Search for: All records

Deforestation drives climate change and reinforces food insecurity in forest dependent communities. What drives deforestation varies by location and is shaped by livelihood systems. But how locals perceive restoration is crucial for developing restoration policies. Evidence suggests that applying sustainable farming strategies can potentially restore forests and sustain livelihoods. Applying a broad-based conceptualization of deforestation and restoration in policymaking, however, results in missed opportunities for addressing deforestation and restoration. Here, we explore the drivers of deforestation, the perceptions of restoration, and the challenges to restoration among smallholder farmers in northern Malawi and examine how agroecology can contribute to restoring degraded agroecosystems. Participants report agricultural land expansion, charcoal production, climate change, burnt brick production, and government subsidies as the major drivers of deforestation. We observed that although perceptions of forest restoration reflect farmers' traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) to include reclamation of degraded farmlands, reconstruction of native tree species, and replacement of felled trees on farmlands, there are challenges including splitting families to gain access to more subsidized fertilizers and food aid, embedded cultural practices, growing demand for charcoal in cities, and weak ecosystem governance structures that hinder the effectiveness of restoration efforts. We, however, do find that agroecological intensification can increase yield from smaller farmlands and allow for larger and longer-lasting fallows of spare lands which regenerate forests. Key overarching implications of these findings include the need to integrate livelihoods more explicitly into restoration plans, accounting for TEK in restoration policies in forest-dependent communities and encouraging the adoption of agroecology. 

Background Landscape composition is known to affect both beneficial insect and pest communities on crop fields. Landscape composition therefore can impact ecosystem (dis)services provided by insects to crops. Though landscape effects on ecosystem service providers have been studied in large-scale agriculture in temperate regions, there is a lack of representation of tropical smallholder agriculture within this field of study, especially in sub-Sahara Africa. Legume crops can provide important food security and soil improvement benefits to vulnerable agriculturalists. However, legumes are dependent on pollinating insects, particularly bees (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) for production and are vulnerable to pests. We selected 10 pigeon pea (Fabaceae: Cajunus cajan (L.)) fields in Malawi with varying proportions of semi-natural habitat and agricultural area within a 1 km radius to study: (1) how the proportion of semi-natural habitat and agricultural area affects the abundance and richness of bees and abundance of florivorous blister beetles (Coleoptera: Melloidae ), (2) if the proportion of flowers damaged and fruit set difference between open and bagged flowers are correlated with the proportion of semi-natural habitat or agricultural area and (3) if pigeon pea fruit set difference between open and bagged flowers in these landscapes was constrained by pest damage or improved by bee visitation. Methods We performed three, ten-minute, 15 m, transects per field to assess blister beetle abundance and bee abundance and richness. Bees were captured and identified to (morpho)species. We assessed the proportion of flowers damaged by beetles during the flowering period. We performed a pollinator and pest exclusion experiment on 15 plants per field to assess whether fruit set was pollinator limited or constrained by pests. Results In our study, bee abundance was higher in areas with proportionally more agricultural area surrounding the fields. This effect was mostly driven by an increase in honeybees. Bee richness and beetle abundances were not affected by landscape characteristics, nor was flower damage or fruit set difference between bagged and open flowers. We did not observe a positive effect of bee density or richness, nor a negative effect of florivory, on fruit set difference. Discussion In our study area, pigeon pea flowers relatively late—well into the dry season. This could explain why we observe higher densities of bees in areas dominated by agriculture rather than in areas with more semi-natural habitat where resources for bees during this time of the year are scarce. Therefore, late flowering legumes may be an important food resource for bees during a period of scarcity in the seasonal tropics. The differences in patterns between our study and those conducted in temperate regions highlight the need for landscape-scale studies in areas outside the temperate region. 

Abstract Both ecosystem function and agricultural productivity depend on services provided by bees; these services are at risk from bee declines which have been linked to land use change, pesticide exposure, and pathogens. Although these stressors often co-occur in agroecosystems, a majority of pollinator health studies have focused on these factors in isolation, therefore limiting our ability to make informed policy and management decisions. Here, we investigate the combined impact of altered landscape composition and fungicide exposure on the prevalence of chalkbrood disease, caused by fungi in the genus Ascosphaera Olive and Spiltoir 1955 (Ascosphaeraceae: Onygenales), in the introduced solitary bee, Osmia cornifrons (Radoszkowski 1887) (Megachilidae: Hymenoptera). We used both field studies and laboratory assays to evaluate the potential for interactions between altered landscape composition, fungicide exposure, and Ascosphaera on O. cornifrons mortality. Chalkbrood incidence in larval O. cornifrons decreased with high open natural habitat cover, whereas Ascosphaera prevalence in adults decreased with high urban habitat cover. Conversely, high fungicide concentration and high forest cover increased chalkbrood incidence in larval O. cornifrons and decreased Ascosphaera incidence in adults. Our laboratory assay revealed an additive effect of fungicides and fungal pathogen exposure on the mortality of a common solitary bee. Additionally, we utilized phylogenetic methods and identified four species of Ascosphaera with O. cornifrons, both confirming previous reports and shedding light on new associates. Our findings highlight the impact of fungicides on bee health and underscore the importance of studying interactions among factors associated with bee decline. 

In the tropics, smallholder farming characterizes some of the world's most biodiverse landscapes. Agroecology as a pathway to sustainable agriculture has been proposed and implemented in sub‐Saharan Africa, but the effects of agricultural practices in smallholder agriculture on biodiversity and ecosystem services are understudied. Similarly, the contribution of different landscape elements, such as shrubland or grassland cover, on biodiversity and ecosystem services to fields remains unknown.

We selected 24 villages situated in landscapes with varying shrubland and grassland cover in Malawi. In each village, we assessed biodiversity of eight taxa and ecosystem services in relation to crop type, shrubland and grassland cover and the number of agroecological pest and soil management practices on smallholder's fields of different crop types (bean monoculture, maize‐bean intercrop and maize monoculture).

Increasing shrubland cover altered carabid and soil bacteria communities. Carabid abundance increased in maize but decreased in intercrop and bean fields with increasing shrubland cover. Carabid abundance and richness and wasp abundance increased with soil management practices. Carabid, spider and parasitoid abundances were higher in bean monocultures, but this was modulated by surrounding shrubland cover. Natural enemy abundances in beans were especially high in landscapes with little shrubland, possibly leading to lower bean damage in monocultures compared to intercropped fields, whereas maize monocultures had higher damage. In maize, grassland cover and pest management practices were positively related to damage. Carabid abundance was higher fields with high bean damage, and increased carabid richness in fields with high maize damage. Parasitoid abundance was negatively associated with bean damage.

Synthesis and application. Our results suggest that maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services on smallholder farms is not achievable with a ‘one size fits all’ approach but should instead be adapted to the landscape context and the priorities of smallholders. Shrubland is important to maintain carabid and soil bacterial diversity, but legume cultivation beneficial to natural enemies could complement pest management in landscapes with a low shrubland cover. An increased number of agroecological soil management practices can lead to improved pest control while the effectiveness of agroecological pest management practices needs to be re‐evaluated.

 

Pollination is essential to fruit production. How plant diversity and blooming events in and around orchards affect the pollinator community and the plant‐flower‐visitor network in neotropical systems remains largely unknown.

We surveyed the flower visitors in deciduous fruit trees and alternative blooming resources (other crops, hedgerows and weeds) in Colombia across 6 orchards over 12 months. We evaluated whether plant species richness and blooming cover influenced abundance and richness of flower visitors, as well as network‐level connectance and specialization. We also assessed the role of alternative blooming resources for the flower visitors of deciduous fruit trees.

Overall, we found 66 taxa of flower visitors, 35 of which visited deciduous fruit trees. There was a greater abundance of flower visitors when there was higher richness of weedy species and greater blooming cover of deciduous fruit trees. Networks were less connected when there was lower crop and weedy species richness. Finally, flower visitor abundance and specialization increased when there were multiple hedgerow species in bloom with a high blooming cover.

We highlight the importance of maintaining alternative blooming resources in and around the orchards to support deciduous fruit tree pollinators and diversity in the plant flower‐visitor network.

 

The production of complex mixtures of secondary metabolites is a ubiquitous feature of plants. Several evolutionary hypotheses seek to explain how phytochemical diversity is maintained, including the synergy hypothesis, the interaction diversity hypothesis, and the screening hypothesis. We experimentally tested a set of predictions derived from these hypotheses by manipulating the richness and structural diversity of phenolic metabolites in the diets of eight plant consumers. Across 3940 total bioassays, there was clear support for the interaction diversity hypothesis over the synergy or screening hypotheses. The number of consumers affected by a particular phenolic composition increased with increasing richness and structural diversity of compounds. Furthermore, the bioactivity of phenolics was consumer‐specific. All compounds tested reduced the performance of at least one consumer, but no compounds affected all consumers. These results show how phytochemical diversity may be maintained in nature by a complex selective landscape exerted by diverse communities of plant consumers.

 

Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield–related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.