Plant-pollinator interactions and bee functional diversity are driven by agroforests in rice-dominated landscapes

Hass, Annika L.; Liese, Bernhard; Heong, K. L.; Settele, Josef; Tscharntke, Teja; Westphal, Catrin

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.019

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Chaplin‐Kramer et al, ; Rusch et al, ; Tscharntke et al, ). In contrast, land‐sharing approaches can conserve and restore functionally diverse pollinator communities, stabilizing pollination services within agricultural production areas (Hass et al, ).…”

Section: Land‐sharing For Provisioning Ecosystem Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…because of habitat loss) and to colonize novel suitable patches (Thomas, ). In tropical land‐sparing landscapes, this can be achieved by countryside elements, such as small forest patches on steep terrain, buffer vegetation along property boundaries or rivers and single trees (Hass et al, ; Kormann et al, ; Medina, Harvey, Sánchez Merlo, Vílchez, & Hernández, ; Mendenhall, Shields‐Estrada, Krishnaswami, & Daily, ). Likewise, live fences of planted trees provide important habitat and resources for wildlife in Central American cattle rangelands and improve connectivity across these often intensively managed landscapes (Harvey et al, ).…”

Section: Integrating Land‐sharing and Land‐sparing Strategies Into A mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Land‐sharing/‐sparing connectivity landscapes for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The land-sharing versus land-sparing debate recently stagnated, lacking an integrating perspective in agricultural landscapes as well as consideration of ecosystem services. Here, we argue that land-sharing (i.e. wildlife-friendly farming systems) and land-sparing (i.e. separation of high-yielding agriculture and natural habitats) are not mutually exclusive, as both are needed to balance management needs for the multifunctionality of agricultural landscapes.2. Land-sharing promotes ecosystem services in agricultural settings, thereby allowing for environmentally friendly production. Land set aside in protected areas by land-sparing is crucial for conservation of those species that are incompatible with agriculture.3. Importantly, as species move throughout the landscape and exploit different habitats, increased connectivity between environmentally friendly managed and protected areas is needed to (a) promote spillover of ecosystem service providers from land-sharing/-sparing measures to agricultural production and rescue service-providing species from extinction in hostile areas, (b) to facilitate immigration and counteract possible extinctions in spared habitats and (c) to conserve response diversity of species communities for ensuring resilience of ecosystem services in changing environments. 4. In conclusion, the successful management of multifunctional landscapes requires the combination of context-specific land-sharing and land-sparing measures within spatially well-connected landscape mosaics, resulting in land-sharing/sparing connectivity landscapes. K E Y W O R D S agriculture, landscape design, landscape management, land-sharing, land-sparing, multifunctionality, sustainability | 263 People and Nature GRASS et Al.

show abstract

Section: Land‐sharing For Provisioning Ecosystem Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Integrating Land‐sharing and Land‐sparing Strategies Into A mentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐sharing/‐sparing connectivity landscapes for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, most published studies report a positive relationship between landscape complexity and network stabilizing properties (reviewed by Ferreira, Boscolo, & Viana, ). For instance, Hass, Liese, et al () studied the effect of different land uses on pollination networks, concluding that agroforests were beneficial for pollination networks in rice‐dominated landscapes. Likewise, Schrader, Franzén, Sattler, Ferderer, and Westphal () report that plant–pollinator networks were more complex in sites surrounded by complex habitats.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interacting effects of landscape and management on plant–solitary bee networks in olive orchards

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Understanding how multi-scale environmental heterogeneity shapes the structure and functions of animal and plant communities is pivotal in agroecology. Our capacity to ensure the provision of ecosystem services (ES), the sustainability of agroecosystems and the efficiency of agri-environmental schemes (AES) relies on this knowledge.2. There is growing interest in how biodiversity and ES are affected by the interplay between landscape characteristics and agricultural management (e.g., intermediate landscape complexity hypothesis; ILCH). However, studies have typically focused on classical measures of community structure (e.g., species abundance, richness and biodiversity), tending to neglect the effects on the structure and stability of ecological networks and the increased risk of biotic homogenization (i.e., loss of β-diversity).3. In this work, we use bee trap nests to sample pollen-solitary bee mutualistic networks in 9 pairs of olive groves under different management regimes (conventional vs. organic) in a landscape complexity gradient in southern Spain. We analyse the mutualistic networks at farm level to test the ILCH and study how agricultural practices and landscape complexity interact to affect the properties of these networks. We also explore the effects on spatial biotic homogenization by performing multivariate analyses of the composition and abundance of bee-plant communities and their pairwise interactions. The results show that solitary bee-plant networks have greater complexity andstability on organic olive farms embedded in relatively heterogeneous landscapes.Differences from conventional management were higher in landscapes of intermediate complexity but were non-significant on olive farms located in simpler landscapes. β-diversity of bees, plants and their pairwise interactions was also greater on organic olive farms. 5. In conclusion, human-induced environmental heterogeneity interacts at different scales to shape plant-solitary bee networks in olive groves, which may have important implications for ES provision and the effectiveness of agri-environmental measures. K E Y W O R D Sbiotic homogenization, landscape structure, mutualistic networks, network complexity, organic farming, plant-pollinator interactions, trap nests, β-diversity | 2317Functional Ecology MARTÍNEZ-NÚÑEZ ET Al.

show abstract

“…Sann et al (2018a) could demonstrate that spatially and temporally variable rice crops in different stages and ratoon rice can sustain vital populations of egg parasitoids (Chalcidoidea) and thus high levels of biological control of important rice pests. Moreover, agroforests play an important role for the delivery of pollination services as they can provide diverse food resources and nesting sites and, therefore, enhance the species richness of bees (Hass et al 2018;Schrader et al 2018, this issue) and arthropod decomposers that break down plant materials (Magcale-Macandog et al 2018, this issue) potentially providing nutrients to adjacent rice fields. Additionally, plants are visited by more diverse bee species communities in structurally diverse "polyculture" than in "monoculture" rice fields, possibly leading to more stable pollination services in heterogeneous agro-ecosystems (Hass et al 2018, while on the other hand pollination may suffer from invasive Varroa mites which affect honeybees, Beaurepaire et al 2015).…”

Section: Regulating Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, agroforests play an important role for the delivery of pollination services as they can provide diverse food resources and nesting sites and, therefore, enhance the species richness of bees (Hass et al 2018;Schrader et al 2018, this issue) and arthropod decomposers that break down plant materials (Magcale-Macandog et al 2018, this issue) potentially providing nutrients to adjacent rice fields. Additionally, plants are visited by more diverse bee species communities in structurally diverse "polyculture" than in "monoculture" rice fields, possibly leading to more stable pollination services in heterogeneous agro-ecosystems (Hass et al 2018, while on the other hand pollination may suffer from invasive Varroa mites which affect honeybees, Beaurepaire et al 2015). Efforts to achieve sustainability in rice landscapes might focus on the interchange of species between rice paddies and adjacent wild areas, including consideration of rice paddies as habitat for endangered wildlife (Horgan et al 2018, this issue).…”

Section: Regulating Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rice ecosystem services in South-east Asia

Settele¹,

Heong²,

Kühn³

et al. 2018

Paddy Water Environ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant-pollinator interactions and bee functional diversity are driven by agroforests in rice-dominated landscapes

Cited by 34 publications

References 47 publications

Land‐sharing/‐sparing connectivity landscapes for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation

Land‐sharing/‐sparing connectivity landscapes for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation

Interacting effects of landscape and management on plant–solitary bee networks in olive orchards

Rice ecosystem services in South-east Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About