Most of the world's crops depend on pollinators, so declines in both managed and wild bees raise concerns about food security. However, the degree to which insect pollination is actually limiting current crop production is poorly understood, as is the role of wild species (as opposed to managed honeybees) in pollinating crops, particularly in intensive production areas. We established a nationwide study to assess the extent of pollinator limitation in seven crops at 131 locations situated across major crop-producing areas of the USA. We found that five out of seven crops showed evidence of pollinator limitation. Wild bees and honeybees provided comparable amounts of pollination for most crops, even in agriculturally intensive regions. We estimated the nationwide annual production value of wild pollinators to the seven crops we studied at over $1.5 billion; the value of wild bee pollination of all pollinator-dependent crops would be much greater. Our findings show that pollinator declines could translate directly into decreased yields or production for most of the crops studied, and that wild species contribute substantially to pollination of most study crops in major crop-producing regions.

Supporting ecosystem services and conserving biodiversity may be compatible goals, but there is concern that service‐focused interventions mostly benefit a few common species. We use a spatially replicated, multiyear experiment in four agricultural settings to test if enhancing habitat adjacent to crops increases wild bee diversity and abundance on and off crops. We found that enhanced field edges harbored more taxonomically and functionally abundant, diverse, and compositionally different bee communities compared to control edges. Enhancements did not increase the abundance or diversity of bees visiting crops, indicating that the supply of pollination services was unchanged following enhancement. We find that actions to promote crop pollination improve multiple dimensions of biodiversity, underscoring their conservation value, but these benefits may not be spilling over to crops. More work is needed to identify the conditions that promote effective co‐management of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

No abstract

No abstract

In sequentially planted oat stands, the cereal leaf beetle (CLB), Oulema melanopus (L.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Lemini), is found in greater numbers, and lays more eggs, on later planted (younger) oats (Avena sativa L.) (Poaceae). Plant characteristics that could explain this ovipositional preference were examined in a series of experiments. Cage and open field whole plant preference tests confirmed the attraction of ovipositing females to younger oats. A cage effect illustrated the role of plant architecture (plant height) in CLB host selection. Two multiple‐choice and one no‐choice excised leaf experiments determined that characteristics of individual leaves associated with leaf insertion level (leaf number from base to apex) and age influence ovipositional site selection. Leaves of higher insertion level have higher nitrogen content, but fewer eggs are laid on those leaves. Two experiments examining the interaction between total leaf nitrogen and leaf insertion level showed that only leaf insertion level affected oviposition choice. Published literature suggests variation in secondary plant compounds cannot explain O. melanopus ovipositional preference among leaves. Grass leaves of higher insertion level have more extensively developed cells associated with tissue toughness and hardness. The data and supporting literature suggest tissue toughness and hardness are deterring oviposition on oat leaves of higher insertion level. However, newly eclosed larvae are able to feed on leaves usually avoided as oviposition sites. The explanation for this result may be a lack of correlation between host suitability and ovipositional preference.