TY - JOUR
T1 - Apple grower pollination practices and perceptions of alternative pollinators in New York and Pennsylvania
AU - Park, Mia G.
AU - Joshi, Neelendra K.
AU - Rajotte, Edwin G.
AU - Biddinger, David J.
AU - Losey, John E.
AU - Danforth, Bryan N.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the anonymous apple growers who participated in the mail survey, as well as those growers who allowed them to conduct bee surveys in their orchards in New York and Pennsylvania. This project was supported by Smith Lever and Hatch Funds administered through Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station and Pennsylvania State University Fruit Research and Extension Center, by a USDA-AFRI grant (USDA 2010-03689, B.N. Danforth, PI), and by a Northeast IPM Partnership grant. M.G. Park received additional support from the Palmer, Rawlins and Chapman awards in the Department of Entomology and a Land Grant Extension Fellowship from the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Cornell University. This project was also supported by an USDA-SCRI Research and Extension grant (PEN04398, D.J. Biddinger and E.G. Rajotte, PDs) on native pollinators, and an USDA-NRCS Conservation Innovation grant with the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. The grower survey was deemed exempt from IRB review at Cornell University.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2018 Cambridge University Press.
PY - 2020/2/1
Y1 - 2020/2/1
N2 - Pollinator declines coupled with increasing demand for insect pollinated crops have the potential to cause future pollinator shortages for our most nutritious and valuable crops. Ensuring adequate crop pollination may necessitate a shift in pollination management, from one that primarily relies on the managed European honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) to one that integrates alternative pollinators. While a growing body of scientific evidence supports significant contributions made by naturally occurring, native bees for crop pollination, translating research to practice requires buy-in from growers. The intention of agricultural extension is to address grower needs and concerns; however, few studies have assessed grower knowledge, perceptions and attitudes about native pollinators. Here we present findings from questionnaire-based surveys of over 600 apple growers in New York State and Pennsylvania, coupled with ecological data from bee surveys. This hybrid sociological and biological survey allows us to compare grower knowledge and perceptions to an actual pollinator census. While up to 93% of respondents highly valued importance of native bees, 20% growers did not know how much native bees actually contribute to their orchard pollination. Despite the uncertainty, a majority of growers were open to relying on native bees (up to 60% in NY and 67% in PA) and to making low-cost changes to their farm's management that would benefit native pollinators (up to 68 in NY and 85% in PA). Growers consistently underestimated bee diversity, but their estimates corresponded to major bee groups identifiable by lay persons, indicating accurate local knowledge about native bees. Grower reliance on honeybees increased with farm size; because native bee abundance did not measurably decrease with farm size, renting honeybees may be motivated by risk avoidance rather than grower perception of lower native bee activity. Demonstrated effectiveness of native pollinators and clear guidelines for their management were the most important factors influencing grower decision to actively manage orchards for native bees. Our results highlight a pressing need for an active and research-based extension program to support diversification of pollination strategies in the region.
AB - Pollinator declines coupled with increasing demand for insect pollinated crops have the potential to cause future pollinator shortages for our most nutritious and valuable crops. Ensuring adequate crop pollination may necessitate a shift in pollination management, from one that primarily relies on the managed European honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) to one that integrates alternative pollinators. While a growing body of scientific evidence supports significant contributions made by naturally occurring, native bees for crop pollination, translating research to practice requires buy-in from growers. The intention of agricultural extension is to address grower needs and concerns; however, few studies have assessed grower knowledge, perceptions and attitudes about native pollinators. Here we present findings from questionnaire-based surveys of over 600 apple growers in New York State and Pennsylvania, coupled with ecological data from bee surveys. This hybrid sociological and biological survey allows us to compare grower knowledge and perceptions to an actual pollinator census. While up to 93% of respondents highly valued importance of native bees, 20% growers did not know how much native bees actually contribute to their orchard pollination. Despite the uncertainty, a majority of growers were open to relying on native bees (up to 60% in NY and 67% in PA) and to making low-cost changes to their farm's management that would benefit native pollinators (up to 68 in NY and 85% in PA). Growers consistently underestimated bee diversity, but their estimates corresponded to major bee groups identifiable by lay persons, indicating accurate local knowledge about native bees. Grower reliance on honeybees increased with farm size; because native bee abundance did not measurably decrease with farm size, renting honeybees may be motivated by risk avoidance rather than grower perception of lower native bee activity. Demonstrated effectiveness of native pollinators and clear guidelines for their management were the most important factors influencing grower decision to actively manage orchards for native bees. Our results highlight a pressing need for an active and research-based extension program to support diversification of pollination strategies in the region.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046035153&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046035153&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S1742170518000145
DO - 10.1017/S1742170518000145
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85046035153
SN - 1742-1705
VL - 35
SP - 1
EP - 14
JO - Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems
JF - Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems
IS - 1
ER -