Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Small forest patches as pollinator habitat: oases in an agricultural desert?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Small forest fragments are often the most abundant type of semi-natural habitat in intensive agricultural landscapes. Wild pollinators can use these forest patches as nesting or foraging habitat. However, the importance of small forest fragments as pollinator habitat has been neglected so far.

Objectives

We evaluated the role of these forest patches as pollinator habitat, focusing on the effect of nesting and foraging resources, both at a local and at a landscape scale.

Methods

Pollinators were sampled with pan traps in 78 forest patches, spread over five study regions in Northwestern Europe. We evaluated effect of forest and landscape characteristics on bee and hoverfly species richness, diversity and activity-abundance.

Results

We showed that the bee community is influenced by both microsite conditions and landscape characteristics. Species richness and activity-abundance were higher when suitable nesting resources, such as sloped terrain and bare soil were available. This suggests that forest edges are important in providing nesting sites, but that most species forage in different habitats. Hoverfly species richness was higher in old forest fragments. This relation was mainly caused by the presence of forest specialist hoverflies in old forest fragments.

Conclusions

Small forest fragments in agricultural landscapes can harbour a diverse pollinator community. Increasing the amount of nesting habitat, such as bare soil and sloped terrains is expected to have beneficial effects on the bee community, whereas older forest fragments should be conserved to sustain a rich hoverfly community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberdi I, Condés S, Martínez-Millán J (2010) Review of monitoring and assessing ground vegetation biodiversity in national forest inventories. Environ Monit Assess 164:649–676

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey S, Requier F, Nusillard B, Roberts SPM, Potts SG, Bouget C (2014) Distance from forest edge affects bee pollinators in oilseed rape fields. Ecol Evol 4:370–380

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Biesmeijer JC, Roberts SPM, Reemer M, Ohlemüller R, Edwards M, Peeters T, Schaffers AP, Potts SG, Kleukers R, Thomas CD, Settele J, Kunin WE (2006) Parallel declines in pollinator and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science 313:351–354

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart SHM, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JPW, Almond REA, Baillie JEM, Bomhard B, Brown C, Brunet J, Carpenter KE, Carr GM, Chanson J, Chenery AM, Csirke J, Davidson NC, Dentener F, Foster M, Galli A, Galloway JN, Genovesi P, Gregory RD, Hockings M, Kapos V, Lamarque J-F, Leverington F, Loh J, McGeoch MA, McRae L, Minasyan A, Morcillo MH, Oldfield TEE, Pauly D, Quader S, Revenga C, Sauer JR, Skolnik B, Spear D, Stanwell-Smith D, Stuart SN, Symes A, Tierney M, Tyrrell TD, Vie J-C, Watson R (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328:1164–1168

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell JW, Hanula JL (2007) Efficiency of Malaise traps and colored pan traps for collecting flower visiting insects from three forested ecosystems. J Insect Conserv 11:399–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowgill SE, Wratten SD, Sotherton NW (1993) The selective use of floral resources by the hoverfly Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae) on farmland. Ann Appl Biol 122:223–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranmer L, McCollin D, Ollerton J (2012) Landscape structure influences pollinator movements and directly affects plant reproductive success. Oikos 121:562–568

    Google Scholar 

  • Droege S, Tepedino VJ, Lebuhn G, Link W, Minckley RL, Chen Q, Conrad C (2010) Spatial patterns of bee captures in North American bowl trapping surveys. Insect Conserv Divers 3:15–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Farwig N, Bailey D, Bochud E, Herrmann JD, Kindler E, Reusser N, Schüepp C, Schmidt-Entling MH (2009) Isolation from forest reduces pollination, seed predation and insect scavenging in Swiss farmland. Landscape Ecol 24:919–927

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontaine C, Dajoz I, Meriguet J, Loreau M (2006) Functional diversity of plant-pollinator interaction webs enhances the persistence of plant communities. PLoS Biol 4:e1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Garratt MPD, Breeze TD, Jenner N, Polce C, Biesmeijer JC, Potts SG (2014) Avoiding a bad apple: Insect pollination enhances fruit quality and economic value. Agric Ecosyst Environ 184:34–40

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifyinf biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundel R, Jean RP, Frohnapple KJ, Glowacki GA, Scott PE, Pavlovic NB (2010) Floral and nesting resources, habitat structure and fire influence bee distribution across an open-forest gradient. Ecol Appl 20:1678–1692

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heneberg P, Bogusch P, Řehounek J (2013) Sandpits provide critical refuge for bees and wasps (Hymenoptera: Apocrita). J Insect Conserv 17:473–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland JD, Bert DG, Fahrig L, Holland JD, Bert DG, Fahrig L (2004) Determining the spatial scale of species’ response to habitat. Bioscience 54:227–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Holzschuh A, Steffan-dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2009) Grass strip corridors in agricultural landscapes enhance nest-site colonization by solitary wasps. Ecol Appl 19:123–132

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jauker F, Bondarenko B, Becker HC, Steffan-Dewenter I (2012) Pollination efficiency of wild bees and hoverflies provided to oilseed rape. Agric For Entomol 14:81–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Jauker F, Diekötter T, Schwarzbach F, Wolters V (2009) Pollinator dispersal in an agricultural matrix: opposing responses of wild bees and hoverflies to landscape structure and distance from main habitat. Landscape Ecol 24:547–555

    Google Scholar 

  • Jauker F, Wolters V (2008) Hover flies are efficient pollinators of oilseed rape. Oecologia 156:819–823

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi NK, Otieno M, Rajotte EG, Fleischer SJ, Biddinger DJ (2016) Proximity to woodland and landscape structure drives pollinator visitation in apple orchard ecosystem. Front Ecol Evol 4:1–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klein A-M, Vaissière BE, Cane JH, Steffan-Dewenter I, Cunningham SA, Kremen C, Tscharntke T (2007) Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc R Soc Biol Sci 274:303–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosior A, Celary W, Olejniczak P, Fijal J, Król W, Solarz W, Plonka P (2007) The decline of the bumble bees and cuckoo bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Bombini) of Western and Central Europe. Oryx 41:79–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson BMH, Kevan PG, Inouye DW (2001) Flies and flowers: taxonomic diversity of anthophiles and pollinators. Can Entomol 133:439–465

    Google Scholar 

  • McCollin D, Jackson JI, Bunce RGH, Barr CJ, Stuart R (2000) Hedgerows as habitat for woodland plants. J Environ Manag 60:77–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray TE, Kuhlmann M, Potts SG (2009) Conservation ecology of bees: populations, species and communities. Apidologie 40:211–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollerton J, Winfree R, Tarrant S (2011) How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120:321–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouin A, Sarthou J, Bouyjou B, Deconchat M, Lacombe J, Monteil C (2006) The species-area relationship in the hoverfly (Diptera, Syrphidae) communities of forest fragments in southern France. Ecography (Cop.) 29:183–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Vulliamy B, Dafni A, Ne’eman G, Willmer PG (2003) Linking bees and flowers: how do floral communities structure pollinator communities? Ecology 84:2628–2642

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Vulliamy B, Roberts S, O’Toole C, Dafni A, Ne’eman G, Willmer PG (2004) Nectar resource diversity organises flower-visitor community structure. Entomol Exp Appl 113:103–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Vulliamy B, Roberts SPM, O’Toole C, Dafni A, Ne’eman G, Willmer PG (2005) Role of nesting resources in organising diverse bee communities in a Mediterranean landscape. Ecol Entomol 30:78–85

    Google Scholar 

  • QGIS Development Team (2015) QGIS 2.16 Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.osgeo.org

  • Reemer M, Renema W, Van Steenis W, Zeegers T, Barendregt A, Smit JT, Van Veen MP, Van Steenis J, Van der Leij LJJM (2009) De Nederlandse zweefvliegen (Diptera, Syrphidae). Nederlandse Fauna 8. Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum Naturalis, KNNV Uitgeverij, European Invertebrate Survey Nederland, Leiden

  • Roulston TH, Goodell K (2011) The role of resources and risks in regulating wild bee populations. Annu Rev Entomol 56:293–312

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffers AP, Raemakers IP, Sykora KV, ter Braak CJF (2008) Arthropod assemblages are best predicted by plant species composition. Ecology 89:782–794

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheper J, Reemer M, van Kats R, Ozinga WA, van der Linden GTJ, Schaminée JHJ, Siepel H, Kleijn D (2014) Museum specimens reveal loss of pollen host plants as key factor driving wild bee decline in The Netherlands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(49):17552–17557

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schüepp C, Herrmann JD, Herzog F, Schmidt-Entling MH (2011) Differential effects of habitat isolation and landscape composition on wasps, bees, and their enemies. Oecologia 165:713–721

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield CS, Pindar A, Packer L, Kevan PG (2013) The potential of cleptoparasitic bees as indicator taxa for assessing bee communities. Apidologie 44:501–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuler RE, Roulston TH, Farris GE (2005) Farming practices influence wild pollinator populations on squash and pumpkin. J Econ Entomol 98:790–795

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sobek S, Tscharntke T, Scherber C, Schiele S, Steffan-Dewenter I (2009) Canopy vs. understory: does tree diversity affect bee and wasp communities and their natural enemies across forest strata? For Ecol Manag 258:609–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Speight MCD, Castella E, Sarthou J (2016) StN 2016. Syrph the Net. The database of European Syrphidae

  • Stoate C, Báldi A, Beja P, Boatman ND, Herzon I, van Doorn A, de Snoo GR, Rakosy L, Ramwell C (2009) Ecological impacts of early 21st century agricultural change in Europe: a review. J Environ Manag 91:22–46

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taki H, Kevan PG, Ascher JS (2007) Landscape effects of forest loss in a pollination system. Landscape Ecol 22:1575–1587

    Google Scholar 

  • Torné-Noguera A, Rodrigo A, Arnan X, Osorio S, Barril-Graells H, Correia da Rocha-Filho L, Bosch J (2014) Determinants of spatial distribution in a bee community: nesting resources, flower resources, and body size. PLoS ONE 9:e97255

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ulyshen MD, Soon V, Hanula JL (2010) On the vertical distribution of bees in a temperate deciduous forest. Insect Conserv Divers 3:222–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerkhove K, de Keersmaeker L, Walleyn R, Köhler F, Crevecoeur L, Govaere L, Thomaes A, Verheyen K (2011) Reappearance of old-growth elements in lowland woodlands in northern Belgium: do the associated species follow? Silva Fenn. 45:909–935

    Google Scholar 

  • Verboven HAF, Uyttenbroeck R, Brys R, Hermy M (2014) Different responses of bees and hoverflies to land use in an urban–rural gradient show the importance of the nature of the rural land use. Landsc Urban Plan 126:31–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson JC, Wolf AT, Ascher JS (2011) Forested landscapes promote richness and abundance of native bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) in Wisconsin apple orchards. Environ Entomol 40:621–632

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Westrich P (1996) Habitat requirements of central European bees and the problems of partial habitats. In: Matheson A, Buchmann SL, O’Toole C, Westrich P, Williams IH (eds) The conservation of bees. The Linnean society of london, London, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Winfree R, Griswold TL, Kremen C (2007) Effect of human disturbance on bee communities in a forested ecosystem. Conserv Biol 21:213–223

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the landowners for giving permission to carry out this research on their properties. Jörg Brunet provided important information about the Sebbarp landcape, while Cecilia Dupré, Jana Michaelis, Andreas Suchopar, Merle Büsing, Jennifer Schröder and Rebecca Siemering assisted in the fieldwork in the Zevener Geest and Helena Theuwissen in Glabbeek. The first author was supported by a grant by FWO-Vlaanderen (FWO14/ASP/195).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Forest & Nature Lab, Department of Forest and Water Management, Ghent University, Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, 9090, Melle-Gontrode, Belgium

    Willem Proesmans, Sanne Van Den Berge & Kris Verheyen

  2. Terrestrial Ecology Unit, Biology Department, Ghent University, K. L. Ledeganckstraat 35, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Willem Proesmans & Dries Bonte

  3. Department of Crop Protection, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links, 653, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Willem Proesmans, Guy Smagghe & Ivan Meeus

  4. UR “Ecologie et Dynamique des Systèmes Anthropisés” (EDYSAN, FRE 3498 CNRS-UPJV), Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France

    Guillaume Decocq & Fabien Spicher

  5. Vegetation Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Bremen, Leobener Str, 28359, Bremen, Germany

    Annette Kolb, Isgard Lemke & Martin Diekmann

  6. Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Hans Henrik Bruun

  7. Department for Land Use Systems and Landscape Ecology, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Eberswalder Str. 84, 15374, Müncheberg, Germany

    Monika Wulf

Authors
  1. Willem Proesmans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dries Bonte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guy Smagghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ivan Meeus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guillaume Decocq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fabien Spicher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Annette Kolb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Isgard Lemke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Martin Diekmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hans Henrik Bruun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Monika Wulf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Sanne Van Den Berge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Kris Verheyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Willem Proesmans.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 43 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Proesmans, W., Bonte, D., Smagghe, G. et al. Small forest patches as pollinator habitat: oases in an agricultural desert?. Landscape Ecol 34, 487–501 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00782-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00782-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation