Dataset Information

How much flower-rich habitat is enough for wild pollinators? Answering a key policy question with incomplete knowledge.

ABSTRACT: In 2013, an opportunity arose in England to develop an agri-environment package for wild pollinators, as part of the new Countryside Stewardship scheme launched in 2015. It can be understood as a 'policy window', a rare and time-limited opportunity to change policy, supported by a narrative about pollinator decline and widely supported mitigating actions. An agri-environment package is a bundle of management options that together supply sufficient resources to support a target group of species. This paper documents information that was available at the time to develop such a package for wild pollinators. Four questions needed answering: (1) Which pollinator species should be targeted? (2) Which resources limit these species in farmland? (3) Which management options provide these resources? (4) What area of each option is needed to support populations of the target species? Focussing on wild bees, we provide tentative answers that were used to inform development of the package. There is strong evidence that floral resources can limit wild bee populations, and several sources of evidence identify a set of agri-environment options that provide flowers and other resources for pollinators. The final question could only be answered for floral resources, with a wide range of uncertainty. We show that the areas of some floral resource options in the basic Wild Pollinator and Farmland Wildlife Package (2% flower-rich habitat and 1 km flowering hedgerow), are sufficient to supply a set of six common pollinator species with enough pollen to feed their larvae at lowest estimates, using minimum values for estimated parameters where a range was available. We identify key sources of uncertainty, and stress the importance of keeping the Package flexible, so it can be revised as new evidence emerges about how to achieve the policy aim of supporting pollinators on farmland.

SUBMITTER: Dicks LV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4737402 | biostudies-other | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How much flower-rich habitat is enough for wild pollinators? Answering a key policy question with incomplete knowledge.

Dicks Lynn V LV Baude Mathilde M Roberts Stuart P M SP Phillips James J Green Mike M Carvell Claire C

Ecological entomology. 20150702 Insects and Ecosystem Services 28th Symposium of the Ro

In 2013, an opportunity arose in England to develop an agri-environment package for wild pollinators, as part of the new Countryside Stewardship scheme launched in 2015. It can be understood as a 'policy window', a rare and time-limited opportunity to change policy, supported by a narrative about pollinator decline and widely supported mitigating actions. An agri-environment package is a bundle of management options that together supply sufficient resources to support a target group of species. ...[more]

PMID: 26877581

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is increasing evidence that farmers in many areas are achieving below maximum yields due to insufficient pollination. Practical and effective approaches are needed to maintain wild pollinator populations within agroecosystems so they can deliver critical pollination services that underpin crop production. We established nesting and wildflower habitat interventions in 24 UK apple orchards and measured effects on flower-visiting insects and the pollination they provide, exploring how this was affected by landscape context. We quantified the extent of pollination deficits and assessed whether the management of wild pollinators can reduce deficits and deliver improved outcomes for growers over 3 years. Wildflower interventions increased solitary bee numbers visiting apple flowers by over 20%, but there was no effect of nesting interventions. Other pollinator groups were influenced by both local and landscape-scale factors, with bumblebees and hoverflies responding to the relative proportion of semi-natural habitat at larger spatial scales (1000 m), while honeybees and other flies responded at 500 m or less. By improving fruit number and quality, pollinators contributed more than £16 k per hectare. However, deficits (where maximum potential was not being reached due to a lack of pollination) were recorded and the extent of these varied across orchards, and from year to year, with a 22% deficit in output in the worst (equivalent to ~£14 k/ha) compared to less than 3% (equivalent to ~£2 k/ha) in the best year. Although no direct effect of our habitat interventions on deficits in gross output was observed, initial fruit set and seed set deficits were reduced by abundant bumblebees, and orchards with a greater abundance of solitary bees saw lower deficits in fruit size. The abundance of pollinators in apple orchards is influenced by different local and landscape factors that interact and vary between years. Consequently, pollination, and the extent of economic output deficits, also vary between orchards and years. We highlight how approaches, including establishing wildflower areas and optimizing the ratio of cropped and non-cropped habitats can increase the abundance of key apple pollinators and improve outcomes for growers.

Project description:Agricultural intensification and associated loss of high-quality habitats are key drivers of insect pollinator declines. With the aim of decreasing the environmental impact of agriculture, the 2014 EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) defined a set of habitat and landscape features (Ecological Focus Areas: EFAs) farmers could select from as a requirement to receive basic farm payments. To inform the post-2020 CAP, we performed a European-scale evaluation to determine how different EFA options vary in their potential to support insect pollinators under standard and pollinator-friendly management, as well as the extent of farmer uptake.A structured Delphi elicitation process engaged 22 experts from 18 European countries to evaluate EFAs options. By considering life cycle requirements of key pollinating taxa (i.e. bumble bees, solitary bees and hoverflies), each option was evaluated for its potential to provide forage, bee nesting sites and hoverfly larval resources.EFA options varied substantially in the resources they were perceived to provide and their effectiveness varied geographically and temporally. For example, field margins provide relatively good forage throughout the season in Southern and Eastern Europe but lacked early-season forage in Northern and Western Europe. Under standard management, no single EFA option achieved high scores across resource categories and a scarcity of late season forage was perceived.Experts identified substantial opportunities to improve habitat quality by adopting pollinator-friendly management. Improving management alone was, however, unlikely to ensure that all pollinator resource requirements were met. Our analyses suggest that a combination of poor management, differences in the inherent pollinator habitat quality and uptake bias towards catch crops and nitrogen-fixing crops severely limit the potential of EFAs to support pollinators in European agricultural landscapes. Policy Implications. To conserve pollinators and help protect pollination services, our expert elicitation highlights the need to create a variety of interconnected, well-managed habitats that complement each other in the resources they offer. To achieve this the Common Agricultural Policy post-2020 should take a holistic view to implementation that integrates the different delivery vehicles aimed at protecting biodiversity (e.g. enhanced conditionality, eco-schemes and agri-environment and climate measures). To improve habitat quality we recommend an effective monitoring framework with target-orientated indicators and to facilitate the spatial targeting of options collaboration between land managers should be incentivised.

Project description:PurposeThe mechanisms by which depressive symptoms negatively affect clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) remain poorly understood. Previous interventions that have attempted to treat depressive symptoms in patients with CAD to improve their clinical outcomes have been disappointing. Our objectives were, among a cohort of CAD patients, to evaluate the impact of depressive symptoms over time, controlling for comorbidity, in determining both successful long-term lifestyle change (ie, increased physical activity), and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality outcomes. In addition, we examined the impact of physical activity changes over time on 2 known mediators of cardiovascular morbidity: parasympathetic tone and inflammation.MethodsClinical data were previously collected (2004-2006) from 242 elective/urgent coronary angioplasty patients who participated in a prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a behavioral intervention versus an educational control to motivate physical activity over 12 months. Exclusion criteria included: (1) inability to walk; (2) enrollment in other risk-reduction trials; (3) non-English speaking; and (4) lack of cardiologist's permission to increase physical activity. Participants were assessed every 2 months for interval clinical events and physical activity. In addition, biomarkers were collected at baseline and at 12 months in a subset of 54 participants; these biomarkers included low-frequency heart rate variability (lfHRV), high-frequency heart rate variability (hfHRV), serum C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and salivary cortisol.FindingsThe mean age of participants was 63 years and 30% were female. Overall, 37% had high depressive symptoms at baseline. Patients with high depressive symptoms who achieved an increase in physical activity of ≥336 kilocalories(kcal)/week by 12 months had significantly lower rates of cardiovascular morbidity/mortality (5.1% vs. 21.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.20, [95% CI, 0.04-0.98]; P = 0.03). In a multivariate model examining cardiovascular morbidity/mortality in patients with high depressive symptoms, an increase in physical activity of ≥336 kcal/week reduced the risk of new cardiovascular morbidity/mortality (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.02-0.81]; P < 0.03), and comorbidity increased the risk (OR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.18-2.13]; P = 0.002). In a generalized structural equation model, increasing physical activity by ≥336 kcal/week decreased the risk of complications, and comorbidity increased the risk. Furthermore, increasing physical activity (≥336 kcal/week) predicted an increase in hfHRV, a marker of parasympathetic tone, and the increase in hfHRV predicted a reduction in the proinflammatory mediators interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein.ImplicationsThis study found a threshold in physical activity in CAD patients with depressive symptoms that is associated with a decrease in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Exercise maintenance at this level may improve clinical outcomes via enhanced parasympathetic tone and decreased inflammation. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00248846.

Dataset Information

How much flower-rich habitat is enough for wild pollinators? Answering a key policy question with incomplete knowledge.

Publications

How much flower-rich habitat is enough for wild pollinators? Answering a key policy question with incomplete knowledge.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets