Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:18:52.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forest and trees: Shade management, forest proximity and pollinator communities in southern Costa Rica coffee agriculture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2016

S. Amanda Caudill ,
Julia N. Brokaw ,
Dejeanne Doublet  and
Robert A. Rice
S. Amanda Caudill*
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Julia N. Brokaw
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Dejeanne Doublet
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert A. Rice
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: CaudillS@SI.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sustained pollinator services within coffee farms depend substantially on a diverse bee community. While studies have been conducted to understand the impacts of forest proximity and farm level management on pollinators, few have examined the interaction between these two spatial scales. We surveyed pollinator communities within 18 sites on a large organic farm surrounded by native forest in southern Costa Rica. We selected sites 0, 50 and 150 m from the forest edge within shaded and sparsely-shaded (sun) portions of the farm to quantify the influence of both shade management and distance to contiguous forest on pollinator communities. Contrary to similar studies, native bees dominated the composition of pollinators on this farm. Overall, pollinator diversity and activity did not differ significantly neither between the shade management types nor among the sites 0, 50 or 150 m from the forest edge. However, pollinator diversity was found to be significantly higher at sun sites near forest (0 m) compared with further away, whereas the diversity was the same for the shade sites regardless of forest proximity. We found that greater numbers of coffee flowers within each site increased bee abundance and flower visitation frequency. Bee abundance was greater in sites with less ground cover and bee diversity and visitation frequencies were higher in sites with greater amounts of shade canopy cover and trees in flower. Based on our results, we suggest including flowering shade trees that provide high levels of canopy cover, maintaining or re-establishing forested areas within or surrounding farms, and eliminating or reducing agrochemical use to increase native pollinator activity and diversity within coffee farms.

Keywords

bee diversitycoffee agroforestryconservationecosystem serviceslandscape ecologypollinationorganic farmingwildlife habitat
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , October 2017 , pp. 417 - 427
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bravo-Monroy, L., Tzanopoulos, J., and Potts, S.G. 2015. Ecological and social drivers of coffee pollination in Santander, Colombia. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 211:145–154.Google Scholar
Briggs, H.M., Perfecto, I., and Brosi, B.J. 2013. The role of the agricultural matrix: Coffee management and Euglossine bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Euglossini) communities in southern Mexico. Environmental Entomology 42:1210–1217.Google Scholar
Brosi, B.J., Daily, G.C., Shih, T.M., Oviedo, F., and Durán, G. 2008. The effects of forest fragmentation on bee communities in tropical countryside. Journal of Applied Ecology 45:773–783.Google Scholar
Butz Huryn, V.M. 1997. Ecological impacts of introduced honey bees. Quarterly Review of Biology 1:275–297.Google Scholar
Cane, J.H. 1991. Soils of ground-nesting bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea): Texture, moisture, cell depth and climate. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 64:406–413.Google Scholar
Clement, R.M. and Horn, S.P. 2001. Pre-Columbian land-use history in Costa Rica: A 3000-year record of forest clearance, agriculture and fires from Laguna Zoncho. The Holocene 11:419–426.Google Scholar
Colwell, R.K. 2013. EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 9. Available at Web site PersistentURL:purl.ococ.org/estimates Google Scholar
Cramer, S.G. and Swanson, M.R. 1973. An evaluation of ten pairwise multiple comparison procedures by Monte Carlo methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association 68:66–74.Google Scholar
DeMarco, P. and Coelho, F.M. 2004. Services performed by the ecosystem: Forest remnants influence agricultural cultures’ pollination and production. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:1245–1255.Google Scholar
Janzen, D.H. 1983. Costa Rican Natural History. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA.Google Scholar
Jha, S. and Vandermeer, J.H. 2010. Impacts of coffee agroforestry management on tropical bee communities. Biological Conservation 143:1423–1431.Google Scholar
Kearns, C.A. and Inouye, D.W. 1993. Techniques for Pollination Biologists. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA.Google Scholar
Klein, A.M., Steffan-Dewenter, I., and Tscharntke, T. 2003a. Pollination of Coffea canephora in relation to local and regional agroforestry management. Journal of Applied Ecology 40:837–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, A.M., Steffan-Dewenter, I., and Tscharntke, T. 2003b. Fruit set of highland coffee increases with the diversity of pollinating bees. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 270:955–961.Google Scholar
Klein, A.M., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Tscharntke, T. 2003c. Bee pollination and fruit set of Coffea arabica and C. canephora (Rubiaceae). American Journal of Botany 90:153–157.Google Scholar
Klein, A.M., Vaissiere, B.E., Cane, J.H., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Cunningham, S.A., Kremen, C., and Tscharntke, T. 2007. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 274:303–313.Google ScholarPubMed
Kremen, C., Williams, N.M., and Thorp, R.W. 2002. Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99:16812–16816.Google Scholar
McCann, K.S. 2000. The diversity–stability debate. Nature 405:228–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Brien, T.G. and Kinnaird, M.F. 2003. Caffeine and conservation. Science 300:587.Google Scholar
Ricketts, T.H. 2004. Tropical forest fragments enhance pollinator activity in nearby coffee crops. Conservation Biology 18:1262–1271.Google Scholar
Ricketts, T.H., Daily, G.C., Ehrlich, P.R., and Michener, C.D. 2004. Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101:12579–12582.Google Scholar
Roubik, D.W. 2002a. Tropical agriculture: The value of bees to the coffee harvest. Nature 417:708.Google Scholar
Roubik, D.W. 2002b. Feral African bees augment neotropical coffee yield. In Kevan, P. and Imperatriz Fonseca, V.L. (eds). Pollinating Bees: The Conservation Link between Agriculture and Nature—Ministry of Environment, Brazil. p. 255–266.Google Scholar
SAS Software. 2010. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Veddeler, D., Olschewski, R., Tscharntke, T., and Klein, A.M. 2008. The contribution of non-managed social bees to coffee production: New economic insights based on farm-scale yield data. Agroforestry Systems 73:109–114.Google Scholar
Vergara, C.H. and Badano, E.I. 2009. Pollinator diversity increases fruit production in Mexican coffee plantations: The importance of rustic management systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 129:117–123.Google Scholar