Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/17
Outputs
Target Audience:Information about this project has been presented to growers, extension staff, federal agencies such as NRCS and FSA, research colleagues, and the general public. This has been done through published materials, presentations at conferences and grower meetings, workshops, field days, and short courses. Electronic delivery of this information has been done through our project website,Facebook page, YouTube channel, and through the eXtension Bee Health community of practice. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The project supported a molecular bee population analysis workshop in 2015 and a bumble bee workshop in 2017, both at the USDA-ARS Pollinating Insects Research Unit in Logan, UT. These workshops were attended by multiple project team members and have led to separate collaborative research projects. A series of 6 webinars were developed and delivered through eXtension to provide resources for training extension and other interested parties. Team members have also coordined training of extension staff in MI, PA, and FL fruit industries to provide the latest information on pollinator management to their clientele. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Through the www.projecticp.org website, an annual newsletter and through www.facebook.com/IntegratedCropPollinationProject. Team members delivered 60 extension/training/teaching events related to this project and presented information to 9,993 grower, agency, and research stakeholders. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objective 1. Contributors to Objective 1, working in California, Florida, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, and British Columbia, collected sampled bees and other pollinating insects, assessed alternative floral resources available at each site, measured crop yield and management intensity at fruit, nut and vegetable farms. Over 140 agricultural fields and orchards were sampled for the following crops across North America: almond (CA), apple (MI, PA), blueberry (FL, MI, OR, BC), cherry (MI, PA, WA), pumpkin (PA), raspberry (OR), and watermelon (CA, FL). We found that wild bee populations declined with distance from the adjacent natural habitat, and there was a large range of importance for honey bees and wild bees, which is currently being used to analyze the economics of crop pollination. An online specimen database was created to house specimen records and site information for rapid sharing of data among collaborators. Over 20,000 specimen records have been entered into the database, and many thousands of individual bee visits to crop flowers have been recorded. Identification of wild bees has informed our understanding of these pollinators across the project, including some of the most abundant wild bee pollinators. Objective 2. Wildflower enhancements were established in each of the main focus crops of this project at 22 farm sites. Establishment success varied among sites in all regions, due to significant weed pressure and deer browsing, but all these sites still attracted significant numbers of bees. We learned which plant species established well, and which management practices worked best and these are encapsulated in guides developed for the west and Midwest regions. Annually seeded enhancements have been trialed for pumpkin growers in PA, resulting in a seed mix that can support wild bees before and after crop flowering. Additionally, molecular analysis of wild bumble bee communities in blueberry and pumpkin farms has been used to determine how habitat resources affect their populations. Data analysis is ongoing to explore the degree of linkage between flowering enhancements, bee response, and crop pollination. Objective 3.In six commercial almond orchards, blue orchard bees were tested to determine optimal deployment strategies (Years 1-2) and use of habitat enhancements (Years 3-4) to increase nut yield. In large almond blocks in the Central Valley of CA, nest boxes of these alternative pollinators were installed in the spring and then retrieved after bloom to determine the total number of completed nests and cells to determine reproductive success and sex ratio. Six other orchards using only honey bees as pollinators were compared, indicating a higher nut yield from the areas of orchards where orchard bees were deployed. Several California wildflowers proposed to support honey bees and managed blue orchard bees in the almond orchard context were planted adjacent to orchards, and we demonstrated that these plantings were visited by honey bees and wild bees, and that they take their pollen back to nests, resulting in higher nut set in these enhanced orchards. In tart cherry orchards, increased yield was detected at orchard edges where mason bees were deployed. Two years of evaluating bumble bees in Michigan and Florida highlighted that bumble bees can provide excellent pollination of southern highbush blueberry (Florida) when constrained on bushes using cages. In contrast, open-air tests in Michigan 'Bluecrop' blueberry fields found that the pollination already provided by honeybee stocking was sufficient for good yields, and it was not improved by the addition of commercial bumble bee colonies. Pollen analysis and on-bush counts indicated that this was the result of bumble bees foraging on alternative flowers (tree species outside the blueberry fields and clover in the farms) and their low abundance on crop flowers. In blueberry fields in British Columbia, field trials of two western species, B. huntii and B. vosnesenskii, were performed to assess pollination efficacy. There is currently no bumble bee available for the western United States, and these trials will inform development of alternative bumble bee pollinators for specialty crops. Objective 4.Extensive delivery of information related to Integrated Crop Pollination was accomplished across the regions where the project was active. This occurred through summer field workshops at research sites as well as during the winter months in formal extension meetings and short courses. Webinars, website postings, and magazine articles were also used to describe the results of the project to our grower stakeholders. This information is also archived through the eXtension.org Bee Health website. Team members worked with restoration and conservation agency partners to develop protocols for bee habitat establishment for several regions of the country where Project ICP research is active, and these were published during Year 5 in printed and electronic formats. Additionally, rapid pollination assessment guides were developed to help growers know if they are getting adequate pollination, and these are being trialed in target crops. Our newsletter was emailed to over 200 subscribers who range from growers, research colleagues, extension educators, interested members of the public, and government agency employees. The Project ICP website and Facebook page provided a user-friendly source for information on this project and related information, and a series of videos about the project activities were developed for the Project ICP YouTube channel. Objective 5.Surveys of grower adoption of pollinator protection and conservation practices administered by USDA-NASS indicated that extension agents were the most common point of contact for information, followed by beekeepers and bee suppliers (respectively included in 35% and 31% of respondent networks). This highlights the need to direct resources to in-service training and developing materials for this audience. Communication with other growers were included in 21% of respondents' networks, suggesting that grower-to-grower communication provides an important support for adopting and retaining new practices, such as the habitat enhancements and alternative managed pollinators included in the ICP project. Contacts from government agencies and research groups were named less frequently, included in 7% and 2% of networks respectively. A follow-up survey run in early 2017 is still being analyzed, and will be used to determine trends over time in regions where the project was active. Objective 6.Members of this team analyzed the supply of pollinators to pollinator-dependent crops within the conterminous United States. This highlighted that regions where land use intensification is greatest, or where change has been most rapid, are also often areas where specialty crops are grown. This information can be used to target investments in pollinator conservation, plus this highlights the trends towards greater dependence on honey bees for specialty crop growers. This team has also developed analyses to assess the potential benefits of adding floral strips or hedgerows within farms. This allows evaluations of different placements of hedgerows within a farm and then test those predictions with experimental results. We also developed PollinationMapper, an online decision support tool that allows growers to compare the effects of different pollination decisions on crop yield for their farms. This includes honey bee stocking rate as well as habitat enhancement and placement, and allows comparison of different strategies. A Beta version of this system is online and is being validated with the data coming from this project's field data, and will then be released.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Lundin, O., Ward, K., Artz, D., Boyle, N., Pitts-Singer, T. L. and Williams, N. M. 2017. Wildflower plantings do not compete with neighboring almond orchards for pollinator visits. Journal of Environmental Entomology 46: 559 - 564
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Gibbs, J., Elle, E., Bobiwash, K., Haapalainen, T., and Isaacs, R. (2016) Contrasting Pollinators and Pollination in Native and Non-Native Regions of Highbush Blueberry Production. PLoS One. 11: e0158937
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Campbell J.W., OBrien J., Irvin J.H., Kimmel C.B., Daniels J.C., Ellis J.D. 2017. Managed bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) caged with blueberry bushes at high density did not increase fruit set or fruit weight compared to open pollination. Environmental Entomology. DOI: 10.1093/ee/nvx044
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Bobiwash, K., Uriel, Y., and Elle, E. Pollen foraging differences among three managed pollinators in the highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) agroecosystem. Submitted to Journal of Ecological Entomology.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
L�pez-Uribe, M.M., J. H. Cane, R. L. Minckley, and Bryan N. Danforth. 2016. Crop domestication facilitated rapid geographic expansion of a specialist pollinator, the squash bee. Proc. Royal Linnean Soc. First view.
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Cane, J.H. 2017. Chapters about blueberries and cranberries In Roubik, D.W. (ed.) The pollination of cultivated plants, a compendium for practitioners FAO, UN. In press.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Andrikopoulos, C. and J. H. Cane. Raspberry (Rubus idaeus) flowers visited twice by a honey bee yield fully-sized fruits. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. submitted.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Andrikopoulos, C. and J. H. Cane. Comparative pollination values of five bee species for red raspberry (Rubus idaeus). in review for submission to J. Econ. Entomology
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Joshi, N. K, Otieno, M., Rajotte, E. G. , Fleischer S. J., and Biddinger D. J. 2016. Proximity to woodland and landscape structure drives pollinator visitation in apple orchard ecosystem. Front. Ecol. Evol. 4:38. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2016.00038
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Boyle, N. K., and Pitts-Singer, T. L. 2017. The effect of nest box distribution on sustainable propagation of Osmia lignaria (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae), blue orchard bees, in commercial tart cherry orchards. Journal of Insect Science 164: 1-5.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Williams, N. M. and Lonsdorf E. (2018) Selecting cost-effective plant mixes to support pollinators. Biological Conservation 217, 195-202.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Isaacs, R., Williams, N., Ellis, J., Pitts-Singer, T. L., Bommarco, R., & Vaughan, M. (2017). Integrated Crop Pollination: Combining strategies to ensure stable and sustainable yields of pollination-dependent crops. Basic and Applied Ecology 22:44-60.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Gibbs, J., N. K. Joshi*, J. Wilson, N. Rothwell, K. Powers, M. Haas, L. Gut, D. Biddinger, and R. Isaacs. (2017). Does passive sampling accurately reflect the bee (Apoidea: Anthophila) communities pollinating apple and sour cherry orchards? Environmental Entomology 46(3):579-5988. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvx069
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Shugrue, S. 2016. (D. Biddinger- thesis advisor). M.S. thesis. Pesticide use, habitat manipulation and management changes as factors in pollinator sustainability in Pennsylvania apple orchards. Pennsylvania State University, Department of Entomology. 85 pp.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Kammerer, M. A.***, D. J. Biddinger, N. K. Joshi*, E. G. Rajotte, & D. Mortensen. 2016. Modeling local spatial patterns of wild bee diversity in Pennsylvania apple orchards. Landscape Ecology. doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0416-4.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Kammerer, M. A.***, D. J. Biddinger, E. G. Rajotte, and D. Mortensen. 2016. Local plant diversity across multiple habitats supports a diverse wild bee community in Pennsylvania apple orchards. Environ. Ent. 45(1): 32-38.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Park, M.G., Joshi*, N.K., Rajotte, E.G., Biddinger, D.J., Losey, J.E. and Danforth, B.N. (2017). Apple grower pollination practices and perceptions of alternative pollinators in New York and Pennsylvania. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems.
|
Progress 09/01/15 to 08/31/16
Outputs
Target Audience:The project team has delivered information from this project to growers, extension educators, crop consultants and other parties interested in crop pollination at 92extension talks to over 5000 people, in 32 scientific meeting presentations, and in 12extension publications across theUnited States. We have also developed information for the research community that has been delivered via 3scientific journalpublications and 32presentations at scientific conferences. Electronic media has also been employed to expand the reach of our project through video, website, and scoail media outlets. Changes/Problems:Achieving all expected levels of data collection across all of the field sites has been challenging, in part due to logistical issues. Aditionally, the establishment of wildflower plantings was delayed ina few regions so those collaborators have neededaditionalsupport to cover measurement of their effect over time. We have also adapted to some personnel changes during the last year. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?This project has employed over 60 people including graduate and undergraduate students who have been trained in pollination biology, bee science, ecology, agriculture and extension.We held the annual project meting in Davis, CA in January 2016, providing an opportunity for interaction among the peopleworking on this project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Through grower trade press, magazine articles, extension articles, research publications, online articles at our www.projecticp.org website, and through social media such as our Facebook page that connects to 813people. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Year 5will be the final year of this project, sofieldwork will be completed and there will be even more emphasis on data analysis and reporting on the results of the project. We will conduct another round of surveys of growers to determine their attitude towards crop pollination, and we will focus efforts on the development of a pollination investment decisiontool.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Through our research and extension activities we have raised awareness of wild bees and their value to agriculture, plus the potential for alternative managed pollinators to support crop yield. Research sites for this project have provided visibility to the ICP project on over 10,000 acres of specialty crop fields across more than 100 farms. We have estimated that in Michigan with better pollination farmers would earn a few hundred dollars per acre more. Earlier published studies from this team suggest that some ICP methods result in increased profits over a short time period. But ICP may also reduce the need for other investments which could result in other profits. In British Columbia we have estimated that with better pollination farmers would earn $10,000-$18,000 more per acre. We are still working to see this increase in profit on some farms. In Florida, our project has affected how growers use pesticides, thus avoiding not just impacts on bees but also avoiding groundwater contamination. Pollinator habitats have significantly increased species richness and abundance of wild bees in many of the systems we are studying. In Pennsylvania pumpkins, for example, one grower has cut honey bee stocking rate in half, from 1 to 0.5 hives/acre without a decrease in yield. This is about a ~$14,000 per year savings for this one grower. Mason bees have been tested in almond orchards and their use is expanding to thousands of acres in a commercial scale test. Bumble bees were tested in fields already receiving honey bee pollination, and no significant increase in yield could be detected. ICP practices have been demonstrated to over 5000 people with our website, videos, and other extension materials reaching much further, and surveys ave revealed how important various groups are for delivering pollination information to growers. Finally, a spatial model of pollinationservices has been used across the United States to identify regions where pollination need is expanding while the availability of habitat to support wild pollinators is declining.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
L�pez-Uribe, M.M., J. H. Cane, R. L. Minckley, and Bryan N. Danforth. In press. Crop domestication facilitated rapid geographic expansion of a specialist pollinator, the squash bee. Proc. Royal Linnean Soc.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Kleijn, D., R Winfree, R. Isaacs, C. Kremen, N.M. Williams, T. Ricketts, E. Elle, E. May and 56 other authors. 2015. Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation. Nature Communications 6: 7414.
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Lewis, Margaret (2015). Advancing ecologically based management for Acalymma vittatum, a key pest of cucurbits. MS Thesis. Pennsylvania State University
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Koh, I., Lonsdorf, E. V., Williams, N.M., Brittain, C., Isaacs. R., Gibbs, J. and Ricketts, T. (2015) Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 113, 140-145.
|
Progress 09/01/14 to 08/31/15
Outputs
Target Audience:The project team has delivered information from this project to growers, extension educators, crop consultantsand other parties interested in crop pollination at 34 workshops,61 extension talks, and in 10 extension publications held acros the United States. We have also developed information for the research community that has been delivered via 11 scientific publications and 26 presentations at scientific conferences. Changes/Problems:Achieving all expected levels of data collection across all of the field sites has been challenging, in part due to logistical issues and in part because of budgetary constraints.Aditionally, the establishment of wildflower plantings has ben delayed in a few regions and that will require aditional years of support to cover the measurement of their effect over time. The project leadership team will be discusing these issues to plan for Year 4 and 5. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?A molecular bee ecology workshop was sponsored by this project and was held in February 9-13 2015, hosted by the USDA-ARS Pollinating Insects Research Unit in Logan Utah. Classes wereheld at theUtah State University campus with the laboratory training at the PIRU labs in Logan. The meeting was attended by 12 trainees that were primarily graduate students and postdoctoral researchers from the project, plus a few faculty. We held the annual project meting in Davis, CA in January 2015, providing an opportunity for interaction among the 50 people working on this project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Through grower trade press, magazine articles, extension articles, research publications, online articles at our www.projecticp.org website, and through social media such as our Facebook page that connects to 473 people. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Year 4 will be a transion year, in which some of the fieldwork will be completed and where there will be a greater emphasis on data analysis, extension programming, and synthesis of the data from acros the project.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
The goal of Objective 1 is to identify economically important pollinators and factors affecting their abundance.In 2015, a total of 142 agricultural fields and orchards were sampled for the following crops: almond (CA), apple (MI, PA), blueberry (FL, MI, OR, BC), cherry (MI, WA), pumpkin (PA), raspberry (OR), and watermelon (CA, FL). Data collection took place at the field or orchard edge, and three additional locations within the field at distances from the field edge. Sites were sampled for pollinator visitation, fruit set, seed set and yield. Additional data were collected on local vegetation diversity, farm management and pollinator management. Each field or orchard was sampled 1 to 4 times to observe pollinator visitations to blossoms and for collection of voucher specimens. As a representative example, 6,327 bee visits were recorded from blueberry blossoms in Michigan. Several hundred specimens were collected during timed samples across all Objective 1 sites. Species-level identification is in progress and has been completed by a subset of contributors with strong taxonomic backgrounds. To determine the contributions of pollinators and the effect of pollination limitation, experimental treatments were performed using pollinator exclusion bags or cages, a supplemental hand-pollination treatment, and a normal pollination treatment (open to pollinators, no supplemental pollen added). Several thousand data points were collected for these treatments. These will be translated into per acre yield values based on the crop-specific information. Fields and orchards were visited multiple times per season to collect data on non-crop floral resources for pollinators present during the entire season. Data have also been gathered on management strategies in fields and orchards with potential to affect pollinators and their floral resources (e.g. herbicide sprays, mowing). Additional data on farm management (e.g. pesticide spray records) were gathered. urveys for relevant data for economic analyses have been completed for Year 1 and 2 and are ongoing for Year 3. This includes information on the pollinator management (e.g. honey bee stocking rates, costs per hive, etc.). For Objective 2, wehave begun monitoring the effects of wildflower enhancement on bee communities and pollination of neighboring crop fields. For cucurbits inCalifornia and Florida enhanced field border plantings are the selected strategy. The CA team monitored bees at all six enhancements and paired controls throughout the season and crop visitation at the one watermelon site.The PA team, focused on an alternative strategy using spring and summer flowering cover crops and specific within-field strip enhancements grown before or along with pumpkin planting.In blueberry, the team has prepared and planted all sites and monitoring has started. Orchard crops comprise the most varied group of species and landscapes (including sweet cherry, tart cherry, apple and almond). In apples, the PA team capitalized on existing habitats and planted additional species to diversify the plants they contain.Monitoring for pollinators and pollination to target cherry crop began in 2015.Almond presents unique challenges of early bloom and a dual role of plantings to support managed and wild pollinators. The team collaborated with growers in central and southern growing regions to plant and test mixes within different parts of the orchard. These identified edges as most successful. Indeed, within mature conventional orchards, in row plantings and end row plantings performed poorly. Preliminary data were collected on bee visitation to enhancements and orchards at the border trial. The team initiated three new plots in the south and one in the central region and these have been sampled in spring 2015. For objective 3, managed bees other than honey bees were added for crop pollination to determine their efficacy as pollinators and the ability to maintain commercial populations in fields under conventional management systems.In 2014and 2015, Osmia or Bombus species were used as alternative managed pollinators in almonds, apples, blueberries, canefruit, cherries, and watermelon.To determine if the addition of floral resources enhances O. lignaria reproductive success, especially after almond bloom has ended, a mix of native wildflowers proposed to support both O. lignaria and honey bees was planted in fall 2014 for 2015 field trials near almond orchards. In the spring 2015, stocks of O. cornifrons were released in four PA and five MI cherry orchards. The effect on yield will be determined in fall/winter 2015/16.In raspberry, the pollination efficiency of O. lignaria was assessed for the red raspberry cultivar 'Canby' and the purple raspberry 'Royalty' during May and June 2015.For alternative managed bees in canefruit in OR, management of the West Coast bee Osmia aglaia was continued. Nesting substrates, shelters, and stands that have been developed for the purpose of bee establishment were used on the caneberry farms. A third spring of largely wet and cold weather was not helpful for bee emergence and successful nesting.In 2014, conventional blueberry fields in MI and FL and watermelon fields in FL used commercially-available Bombus impatiens for pollination. In blueberry fields in British Columbia, field trials of two western species, B. huntii and B. vosnesenskii, were performed to assess pollination efficacy.When yield data have all been collected, these will be compared with bumble bee colony prices to determine the relative costs and benefits of this alternative managed bee in specialty crops. For objective 4, there has been increased effort on this aspect, through hiring a Crop Pollination Outreach Specialist for this project, providing more attention to Objective 4. Demonstration farms have ben selected, many of these sites have ben visited by the specialist, and interviews of the farmers have been conducted.A total of 30 people involved with Project ICP have conducted integrated crop pollination outreach and extension work during the 2014-5 reporting period. This is This work included 35 half day to two day long workshops, 61 extension presentations with at least one presentation in each region, and 10 extension publications. In addition, team members gave 26 presentations or posters at scientific meetings and published 11 papers in peer-reviewed journals. For Objective 5, we conducted a nationwide grower survey with partners at the National Agricultural Statistics Survey (NASS) to a target sample of 3,500 growers (comprising 1,300 CA almond growers and 2,200 fruit & vegetable growers in CA, OR, MI, and FL). Survey results are being analyzed and summarized this summer and will be shared with the team this winter.Continuing ICP collaborations include biophysical sampling of ecosystem services in hedgerows in Yolo and Solano County, CA. This work is in collaboration with Rachael Long and Neal Williams For Objective 6, to understand the economics and landscape distribution of pollination ecosystem services, a national-scale assessment of wild pollinators has been completed that is being used to test our landscape pollination model. The group has also been working to improve the model's structure in several ways to match the analytical needs of ICP.Third, this group has collaborated with Objective 4's almond team to analyze the spatial relationship between alternative managed bees and pollination services. A manuscript to report on the national analysis has ben completed, and will be submitted for review next month. We are also working to improve our ability to predict where bees forage as a function of floral resource quality by using central place foraging theory.A key output of the landscape model is an index of abundance of bees that forage on pollinator-dependent crops.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Artz, D.R., Allan, M.J., Wardell, G.I., and Pitts-Singer, T.L. (2014) Influence of nest box color and release sites on Osmia lignaria (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) reproductive success in a commercial almond orchard. Journal of Economic Entomology 107(6):2045-2054.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Biddinger, D.J., Joshi, N.K., Rajotte, E.G., Halbrendt, N.O., Pulig, C., Naithani, K.J., and Vaughn M. (2013) An immunomarking method to determine the foraging patterns of Osmia cornifrons and resulting fruit set in a cherry orchard. Apidologie 44 (6), 738-749.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Biddinger D., Robertson, J., Mullin, C., Frazier, J., Ashcraft, S., Joshi, N. K., and Vaughn, M. (2013) Comparative toxicities and synergism of apple orchard pesticides to Apis mellifera (L.) and Osmia cornifrons (Radoszkowski). PLoS ONE. 8(9): e72587.
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Biddinger, D., Rajotte, E.G., Joshi, N.K. (2014) Integrating pollinator health into tree fruit IPM- A case study of Pennsylvania apple production. In: The pollination of cultivated plants: a compendium for practitioners (2nd edition) (Editor- David Roubik). In Press.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Button, L. and Elle, E. (2014) Wild bumble bees reduce pollination deficits in a crop mostly visited by managed honey bees. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 197: 255-263
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Cabrera, A.R., Almanza, M.T., Cutler, G.C., Fischer, D.L., Hinarejos, S., Lewis, G., Nigro, D., Olmstead, A., Overmyer, J., Potter, D., Rayne, N.E., Stanley-Stahr, C., Thompson, H., and van der Steen, S. (2015) Initial recommendations for higher-tier risk assessment protocols for Bombus spp. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). In review
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Graham, J.R., Tan, Q., Jones, L.C., and Ellis, J.D. (2014) Native buzz: citizen scientists creating nesting habitat for solitary bees and wasps. Florida Scientist, vol. 77(4). In review at Florida Academy of Sciences.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Sidhu, C. S. and Biddinger, D.J. (2014) Active sampling used to collect northern-most North American records of introduced flower fly, Syritta flaviventris (Diptera: Syrphidae) and flower visitation records of it and the sympatric species, Syritta pipiens. Great Lakes Entomologist 47, 166-170..
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Isaacs, R., Blaauw, B., Williams, N.M., Kwapong, P., Mader, E., and Vaughan, M. (2015) Farm-tailored measures to sustain and enhance pollination services. In: Toward Sustainable Crop Pollination Services. In press.
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Williams, N.M., Isaacs, R., Lonsdorf, E., Winfree, R., and Ricketts, T.H. (2015) Building resilience into agricultural pollination using wild pollinators. In: Enhancing Resilience in Agriculture. In press.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Biddinger, David J., and Edwin G. Rajotte. "Integrated pest and pollinator managementadding a new dimension to an accepted paradigm." Current Opinion in Insect Science 10 (2015): 204-209.
|
Progress 09/01/13 to 08/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: Growers, federal agencies such as NRCS and FSA, research colleagues, and the general public. Our contact with these audiences has been via one-on-one interactions with the cooperating growers, through published materials, presentations at conferences and extension meetings, through our project website and Facebook page. Changes/Problems: The lack of a commercially available bumble bee species for the western US has prevented us from working on objective 3 in Oregon blueberry fields. Two postdoctoral researchers have recently left the project so their positions are being refilled. Co-PI Winfree has become available to work on Objective 1 ahead of schedule so she will begin contributing to the project earlier than expected. Some aspects of the project have been delayed due to a lack of funding in year two, but with the additional funds received we are now able to renew efforts in all areas of the project. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? In January 2014, Project ICP organized an all-team meeting via a webinar format to save costs in the absence of year 2 funding. Included in the webinar series were short workshop presentations on developing videos and navigating the project databases. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Through the www.projecticp.org website, an annual newsletter and through www.facebook.com/IntegratedCropPollinationProject. Team members delivered 14 extension/training/teaching publications about the project and presented more than 100 talks to grower, agency, and research groups. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? With continuation funding received in September 2014, we are pursuing our goals in each of the six objectives with renewed vigor. Participants in objective 1 are actively working to complete publications based on the first two years of data collection that will form the baseline for comparison to be made with objectives 2 and 3. Additional collections will be made in the coming year to continue expansion of our growing data sets. Habitat enhancements for objective 2 are being installed, managed and established and will be assessed for their impact on pollinator communities and pollination services to crop plants. We will continue assessments of alternative managed pollinators in the genera Osmia and Bombus. We will continue to engage the stakeholders to disseminate information on integrated crop pollination practices. A large scale NASS survey will be conducted and data analyzed in the coming year. We also expect to publish new analyses based on pollination service models at broad scales.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objective 1. InCalifornia, Florida, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, and British Columbia, we have sampled bees and other pollinating insects, assessed alternative floral resources available at each site, measured crop yield and management intensity at fruit, nut and vegetable farms. Land use data have been compiled for the areas surrounding each site at local and landscape scales. At each site, data collection took place at the field or orchard edge and at three additional locations into the crop (25, 50 and 100 meters). Sites were sampled multiple times through the season. Our results to date demonstrate that both managed and native bee abundance affect crop yields and that land use factors impact pollinator abundance. These data support the potential benefits of increasing bee numbers and diversity through habitat management and alternative managed pollinators. Objective 2. Wildflower enhancements in California almond, CA watermelon, Michigan blueberry and MI cherry and Pennsylvania apple were monitored along with paired control sites for bees and plant establishment. Where possible, we also collected associated crop yield data as a baseline for future years. Establishment success varied among sites in all regions, due to significant weed pressure in CA and MI and deer browse in PA; however sites still attracted significant numbers of bees. Plant materials have been obtained for all regions and establishment for these additoinal sites is underway. We collected extensive field data for CA, MI and PA sites, including plant germination success and pollinator abundance. Specimens are being curated for final identification. In CA watermelon, 1581 bees and 172 syrphid flies were captured, in almond 216 bees and 49 syrphids were collected; in MI blueberry sites 333 bees were collected. Objective 3. In six commercial almond orchards Osmia lignariawere released in each of two 10-acre blocks per orchard. The total number of completed nests and cells were examined by x-radiography in the fall to measure reproductive success and sex ratio. These orchards were paired with six other orchards using only honey bees as pollinators. Nut yield from experimental areas of 10 paired orchards is being assessed this fall/winter. In four separate almond orchards, fully-emerged O. lignaria adults were released at the beginning of bloom in 5 acre blocks. The total number of completed nests was counted and in the fall, all nests were stripped out of the nesting media, and reproductive success and sex ratio were determined. Four other orchards using only honey bees as pollinators were paired with those where O. lignaria were added. Several California wildflowers proposed to support honey bees and managed blue orchard bees in the almond orchard context were planted in fall 2014 for 2015 field trials; however, CA drought conditions prohibited plant growth and flowering in the unirrigated trial sites. In spring 2014, stocks of O. cornifrons were released in four PA apple orchards and five MI cherry orchards. Stocking rates were 250 females per acre with 1-2 times as many males. In PA, alternative bee forage was provided with the addition of red maples, willows, and Siberian squill along the orchard edge. The return on number of bees is not yet known, but suspected to be low in MI and modest in PA. The effect on apple and cherry yield has yet to be determined. In 2014, commercially-available Bombus impatienswere tested in blueberry fields in Michigan and Florida and in Florida watermelons. Additionally, in blueberry fields in British Columbia, field trials of two western species, B. huntii and B. vosnesenskii, were performed to assess pollination efficacy. A significant increase in B. impatiens was observed in Michigan blueberry fields, but not Florida. Yield data are still being collected and analyzed. In six commercial watermelon fields in Florida, Bombus impatiens colonies were placed at approximately four colonies per acre. One quad each was placed among watermelon rows directly adjacent to drive rows at approximately 25, 50, and 100 meters from the field edge. Colonies were placed in the fields in early May and were weighed every two weeks during the growing season (seven total sampling events). At this same interval two of the four B. impatiens colonies per quad were observed for forager activity and three pollen-bearing workers were collected. Six other commercial watermelon fields in which honey bees were the only managed pollinator, were paired with the six fields in which B. impatiens were added. Before watermelon harvest, melons were weighed and measured from both field treatments. Objective 4. We have distributed the Project ICP brochure around the country at grower meetings and at Short Courses. Team members have worked with restoration and conservation agency partners to develop protocols for bee habitat establishment for several regions of the country where Project ICP research is active. These restoration protocols include details on site assessment, site preparation and weed abatement prior to planting, planting techniques for hedgerows, seeding techniques for wildflower meadow, seed sources, and site management during establishment. These regional guides for habitat creation support Objective 2 habitat installments. We also developed a 2013 project newsletter that was posted online, and emailed to members of the project and our subscribers. The brochure and the online materials have been seen by hundreds of growers at extension meetings, and by thousands of visitors to the websites. Additionally, we have prepared articles for trade magazines that have national readership. Our newsletter is emailed to 200 subscribers who range from growers, research colleagues, extension educators, interested members of the public, and government agency employees. A new Xerces outreach and extension specialist is coordinating the production of educational videos, demonstration sites, website and social media content, and publications. The Project ICP website has been updated to be more user-friendly and useful for farmer audiences. Objective 5. The most notable advance to date is a fully executed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the NASS to distribute the ICP survey. Together with NASS Pacific Region, we have developed a survey protocol and sampling frame for the nation-wide grower survey in four focal states: Florida, Michigan, California and Oregon. We anticipate distributing the survey to growers of almonds, apples, blueberry, cherry, raspberry, and watermelon to growers that have 0.1 acres or more of the target crops, and this survey will be distributed to approximately 3,000 farmers in fall 2014. Objective 6. Objective 6 was created to help quantitatively synthesize the results and insights gained from the other ICP objectives. As those data are developed, we have worked to improve our ability to make management decisions regarding pollination services at several scales: national, landscapes around farms and within-farms. First, we are finishing up a national status assessment of pollinator abundance. Second, we are working to improve an analysis of the landscape around farms to determine how landscapes might be improved to ensure the supply of pollinators. Finally, we are improving our ability to assess the potential benefits of adding floral strips or hedgerows within farms. This will allow us to evaluate different placements of hedgerows within a farm and then test those predictions with experimental results.
Publications
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
www.projecticp.org
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Button, L. and Elle, E. 2014. Wild bees reduce pollination deficits in a crop mostly visited by managed honey bees. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 197, 255263.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Gibbs, J., Dumesh, S. and Griswold. T.L. 2014. Bees of the genera Dufourea and Dieunomia of Michigan (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Halictidae), with a key to the Dufourea of eastern North America. Journal of Melittology 29, 115.
|
Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: Information about this project has been presented to growers, federal agencies such as NRCS and FSA, research colleagues, and the general public. This has been done through published materials, presentations at conferences and grower meetings, and through our project website and Facebook page. Changes/Problems: One major structural change is that our team decided to add an Objective 6 to the project "Modeling and economics of pollination ecosystem services" to better reflect the synthesis of project information being done by various team members. This will improve our efficiency and connection among project components. Our major problem is the lack of a Farm Bill. Team members are working in various ways to keep this project's goals on track, but this is becoming more challenging the longer this is delayed. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Project ICP organized an all-team meeting in Gainsville, FL in January 2013. This includes a visit to a blueberry farm using bumble bees and habitat plantings for bees, and the team had an opportunity to talk with the grower. We are discussing an all-team training opportunity later in 2013 that would likely be opened to a broader audience. However, our Farm Bill funding uncertainty has suspended planning for this. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Through the www.projecticp.org website and throughwww.facebook.com/IntegratedCropPollinationProject. Team members delivered 14 extension/training/teaching publications about the project and presented 48 talks to grower, agency, and research groups. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Continue to address our project objectives, pending funding from the next Farm Bill.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objective 1. Determine the value of managed and non-managed bees for pollination of specialty crops and identify factors affecting their abundance.Contributors to objective 1, working in California, Florida, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, and British Columbia, have sampled bees and other insects, flower resources in and around each site, crop yield and management intensity at fruit, nut and vegetable farms. Over 100 agricultural fields and orchards were sampled for the following crops across North America: almond (CA), apple (MI, PA), blueberry (FL, MI, OR, BC), cherry (MI, WA), pumpkin (PA), raspberry (OR), and watermelon (CA, FL). Some of these sites will be reexamined in subsequent years as part of objectives 2 and 3. At each site, data collection took place at the field or orchard edge and at three additional locations into the crop (25, 50 and 100 meters) (figure and photos). Sites were sampled multiple times through the season. Objective 2. Evaluate farm and habitat management practices for enhancing specialty crop pollination.The work on this objective is a long term undertaking and our Year 1 activities have focused on identifying and preparing sites for installing habitat adjacent to almond, blueberry, cherry, and pumpkin fields, and choosing appropriate seed mixes. Most of these sites have also been sampled for bees and crop yield to provide a baseline level for future comparisons. There are no field sample data to report. Objective 3. Determine performance of alternative managed bees as specialty crop pollinators.At six almond orchards near Lost Hills, CA, 12,000 blue orchard bees were released in each of two 10-acre blocks. In each block we placed forty-eight nesting boxes (corrugated plastic box with 200 cavities within each box), and the total number of bee nests and cells will be examined by x-radiography in the fall-winter 2013 to measure reproductive success. In four almond orchards near Modesto, CA, fully emerged adult blue orchard bees were released over a two-day period at the beginning of bloom in 5-acre blocks. Seventy five nesting sites (64-hole grooved wooden laminates) were available in each 5-acre block. Establishment rate was sampled at night by counting females established in nests. The total number of completed nests was counted and in the fall, all nests will be stripped out of the nesting media and the total number of offspring will be counted. Several wild California wildflowers proposed to support honey bees and managed blue orchard bees in the almond orchard context were planted in fall 2012. In apples in the spring 2013, stocks of O. cornifrons were released for propagation near woodlands or apple orchards near Biglerville, PA. The established population will be used for deployment in 2014. Four sites have been identified for using Osmia cornifrons as the only applied managed pollinator for apples. Blueberry fields in Michigan and Florida are able to use commercially-available Bombus impatiens for pollination. If available, managed colonies of Bombus vosnesenskii will be added to farms in British Columbia and Oregon in 2014. We will work with two potential suppliers of this species to obtain colonies for use in this objective. For fields that will receive bumble bees in 2014 we have obtained baseline estimates of bee visitation rates during bloom of Year 1. Economic data regarding the cost of adding alternative managed bees will be collected in 2014. These values will be used to conduct analysis of the relative costs and benefits of using alternative managed bee in specialty crops. Objective 4. Demonstrate and deliver ICP strategies for specialty crops. We developeda project logo and a brochure that describe the concept of Integrated Crop Pollination and outlines the objectives, tools, and expected outcomes of Project ICP. We have distributed the brochure around the country at grower meetings and at Short Courses. Team members have worked with restoration and conservation agency partners to develop protocols for bee habitat establishment for several regions of the country where Project ICP research is active. These restoration protocols include details on site assessment, site preparation and weed abatement prior to planting, planting techniques for hedgerows, seeding techniques for wildflower meadow, seed sources, and site management during establishment. These regional guides for habitat creation support Objective 2 habitat installments. We also developed a Spring 2013 project newsletter that was posted online, and emailed to members of the project and our subscribers. The brochure and the online materials have been seen by hundreds of growers at extension meetings, and by thousands of visitors to the websites. Additionally, we have prepared articles for trade magazines that have national readership. Our newsletter is emailed to 200 subscribers who range from growers, research colleagues, extension educators, interested members of the public, and government agency employees. Objective 5. Determine optimal methods for ICP information delivery and measure ICP adoption. In preparation for the nationwide grower survey (planned for distribution in Year 2), we developed a work plan and draft sampling approach with partners at the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Survey (NASS). We have also drafted, piloted, and refined the national grower survey by conducting survey design activities. We have conducted survey design activities, including piloting questions and asking for editorial input, with more than 128 growers at meetings in Michigan and Pennsylvania. Feedback to date indicates a positive response to using technology, such as remote control responders, to provide survey responses in sessions at grower meetings. The most frequently named contacts in growers’ networks were extension agents, followed by beekeepers and bee suppliers (respectively included in 35% and 31% of respondent networks). This preliminary data suggests that the ICP project can enhance communication by disseminating information through traditional extension channels, while engaging commercial bee suppliers and beekeepers can provide an additional level of support for delivering information on ICP approaches. One approach to doing so is inviting and engaging with beekeepers and suppliers at field days, meetings, and personal conversations to share developments in the ICP project. Communication with other growers were included in 21% of respondents’ networks, suggesting that grower-to-grower communication may provide an important support for adopting and retaining new practices, such as the habitat enhancements and alternative managed pollinators included in the ICP project. Contacts from government agencies and research groups were named less frequently, included in 7% and 2% of networks respectively. As we develop our approach to collecting and analyzing network data, we will continue to investigate the distinct and complementary roles of different types of contacts within the network by modeling how the number and type of contacts influence grower practices. Objective 6. Modeling and economics of pollination ecosystem services. This objective was formed immediately after the first all-team webinar in Fall 2012, in response to the team’s realization that the economics and modeling components of the project cut across all facets of the project. Identification as a stand-alone objective has helped focus effort on these topics, rather than having them as small components of the other objectives. To improve our existing model, we have framed and drafted several papers that will provide the foundation for integration of data from Project ICP into our modeling framework, and will also set the stage for our proposed interactive model for planning pollination practices on farms.
Publications
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
www.projecticp.org
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Courcelles, D. M. M., Button, L., and Elle, E. 2013. Bee visit rates vary with floral morphology among highbush blueberry cultivars (Vaccinium corymbosum L.). Journal of Applied Entomology 137, 693701.
|
|