-
Global Change Biology Feb 2020Natural hazards are naturally occurring physical events that can impact human welfare both directly and indirectly, via shocks to ecosystems and the services they... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Natural hazards are naturally occurring physical events that can impact human welfare both directly and indirectly, via shocks to ecosystems and the services they provide. Animal-mediated pollination is critical for sustaining agricultural economies and biodiversity, yet stands to lose both from present exposure to natural hazards, and future climate-driven shifts in their distribution, frequency, and intensity. In contrast to the depth of knowledge available for anthropogenic-related threats, our understanding of how naturally occurring extreme events impact pollinators and pollination has not yet been synthesized. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the potential impacts of natural hazards on pollinators and pollination in natural and cultivated systems. From a total of 117 studies (74% of which were observational), we found evidence of community and population-level impacts to plants and pollinators from seven hazard types, including climatological (extreme heat, fire, drought), hydrological (flooding), meteorological (hurricanes), and geophysical (volcanic activity, tsunamis). Plant and pollinator response depended on the type of natural hazard and level of biological organization observed; 19% of cases reported no significant impact, whereas the majority of hazards held consistent negative impacts. However, the effects of fire were mixed, but taxa specific; meta-analysis revealed that bee abundance and species richness tended to increase in response to fire, differing significantly from the mainly negative response of Lepidoptera. Building from this synthesis, we highlight important future directions for pollination-focused natural hazard research, including the need to: (a) advance climate change research beyond static "mean-level" changes by better incorporating "shock" events; (b) identify impacts at higher levels of organization, including ecological networks and co-evolutionary history; and (c) address the notable gap in crop pollination services research-particularly in developing regions of the world. We conclude by discussing implications for safeguarding pollination services in the face of global climate change.
Topics: Animals; Bees; Biodiversity; Climate Change; Ecosystem; Fires; Humans; Pollination
PubMed: 31621147
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14840 -
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal... Jun 2022Despite recent advances in understanding the role of biodiversity in ecosystem-service provision, the links between the health of ecosystem-service providers and human... (Review)
Review
Despite recent advances in understanding the role of biodiversity in ecosystem-service provision, the links between the health of ecosystem-service providers and human health remain more uncertain. During the past decade, an increasing number of studies have argued for the positive impacts of healthy pollinator communities (defined as functionally and genetically diverse species assemblages that are sustained over time) on human health. Here, we begin with a systematic review of these impacts, finding only two studies that concomitantly quantified aspects of pollinator health and human health. Next, we identify relevant research relating to four pathways linking pollinator health and human health: nutrition, medicine provisioning, mental health and environmental quality. These benefits are obtained through improved pollination of nutritious crops and an estimated approximately 28 000 animal-pollinated medicinal plants; the provisioning of pollinator-derived products such as honey; the maintenance of green spaces and biocultural landscapes that improve mental health; and cleaner air, water and food resulting from pollinator-centred initiatives to reduce agrochemical use. We suggest that pollinator diversity could be a proxy for the benefits that landscapes provide to human health. This article is part of the theme issue 'Natural processes influencing pollinator health: from chemistry to landscapes'.
Topics: Animals; Biodiversity; Crops, Agricultural; Ecosystem; Humans; Pollination
PubMed: 35491592
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2021.0158 -
Environmental Research Oct 2023Synthetic pesticides (e.g. herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) are used widely in agriculture to protect crops from pests, weeds and disease. However, their use... (Review)
Review
Synthetic pesticides (e.g. herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) are used widely in agriculture to protect crops from pests, weeds and disease. However, their use also comes with a range of environmental concerns. One key concern is the effect of insecticides on non-target organisms such as bees, who provide pollination services for crops and wild plants. This systematic literature review quantifies the existing research on bees and insecticides broadly, and then focuses more specifically on non-neonicotinoid insecticides and non-honeybees. We find that articles on honeybees (Apis sp.) and insecticides account for 80% of all research, with all other bees combined making up 20%. Neonicotinoids were studied in 34% of articles across all bees and were the most widely studied insecticide class for non-honeybees overall, with almost three times as many studies than the second most studied class. Of non-neonicotinoid insecticide classes and non-honeybees, the most studied were pyrethroids and organophosphates followed by carbamates, and the most widely represented bee taxa were bumblebees (Bombus), followed by leaf-cutter bees (Megachile) and mason bees (Osmia). Research has taken place across several countries, with the highest numbers of articles from Brazil and the US, and with notable gaps from countries in Asia, Africa and Oceania. Mortality was the most studied effect type, while sub-lethal effects such as on behaviour were less studied. Few studies tested how the effect of insecticides were influenced by multiple pressures, such as climate change and co-occurring pesticides (cocktail effects). As anthropogenic pressures do not occur in isolation, we suggest that future research also addresses these knowledge gaps. Given the changing global patterns in insecticide use, and the increasing inclusion of both non-honeybees and sub-lethal effects in pesticide risk assessment, there is a need for expanding research beyond its current state to ensure a strong scientific evidence base for the development of risk assessment and associated policy.
Topics: Bees; Animals; Insecticides; Neonicotinoids; Pesticides; Pyrethrins; Fungicides, Industrial; Crops, Agricultural
PubMed: 37454798
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.116612 -
Neotropical Entomology Aug 2020Many studies have evaluated and categorized the pollination systems of plants in different regions. These studies resulted in the definition of new pollination systems,...
Many studies have evaluated and categorized the pollination systems of plants in different regions. These studies resulted in the definition of new pollination systems, such as that by small diverse insects (SDI). Although SDI systems are frequent in tropical communities, we know little about the species of plants and pollinators that compose these systems. This study synthesized knowledge of SDI systems through a systematic review of the literature, in order to characterize the composition of plants and pollinator species related to this pollination system. Most studies of SDI systems were carried out in tropical rainforest communities, and used a variety of terminologies and concepts. We found 362 plant species assigned to the SDI system, distributed in 76 families and 35 orders. These species are mainly trees and have inconspicuous greenish flowers, and most are hermaphroditic or dioecious. Few studies provided information on the composition of pollinators, which encompassed small and large insects; beetles, wasp, flies, and bees were the most frequent groups. We suggest adoption of the term "pollination system by diverse insects" instead of "small diverse insects." We discuss conceptual aspects and questions for studies with this pollination system.
Topics: Animals; Color; Flowers; Insecta; Plants; Pollination; Rainforest; Terminology as Topic
PubMed: 32578046
DOI: 10.1007/s13744-020-00779-6 -
PloS One 2019Bees and the pollination services they deliver are beneficial to both food crop production, and for reproduction of many wild plant species. Bee decline has stimulated...
Bees and the pollination services they deliver are beneficial to both food crop production, and for reproduction of many wild plant species. Bee decline has stimulated widespread interest in assessing hazards and risks to bees from the environment in which they live. While there is increasing knowledge on how the use of broad-spectrum insecticides in agricultural systems may impact bees, little is known about effects of other pesticides (or plant protection products; PPPs) such as herbicides and fungicides, which are used more widely than insecticides at a global scale. We adopted a systematic approach to review existing research on the potential impacts of fungicides and herbicides on bees, with the aim of identifying research approaches and determining knowledge gaps. While acknowledging that herbicide use can affect forage availability for bees, this review focussed on the potential impacts these compounds could have directly on bees themselves. We found that most studies have been carried out in Europe and the USA, and investigated effects on honeybees. Furthermore, certain effects, such as those on mortality, are well represented in the literature in comparison to others, such as sub-lethal effects. More studies have been carried out in the lab than in the field, and the impacts of oral exposure to herbicides and fungicides have been investigated more frequently than contact exposure. We suggest a number of areas for further research to improve the knowledge base on potential effects. This will allow better assessment of risks to bees from herbicides and fungicides, which is important to inform future management decisions around the sustainable use of PPPs.
Topics: Animals; Bees; Fungicides, Industrial; Herbicides; Life Cycle Stages; Research; Species Specificity
PubMed: 31821341
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225743 -
PeerJ 2020Plant reproduction is influenced by the net outcome of plant-herbivore and plant-pollinator interactions. While both herbivore impacts and pollinator impacts on plant...
BACKGROUND
Plant reproduction is influenced by the net outcome of plant-herbivore and plant-pollinator interactions. While both herbivore impacts and pollinator impacts on plant reproduction have been widely studied, few studies examine them in concert.
METHODOLOGY
Here, we review the contemporary literature that examines the net outcomes of herbivory and pollination on plant reproduction and the impacts of herbivores on pollination through damage to shared host plants using systematic review tools. The direct or indirect effects of herbivores on floral tissue and reported mechanisms were compiled including the taxonomic breadth of herbivores, plants and pollinators.
RESULTS
A total of 4,304 studies were examined producing 59 relevant studies for synthesis that reported both pollinator and herbivore measures. A total of 49% of studies examined the impact of direct damage to floral tissue through partial florivory while 36% of studies also examined the impact of vegetative damage on pollination through folivory, root herbivory, and stem damage. Only three studies examined the effects of both direct and indirect damage to pollination outcomes within the same study.
CONCLUSIONS
It is not unreasonable to assume that plants often sustain simultaneous forms of damage to different tissues and that the net effects can be assessed through differences in reproductive output. Further research that controls for other relative drivers of reproductive output but examines more than one pathway of damage simultaneously will inform our understanding of the mechanistic relevance of herbivore impacts on pollination and also highlight interactions between herbivores and pollinators through plants. It is clear that herbivory can impact plant fitness through pollination; however, the relative importance of direct and indirect damage to floral tissue on plant reproduction is still largely unknown.
PubMed: 32551190
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9049 -
The Science of the Total Environment Oct 2022Multiple stressors threaten bee health, a major one being pesticides. Bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides that can cause both lethal and sublethal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Multiple stressors threaten bee health, a major one being pesticides. Bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides that can cause both lethal and sublethal effects. Risk assessment and most research on bee health, however, focus on lethal individual effects. Here, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis that summarizes and re-interprets the available qualitative and quantitative information on the lethal, sublethal, and combined toxicity of a comprehensive range of pesticides on bees. We provide results (1970-2019) for multiple bee species (Bombus, Osmia, Megachile, Melipona, Partamona, Scaptotrigona), although most works focused on Apis mellifera L. (78 %). Our harmonised results document the lethal toxicity of pesticides in bees (n = 377 pesticides) and the types of sublethal testing methods and related effects that cause a sublethal effect (n = 375 sublethal experiments). We identified the most common combinations of pesticides and mode of actions tested, and summarize the experimental methods, magnitude of the interactions, and robustness of available data (n = 361 experiments). We provide open access searchable, comprehensive, and integrated list of pesticides and their levels causing lethal, sublethal, and combined effects. We report major data gaps related to pesticide's sublethal (71 %) and combined (e.g., ~99 %) toxicity. We identified pesticides and mode of actions of greatest concern in terms of sublethal (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, glyphosate; neonicotinoids) and combined (tau-fluvalinate combinations; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and neonicotinoids) effects. Although certain pesticides have faced regulatory restrictions in specific countries (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, neonicotinoids), most are still widely used worldwide (e.g., glyphosate). This work aims at facilitating the implementation of more comprehensive and harmonised research and risk assessments, considering sublethal and combined effects. To ensure safeguarding pollinators and the environment, we advocate for a more refined and holistic assessment that do not only focus on lethality but uses harmonised methods to test sublethal and relevant combinations.
Topics: Acetylcholinesterase; Animals; Bees; Insecticides; Neonicotinoids; Pesticides; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 35760183
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156857 -
Veterinary Medicine and Science Jul 2023Honey bees and honeycomb bees are very valuable for wild flowering plants and economically important crops due to their role as pollinators. However, these insects... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Honey bees and honeycomb bees are very valuable for wild flowering plants and economically important crops due to their role as pollinators. However, these insects confront many disease threats (viruses, parasites, bacteria and fungi) and large pesticide concentrations in the environment. Varroa destructor is the most prevalent disease that has had the most negative effects on the fitness and survival of different honey bees (Apis mellifera and A. cerana). Moreover, honey bees are social insects and this ectoparasite can be easily transmitted within and across bee colonies.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to provide a survey of the diversity and distribution of important bee infections and possible management and treatment options, so that honey bee colony health can be maintained.
METHODS
We used PRISMA guidelines throughout article selection, published between January 1960 and December 2020. PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Ovid databases were searched.
RESULTS
We have collected 132 articles and retained 106 articles for this study. The data obtained revealed that V. destructor and Nosema spp. were found to be the major pathogens of honey bees worldwide. The impact of these infections can result in the incapacity of forager bees to fly, disorientation, paralysis, and death of many individuals in the colony. We find that both hygienic and chemical pest management strategies must be implemented to prevent, reduce the parasite loads and transmission of pathogens. The use of an effective miticide (fluvalinate-tau, coumaphos and amitraz) now seems to be an essential and common practice required to minimise the impact of Varroa mites and other pathogens on bee colonies. New, alternative biofriendly control methods, are on the rise, and could be critical for maintaining honey bee hive health and improving honey productivity.
CONCLUSIONS
We suggest that critical health control methods be adopted globally and that an international monitoring system be implemented to determine honey bee colony safety, regularly identify parasite prevalence, as well as potential risk factors, so that the impact of pathogens on bee health can be recognised and quantified on a global scale.
Topics: Animals; Bees; Nosema; Pesticides; Varroidae; Animal Diseases
PubMed: 37335585
DOI: 10.1002/vms3.1194 -
Biological Reviews of the Cambridge... Aug 2019Approximately 25 years ago, ecologists became increasingly interested in the question of whether ongoing biodiversity loss matters for the functioning of ecosystems. As...
Approximately 25 years ago, ecologists became increasingly interested in the question of whether ongoing biodiversity loss matters for the functioning of ecosystems. As such, a new ecological subfield on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning (BEF) was born. This subfield was initially dominated by theoretical studies and by experiments in which biodiversity was manipulated, and responses of ecosystem functions such as biomass production, decomposition rates, carbon sequestration, trophic interactions and pollination were assessed. More recently, an increasing number of studies have investigated BEF relationships in non-manipulated ecosystems, but reviews synthesizing our knowledge on the importance of real-world biodiversity are still largely missing. I performed a systematic review in order to assess how biodiversity drives ecosystem functioning in both terrestrial and aquatic, naturally assembled communities, and on how important biodiversity is compared to other factors, including other aspects of community composition and abiotic conditions. The outcomes of 258 published studies, which reported 726 BEF relationships, revealed that in many cases, biodiversity promotes average biomass production and its temporal stability, and pollination success. For decomposition rates and ecosystem multifunctionality, positive effects of biodiversity outnumbered negative effects, but neutral relationships were even more common. Similarly, negative effects of prey biodiversity on pathogen and herbivore damage outnumbered positive effects, but were less common than neutral relationships. Finally, there was no evidence that biodiversity is related to soil carbon storage. Most BEF studies focused on the effects of taxonomic diversity, however, metrics of functional diversity were generally stronger predictors of ecosystem functioning. Furthermore, in most studies, abiotic factors and functional composition (e.g. the presence of a certain functional group) were stronger drivers of ecosystem functioning than biodiversity per se. While experiments suggest that positive biodiversity effects become stronger at larger spatial scales, in naturally assembled communities this idea is too poorly studied to draw general conclusions. In summary, a high biodiversity in naturally assembled communities positively drives various ecosystem functions. At the same time, the strength and direction of these effects vary highly among studies, and factors other than biodiversity can be even more important in driving ecosystem functioning. Thus, to promote those ecosystem functions that underpin human well-being, conservation should not only promote biodiversity per se, but also the abiotic conditions favouring species with suitable trait combinations.
Topics: Animals; Biodiversity; Biomass; Food Chain; Phylogeny; Soil
PubMed: 30724447
DOI: 10.1111/brv.12499 -
The Science of the Total Environment Nov 2022Global food production, food supply chains and food security are increasingly stressed by human population growth and loss of arable land, becoming more vulnerable to... (Review)
Review
Global food production, food supply chains and food security are increasingly stressed by human population growth and loss of arable land, becoming more vulnerable to anthropogenic and environmental perturbations. Numerous mutualistic and antagonistic species are interconnected with the cultivation of crops and livestock and these can be challenging to identify on the large scales of food production systems. Accurate identifications to capture this diversity and rapid scalable monitoring are necessary to identify emerging threats (i.e. pests and pathogens), inform on ecosystem health (i.e. soil and pollinator diversity), and provide evidence for new management practices (i.e. fertiliser and pesticide applications). Increasingly, environmental DNA (eDNA) is providing rapid and accurate classifications for specific organisms and entire species assemblages in substrates ranging from soil to air. Here, we aim to discuss how eDNA is being used for monitoring of agricultural ecosystems, what current limitations exist, and how these could be managed to expand applications into the future. In a systematic review we identify that eDNA-based monitoring in food production systems accounts for only 4 % of all eDNA studies. We found that the majority of these eDNA studies target soil and plant substrates (60 %), predominantly to identify microbes and insects (60 %) and are biased towards Europe (42 %). While eDNA-based monitoring studies are uncommon in many of the world's food production systems, the trend is most pronounced in emerging economies often where food security is most at risk. We suggest that the biggest limitations to eDNA for agriculture are false negatives resulting from DNA degradation and assay biases, as well as incomplete databases and the interpretation of abundance data. These require in silico, in vitro, and in vivo approaches to carefully design, test and apply eDNA monitoring for reliable and accurate taxonomic identifications. We explore future opportunities for eDNA research which could further develop this useful tool for food production system monitoring in both emerging and developed economies, hopefully improving monitoring, and ultimately food security.
Topics: Agriculture; Biodiversity; DNA Barcoding, Taxonomic; DNA, Environmental; Ecosystem; Environmental Monitoring; Fertilizers; Humans; Pesticides; Soil
PubMed: 35882340
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157556