Pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented set-aside fields in agriculture

IF 6 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Carly L. McGregor , Tyler T. Kelly , Juli Carrillo , Claire Kremen
{"title":"Pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented set-aside fields in agriculture","authors":"Carly L. McGregor ,&nbsp;Tyler T. Kelly ,&nbsp;Juli Carrillo ,&nbsp;Claire Kremen","doi":"10.1016/j.agee.2025.109682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Agriculture relies on pollinators, yet paradoxically, agricultural practices can harm them, including through habitat simplification. The diversification of agricultural landscapes may support pollinators by providing varied foraging and habitat resources. Grassland set-asides are often established on farms to restore soils for crop productivity, and may have the co-benefit of providing resources for pollinators. Set-asides may also be supplemented with forbs for enhanced pollinator benefit, but few studies have investigated pollinator use of these fields compared to crop fields, and across set-aside management practices. Here, we use passive traps and net surveys to assess the flower-visiting insect community in three farm field types; traditional (grass-dominant) set-asides, forb-supplemented set-asides, and non-pollinator-dependent crop reference fields, to evaluate the potential for each to provide resources for pollinators. We found higher abundance of putative wild pollinators in forb-supplemented set-asides compared to crop fields, and higher species diversity in traditional set-asides compared to crop fields. Bumble bees were more abundant in both set-aside types compared to crops, while honey bees visited flowers in forb-supplemented sites the most. The diversity of wild pollinators and abundance of bumble bees in traditional set-asides occurred despite their lack of floral supplementation, suggesting that they may support pollinators by providing other resources (i.e., nesting or graminoid nutritional resources). We demonstrate that pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented grassland set-asides more than non-pollinator-dependent crop fields. Future studies to elucidate specific resource use by pollinators in set-asides across management types are needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7512,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment","volume":"388 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880925002142","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agriculture relies on pollinators, yet paradoxically, agricultural practices can harm them, including through habitat simplification. The diversification of agricultural landscapes may support pollinators by providing varied foraging and habitat resources. Grassland set-asides are often established on farms to restore soils for crop productivity, and may have the co-benefit of providing resources for pollinators. Set-asides may also be supplemented with forbs for enhanced pollinator benefit, but few studies have investigated pollinator use of these fields compared to crop fields, and across set-aside management practices. Here, we use passive traps and net surveys to assess the flower-visiting insect community in three farm field types; traditional (grass-dominant) set-asides, forb-supplemented set-asides, and non-pollinator-dependent crop reference fields, to evaluate the potential for each to provide resources for pollinators. We found higher abundance of putative wild pollinators in forb-supplemented set-asides compared to crop fields, and higher species diversity in traditional set-asides compared to crop fields. Bumble bees were more abundant in both set-aside types compared to crops, while honey bees visited flowers in forb-supplemented sites the most. The diversity of wild pollinators and abundance of bumble bees in traditional set-asides occurred despite their lack of floral supplementation, suggesting that they may support pollinators by providing other resources (i.e., nesting or graminoid nutritional resources). We demonstrate that pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented grassland set-asides more than non-pollinator-dependent crop fields. Future studies to elucidate specific resource use by pollinators in set-asides across management types are needed.
传粉者在农业中既利用传统的农田,也利用牧草补充的农田
农业依赖传粉媒介,但矛盾的是,农业做法可能会损害它们,包括通过栖息地简化。农业景观的多样化可能通过提供多样化的觅食和生境资源来支持传粉媒介。通常在农场建立草地隔离区,以恢复土壤以提高作物生产力,并可能具有为传粉媒介提供资源的共同利益。隔离区也可以补充植物以提高传粉者的效益,但很少有研究将这些田地的传粉者利用与农田进行比较,并在隔离区管理实践中进行调查。本文采用被动式诱捕法和网调查法对3种农田类型的访花昆虫群落进行了调查;传统(草为主)隔离区、牧草补充隔离区和不依赖传粉媒介的作物参考田,评估每种隔离区为传粉媒介提供资源的潜力。我们发现,与作物地相比,在添加了牧草的隔离带中,假定的野生传粉媒介的丰度更高,而在传统隔离带中,物种多样性高于作物地。与作物相比,大黄蜂在这两种搁置类型中都更丰富,而蜜蜂在有植物补充的地方访问花朵最多。野生传粉者的多样性和大黄蜂的丰度在传统的放养区出现,尽管它们缺乏花卉补充,这表明它们可能通过提供其他资源(即筑巢或禾草类营养资源)来支持传粉者。我们证明,传粉媒介比非传粉媒介依赖的农田更利用传统和牧草补充的草地。未来的研究需要阐明不同管理类型的传粉媒介在隔离区的具体资源利用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
392
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment publishes scientific articles dealing with the interface between agroecosystems and the natural environment, specifically how agriculture influences the environment and how changes in that environment impact agroecosystems. Preference is given to papers from experimental and observational research at the field, system or landscape level, from studies that enhance our understanding of processes using data-based biophysical modelling, and papers that bridge scientific disciplines and integrate knowledge. All papers should be placed in an international or wide comparative context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信