Pollination services in the UK: How important are honeybees?

Breeze, Tom D.; Bailey, Alison; Balcombe, Kelvin; Potts, Simon G.

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2011.03.020

Cited by 329 publications

(258 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

231

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This ties in with accumulating recent literature on the relative benefits of wild bees and of commercial honey bees, as pollinators of natural habitats and urban spaces (Lowenstein et al 2015;Hausmann et al 2016). Wild bees are also vital, and often better than Apis, as crop pollinators, with the importance of honeybees often over-emphasised in the past (see Breeze et al 2011;Garibaldi et al 2013). For example, halictid bees are important for melon (Rodrigo-Gomez et al 2016) and watermelon (Garantonakis et al 2016), bumblebees are important for blueberries (Button and Elle 2014) and several wild bees are better than managed honeybees at pollinating apples (Mallinger and Gratton 2015), although it is only a few relatively common solitary bee species that are crucial across crops in general (Kleijn et al 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Insights from measuring pollen deposition: quantifying the pre-eminence of bees as flower visitors and effective pollinators

Willmer

Cunnold

Ballantyne

2017

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using our accumulated datasets from Kenyan savanna, Mediterranean garigue, UK gardens and heathland, involving 76 plants from 30 families, we present detailed data to quantify the superiority of bees as pollinators of most flowering plants when compared with other flower visitors. Bees provided the majority of visits to study species at all sites, and 33 of the 76 plants received more than 90% of their visits from bees. Furthermore, pollen deposition onto stigmas from single-visit events (SVD, a measure of pollination effectiveness) was significantly higher for bees than non-bees at all the four sites where a major proportion of the flora was sampled. Solitary bees, and also bumblebees in temperate habitats, were the best potential pollinators for most plants in this respect, and significantly out-performed honeybees. Only a few plants were well served by bombyliid flies, and fewer again by larger hoverflies, butterflies, or solitary wasps. Bees also achieved better matches of their visit timing to peak pollen availability (measured indirectly as peak SVD), and made much shorter visits to flowers than did non-bees, permitting a substantially greater visit frequency. Additionally, they deposited significantly lower levels of potentially deleterious heterospecific pollen on stigmas in heathland and Mediterranean garigue, though not in the UK garden with densely clustered high-diversity flowering, or in the Kenyan savanna site with particularly dispersed flowering patches and some specialist non-bee flowers. Our data provide a novel and quantified characterisation of the specific advantages of bees as flower visitors, and underline the need to conserve diverse bee communities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Insights from measuring pollen deposition: quantifying the pre-eminence of bees as flower visitors and effective pollinators

Willmer

Cunnold

Ballantyne

2017

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For some important pollinator‐dependent crops grown in the UK, such as apple, solitary bees are more efficient pollinators than honeybees (Delaplane, Mayer, & Mayer, 2000; Garratt et al., 2014). As the cultivation of crops that depend on insect pollination continues to expand (Aizen, Garibaldi, Cunningham, & Klein, 2008), the conservation of solitary bee communities on farmland is important; it is estimated that current honeybee populations are capable of supplying just 34% of the pollination service demand in the UK (Breeze, Bailey, Balcombe, & Potts, 2011). The effectiveness of current wildflower mixes in supporting solitary bee foraging in the UK landscape remains a key knowledge gap and one that this study aimed to address, for cavity‐nesting solitary bees specifically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flower preferences and pollen transport networks for cavity‐nesting solitary bees: Implications for the design of agri‐environment schemes

Gresty

Clare

Devey

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral foraging resources are valuable for pollinator conservation on farmland, and their provision is encouraged by agri‐environment schemes in many countries. Across Europe, wildflower seed mixtures are widely sown on farmland to encourage pollinators, but the extent to which key pollinator groups such as solitary bees exploit and benefit from these resources is unclear. We used high‐throughput sequencing of 164 pollen samples extracted from the brood cells of six common cavity‐nesting solitary bee species (Osmia bicornis, Osmia caerulescens, Megachile versicolor, Megachile ligniseca, Megachile centuncularis and Hylaeus confusus) which are widely distributed across the UK and Europe. We documented their pollen use across 19 farms in southern England, UK, revealing their forage plants and examining the structure of their pollen transport networks. Of the 32 plant species included currently in sown wildflower mixes, 15 were recorded as present within close foraging range of the bees on the study farms, but only Ranunculus acris L. was identified within the pollen samples. Rosa canina L. was the most commonly found of the 23 plant species identified in the pollen samples, suggesting that, in addition to providing a nesting resource for Megachile leafcutter bees, it may be an important forage plant for these species. Higher levels of connectance and nestedness were characteristic of pollen transport networks on farms with abundant floral resources, which may increase resilience to species loss. Our data suggest that plant species promoted currently by agri‐environment schemes are not optimal for solitary bee foraging. If a diverse community of pollinators is to be supported on UK and European farmland, additional species such as R. canina should be encouraged to meet the foraging requirements of solitary bees.

show abstract

“…In the past, most of the credit has been given to domestic honeybees. However, recent studies have shown that wild pollinators are more important contributors to global crop pollination than previously assumed (Breeze et al 2011). Estimates for the UK indicate that managed honeybees (Apis mellifera) pollinate approximately no more than one third of the crops.…”

Section: Box 1: Crops That Depend On Insect Pollinationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Pollinators and Global Food Security: the Need for Holistic Global Stewardship

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decades, both wild and domesticated insect pollinators are in dramatic decline, which puts at stake the existence of species, ecosystem resilience and global food security. Globally, 87 of major food crops depend on animal pollination. Together these account for 35 % of the world food production volume. Pollinator mediated crops are indispensable for essential micronutrients in the human diet. Many ornamental plants as well as crops for fibre, fodder, biofuels, timber and phytopharmaceuticals also depend on insect pollinators. This article aims to map the current situation of pollinators worldwide, with a focus on the critical role of pollinators in the human food chain and ecosystem sustainability, their intrinsic and extrinsic value, as well as the causes of their declines and the interventions needed to conserve them, in order to develop an argument for the importance of conserving and restoring pollinator populations and diversity. The present pollinator crisis threatens global and local food security, can worsen the problems of hidden hunger, erodes ecosystem resilience, and can destabilise ecosystems that form our life support system. An integrated approach that simultaneously addresses the key drivers is needed. This includes creation and restoration of floral and nesting resources, a global phase out of prophylactic use of neonicotinoids and fipronil, improvement of test protocols in authorisation of agrochemicals, and restoration and maintenance of independence in regulatory science. The authors argue that an international treaty for global pollinator stewardship and pollinator ecosystem restoration should be initiated in order to systemically counteract the current crisis. Food ethics (2016) 1:75-91

show abstract

Pollination services in the UK: How important are honeybees?

Cited by 329 publications

References 42 publications

Insights from measuring pollen deposition: quantifying the pre-eminence of bees as flower visitors and effective pollinators

Insights from measuring pollen deposition: quantifying the pre-eminence of bees as flower visitors and effective pollinators

Flower preferences and pollen transport networks for cavity‐nesting solitary bees: Implications for the design of agri‐environment schemes

Pollinators and Global Food Security: the Need for Holistic Global Stewardship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About