Pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented set-aside fields in agriculture

Agriculture relies on pollinators, yet paradoxically, agricultural practices can harm them, including through habitat simplification. The diversification of agricultural landscapes may support pollinators by providing varied foraging and habitat resources. Grassland set-asides are often established on farms to restore soils for crop productivity, and may have the co-benefit of providing resources for pollinators. Set-asides may also be supplemented with forbs for enhanced pollinator benefit, but few studies have investigated pollinator use of these fields compared to crop fields, and across set-aside management practices. Here, we use passive traps and net surveys to assess the flower-visiting insect community in three farm field types; traditional (grass-dominant) set-asides, forb-supplemented set-asides, and non-pollinator-dependent crop reference fields, to evaluate the potential for each to provide resources for pollinators. We found higher abundance of putative wild pollinators in forb-supplemented set-asides compared to crop fields, and higher species diversity in traditional set-asides compared to crop fields. Bumble bees were more abundant in both set-aside types compared to crops, while honey bees visited flowers in forb-supplemented sites the most. The diversity of wild pollinators and abundance of bumble bees in traditional set-asides occurred despite their lack of floral supplementation, suggesting that they may support pollinators by providing other resources (i.e., nesting or graminoid nutritional resources). We demonstrate that pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented grassland set-asides more than non-pollinator-dependent crop fields. Future studies to elucidate specific resource use by pollinators in set-asides across management types are needed. • We evaluated pollinator communities in grassland set-asides compared to crop fields. • Forb-supplemented set-asides had higher pollinator abundance than crop fields. • Traditional set-asides had higher pollinator diversity than crop fields. • Set-asides across two management types show potential to support pollinators.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2025.109682
Primary Topic
Plant and animal studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented set-aside fields in agriculture

Tyler Kelly, Juli Carrillo, Claire Kremen, Carly Laura McGregor
Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment
Plant and animal studies
article

Pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented set-aside fields in agriculture

Tyler Kelly, Juli Carrillo, Claire Kremen, Carly Laura McGregor
article en

Abstract

Agriculture relies on pollinators, yet paradoxically, agricultural practices can harm them, including through habitat simplification. The diversification of agricultural landscapes may support pollinators by providing varied foraging and habitat resources. Grassland set-asides are often established on farms to restore soils for crop productivity, and may have the co-benefit of providing resources for pollinators. Set-asides may also be supplemented with forbs for enhanced pollinator benefit, but few studies have investigated pollinator use of these fields compared to crop fields, and across set-aside management practices. Here, we use passive traps and net surveys to assess the flower-visiting insect community in three farm field types; traditional (grass-dominant) set-asides, forb-supplemented set-asides, and non-pollinator-dependent crop reference fields, to evaluate the potential for each to provide resources for pollinators. We found higher abundance of putative wild pollinators in forb-supplemented set-asides compared to crop fields, and higher species diversity in traditional set-asides compared to crop fields. Bumble bees were more abundant in both set-aside types compared to crops, while honey bees visited flowers in forb-supplemented sites the most. The diversity of wild pollinators and abundance of bumble bees in traditional set-asides occurred despite their lack of floral supplementation, suggesting that they may support pollinators by providing other resources (i.e., nesting or graminoid nutritional resources). We demonstrate that pollinators utilize both traditional and forb-supplemented grassland set-asides more than non-pollinator-dependent crop fields. Future studies to elucidate specific resource use by pollinators in set-asides across management types are needed. • We evaluated pollinator communities in grassland set-asides compared to crop fields. • Forb-supplemented set-asides had higher pollinator abundance than crop fields. • Traditional set-asides had higher pollinator diversity than crop fields. • Set-asides across two management types show potential to support pollinators.

Agriculture Ecosystems & EnvironmentVol. 388
University of British Columbia (CA)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Plant and animal studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.