Authors
Christina M Kennedy, Eric Lonsdorf, Maile C Neel, Neal M Williams, Taylor H Ricketts, Rachael Winfree, Riccardo Bommarco, Claire Brittain, Alana L Burley, Daniel Cariveau, Luísa G Carvalheiro, Natacha P Chacoff, Saul A Cunningham, Bryan N Danforth, Jan‐Hendrik Dudenhöffer, Elizabeth Elle, Hannah R Gaines, Lucas A Garibaldi, Claudio Gratton, Andrea Holzschuh, Rufus Isaacs, Steven K Javorek, Shalene Jha, Alexandra M Klein, Kristin Krewenka, Yael Mandelik, Margaret M Mayfield, Lora Morandin, Lisa A Neame, Mark Otieno, Mia Park, Simon G Potts, Maj Rundlöf, Agustin Saez, Ingolf Steffan‐Dewenter, Hisatomo Taki, Blandina Felipe Viana, Catrin Westphal, Julianna K Wilson, Sarah S Greenleaf, Claire Kremen
Publication date
2013/5
Journal
Ecology letters
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
584-599
Description
Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local‐scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high‐quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high‐quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator …
Total citations
Scholar articles
CM Kennedy, E Lonsdorf, MC Neel, NM Williams… - Ecology letters, 2013