Abstract:Hedgerows, flowering strips, and natural areas that are adjacent to agricultural land have been shown to benefit crop production, via the provision of insect pollinators that pollinate crops. However, we do not yet know the extent to which bee habitat in the form of urban gardens might contribute to pollination services in surrounding crops. We explored whether gardens might provision pollinators to adjacent agricultural areas by sampling bees from gardens in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area, and estimat… Show more
“…Within West African countries urban growth and agricultural intensification can trigger changes in biodiversity leading to either a homogenization or a reduction of important insect communities affecting the ecosystem service of pollination [35][36][37][38][39]. The fact that urban farming households in Ouagadougou were highly specialized in the cultivation and marketing of crops which often rely substantially upon insect pollination and from which they earn most of their total household income, made these households vulnerable to loss of pollination services by insects.…”
Urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) in West African countries is developing rapidly in response to population growth and changing consumer preferences. Furthermore, UPA offers opportunities to secure income and social integration for the urban poor. However, little is known about household (HH) income security effects of the ongoing shift in UPA land use from crops that do not rely on insect pollinators for fruit development (e.g., sorghum and millet) to pollinator-dependent crops. In our study we developed a Household Vulnerability Index (HVI) for 224 HHs along a rural–urban gradient of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. The HVI indicates to which degree total HH revenue could be affected by a decline in insect pollinators. HH specific relative reduction of agricultural revenue ranged from 0 to −0.83, a reduction in HHs’ revenue of up to 83%, depending on the crops’ level of pollinator dependency. Half of the studied HHs (n = 108) showed an HVI of 0 and remained unaffected by a decline in pollinators. Nevertheless, mean HVI was highest for urban HHs; making these HHs most vulnerable for loss of pollination services. As in urban areas changes in insect-mediated pollination services are expected, the development of resilient UPA systems must consider “pollinator-friendly” landscape management.
“…Within West African countries urban growth and agricultural intensification can trigger changes in biodiversity leading to either a homogenization or a reduction of important insect communities affecting the ecosystem service of pollination [35][36][37][38][39]. The fact that urban farming households in Ouagadougou were highly specialized in the cultivation and marketing of crops which often rely substantially upon insect pollination and from which they earn most of their total household income, made these households vulnerable to loss of pollination services by insects.…”
Urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) in West African countries is developing rapidly in response to population growth and changing consumer preferences. Furthermore, UPA offers opportunities to secure income and social integration for the urban poor. However, little is known about household (HH) income security effects of the ongoing shift in UPA land use from crops that do not rely on insect pollinators for fruit development (e.g., sorghum and millet) to pollinator-dependent crops. In our study we developed a Household Vulnerability Index (HVI) for 224 HHs along a rural–urban gradient of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. The HVI indicates to which degree total HH revenue could be affected by a decline in insect pollinators. HH specific relative reduction of agricultural revenue ranged from 0 to −0.83, a reduction in HHs’ revenue of up to 83%, depending on the crops’ level of pollinator dependency. Half of the studied HHs (n = 108) showed an HVI of 0 and remained unaffected by a decline in pollinators. Nevertheless, mean HVI was highest for urban HHs; making these HHs most vulnerable for loss of pollination services. As in urban areas changes in insect-mediated pollination services are expected, the development of resilient UPA systems must consider “pollinator-friendly” landscape management.
“…Earlier research highlighted the potential of urban green spaces in terms of providing diverse nesting and forage sources to pollinators, which have decreased in rural areas [5,12]. On the other hand, the production of crops in peri-urban and urban areas may benefit from a pollination ecosystem service flow from these green refugia [13,15,54]. We add new findings on the potential of gardens to provide an enhanced quality of forage resources for pollinators [18,49].…”
Section: Rates Of Pesticide-contamination In Gardens Vs Orchardsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Though not recognized by gardeners as a priority, protecting the environment also includes protecting pollinator communities and the pollination ecosystem service to their crops [8,91]. Our findings contribute to a broader understanding of how urban gardening generates valuable environmental and social outputs in the cities [12][13][14][15][16]53,54].…”
Section: Rates Of Pesticide-contamination In Gardens Vs Orchardsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Bees spread from urban refugia to forage in peri-urban agricultural land, where they may contribute to crop production by pollination [11,13]. Their pollination service is also important for yields of urban crops, mainly in view of the expanding field of urban agriculture and increased demand for local and sustainable food in cities [13][14][15][16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Domestic gardens are defined as an area adjacent to a domestic dwelling [51]. Aside from the benefits in terms of human health and well-being, air cooling or support of biodiversity [12,13,[52][53][54], the misuse of fertilizers and pesticides in domestic gardens [55], out of any institutional control, may pose a risk to pollinators. On the other hand, a lower intensity of agrochemicals use in gardens than in the agricultural landscape could be expected on the basis of earlier research [18,49].…”
Domestic gardens supply pollinators with valuable habitats, but the risk of exposure to pesticides has been little investigated. Artificial nesting shelters of a red mason bee species (Osmia bicornis) were placed in two suburban gardens and two commercial fruit orchards to determine the contamination of forage sources by pesticides. Larval pollen provisions were collected from a total of 14 nests. They consisted mainly of pollen from oaks (65–100% weight/sample), Brassicaceae (≤34% w/s) and fruit trees (≤1.6% w/s). Overall, 30 pesticides were detected and each sample contained a mixture of 11–21 pesticide residues. The pesticide residues were significantly lower in garden samples than in orchard samples. The difference was attributed mainly to the abundant fungicides pyrimethanil and boscalid, which were sprayed in fruit orchards and were present on average at 1004 ppb and 648 ppb in orchard samples, respectively. The results suggested that pollinators can benefit from domestic gardens by foraging from floral sources less contaminated by pesticides than in adjacent croplands.
Like other urban green spaces, urban community gardens can act as biodiversity refugees, especially for small organisms like arthropods. In turn, arthropods can provide important ecosystem pest control services to these agroecosystems. Thus, an often‐asked question among urban gardeners is how to improve gardens and surrounding areas for natural enemies and associated pest control services. We examine how local vegetation and garden characteristics, as well as the surrounding landscape composition, affect ground‐dwelling beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae and Staphylinidae), spiders (Araneae), opilionids (Opiliones), and ladybird beetles (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), all of which are important predators. In the summer of 2019, we collected predators, vegetation, ground cover, and garden and landscape characteristic data from 10 community gardens in the city of Seattle, Washington. We found that different groups of natural enemies are associated with different environmental variables and at different scales; probably related to differences in their dispersal capabilities, habits, and diets. Floral variables (number of flowers and number of species in flower) had a negative effect on nonflying natural enemies (spiders, opilionids, and ground‐dwelling beetles), but not on flying ones (ladybird beetles). The only taxon that was significantly affected by a landscape‐scale variable was Opiliones, the only group examined that exclusively disperses by ground. Our results show contrasting results to similar studies in different regions and highlight the need to expand the taxa and regions of study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.