparative studies of both taxa at different densities are rare. In the present study, the efficiency of the solitary mason bee Osmia rufa and two hoverfly species (Eristalis tenax and Episyrphus balteatus) as pollinators of oilseed rape Brassica napus was examined in a standardized caged plant breeding regime. Honeybee Apis mellifera colonies were used as a reference pollinator taxon. 3 Yield parameters responded differently to pollinator density and identity. Fruit set and number of seeds per pod increased with increasing pollinator density, although these were stronger in the mason bee than the hoverfly treatment. Weight per 1000 seeds did not respond to any pollinator treatment, indicating that seed quality was not affected. Oilseed rape yield in the highest tested densities of both pollinator taxa resulted in yield values close to the efficiency of small honeybee colonies. 4 Hoverflies required approximately five-fold densities of the red mason bees to reach a similar fruit set and yield. Thus, mason bees are more efficient in plant breeding and managed pollination systems. Both natural pollinator taxa, however, are of potential value in open and closed crop production systems.