Research ArticleAGRICULTURE

A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  16 Oct 2019:
Vol. 5, no. 10, eaax0121
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0121
  • Fig. 1 Distribution of analyzed studies and effects of richness on ecosystem services provisioning.

    (A) Map showing the size (number of crop fields sampled) and location of the 89 studies (further details of studies are given in table S1). (B) Global effect of pollinator richness on pollination (n = 821 fields of 52 studies). (C) Global effect of natural enemy richness on pest control (n = 654 fields of 37 studies). The thick line in each plot represents the median of the posterior distribution of the model. Light gray lines represent 1000 random draws from the posterior. The lines are included to depict uncertainty of the modeled relationship.

  • Fig. 2 Direct and indirect effects of richness, total abundance, and evenness on ecosystem services.

    (A) Path model of pollinator richness as a predictor of pollination, mediated by pollinator abundance. (B) Path model of natural enemy richness as a predictor of pest control, mediated by natural enemy abundance. (C) Path model of pollinator richness as a predictor of pollination, mediated by pollinator evenness. (D) Path model of natural enemy richness as a predictor of pest control, mediated by natural enemy evenness. Pollination model, n = 821 fields of 52 studies; pest control model, n = 654 fields of 37 studies. Path coefficients are effect sizes estimated from the median of the posterior distribution of the model. Black and red arrows represent positive or negative effects, respectively. Arrow widths are proportional to highest density intervals (HDIs).

  • Fig. 3 Direct and indirect effects of landscape simplification on richness of service-providing organisms and associated ecosystem services.

    (A) Path model of landscape simplification as a predictor of pollination, mediated by pollinator richness (n = 821 fields of 52 studies). (B) Path model of landscape simplification as a predictor of pest control, mediated by natural enemy richness (n = 654 fields of 37 studies). Path coefficients are effect sizes estimated from the median of the posterior distribution of the model. Black and red arrows represent positive and negative effects, respectively. Arrow widths are proportional to HDIs. Gray arrows represent nonsignificant effects (HDIs overlapped zero).

  • Fig. 4 Direct and cascading effects of landscape simplification on final crop production via changes in richness, evenness, and ecosystem services.

    (A) Path model representing direct and indirect effects of landscape simplification on final crop production through changes in pollinator richness, evenness, and pollination (n = 438 fields of 27 studies). (B) Path model representing direct and indirect effects of landscape simplification on final crop production through changes in natural enemy richness, evenness, and pest control [only insecticide-free areas were considered in the model (n = 185 fields of 14 studies)]. Path coefficients are effect sizes estimated from the median of the posterior distribution of the model. Black and red arrows represent positive and negative effects, respectively. Arrow widths are proportional to HDIs. Gray arrows represent nonsignificant effects (HDIs overlapped zero).

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/10/eaax0121/DC1

    Supplementary Text

    Fig. S1. Forest plot of the effect of pollinator richness on pollination for individual studies.

    Fig. S2. Forest plot of the effect of natural enemy richness on pest control for individual studies.

    Fig. S3. Direct and indirect landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and abundance or richness and evenness.

    Fig. S4. Direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in natural enemy richness, abundance evenness, and pest control (all sites together, with and without insecticide application).

    Fig. S5. Forest plot of the effect of landscape simplification on natural enemy abundance for individual studies.

    Fig. S6. Mediation model.

    Fig. S7. Direct and indirect effects of pollinator richness, abundance, and evenness (with honey bees) on pollination.

    Fig. S8. Direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on area-based yield via changes in richness, and ecosystem services.

    Table S1. List of 89 studies considered in our analyses.

    Table S2. Model output for richness–ecosystem service relationships.

    Table S3. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in abundance) of richness on ecosystem services.

    Table S4. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in evenness) of richness on ecosystem services.

    Table S5. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in richness) of landscape simplification on ecosystem services.

    Table S6. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and abundance.

    Table S7. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and evenness.

    Table S8. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in richness, evenness, and ecosystem services.

    Table S9. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in richness, abundance, and ecosystem services.

    Table S10. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects of pollinator richness, abundance, and evenness (with honey bees) on pollination.

    Table S11. Results of pairwise comparison of richness–ecosystem service relationships according to the methods used to sample pollinators and natural enemies.

    Table S12. Results of pairwise comparison of richness–ecosystem service relationships according to the methods used to quantify pollination and pest control services.

    Database S1. Data on pollinator and natural enemy diversity and associated ecosystem services compiled from 89 studies and 1475 locations around the world.

    References (66111)

  • Supplementary Materials

    The PDF file includes:

    • Supplementary Text
    • Fig. S1. Forest plot of the effect of pollinator richness on pollination for individual studies.
    • Fig. S2. Forest plot of the effect of natural enemy richness on pest control for individual studies.
    • Fig. S3. Direct and indirect landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and abundance or richness and evenness.
    • Fig. S4. Direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in natural enemy richness, abundance evenness, and pest control (all sites together, with and without insecticide application).
    • Fig. S5. Forest plot of the effect of landscape simplification on natural enemy abundance for individual studies.
    • Fig. S6. Mediation model.
    • Fig. S7. Direct and indirect effects of pollinator richness, abundance, and evenness (with honey bees) on pollination.
    • Fig. S8. Direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on area-based yield via changes in richness, and ecosystem services.
    • Table S1. List of 89 studies considered in our analyses.
    • Table S2. Model output for richness–ecosystem service relationships.
    • Table S3. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in abundance) of richness on ecosystem services.
    • Table S4. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in evenness) of richness on ecosystem services.
    • Table S5. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects (mediated by changes in richness) of landscape simplification on ecosystem services.
    • Table S6. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and abundance.
    • Table S7. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on ecosystem services via changes in richness and evenness.
    • Table S8. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in richness, evenness, and ecosystem services.
    • Table S9. Model output for path models testing the direct and cascading landscape simplification effects on final crop production via changes in richness, abundance, and ecosystem services.
    • Table S10. Model output for path models testing direct and indirect effects of pollinator richness, abundance, and evenness (with honey bees) on pollination.
    • Table S11. Results of pairwise comparison of richness–ecosystem service relationships according to the methods used to sample pollinators and natural enemies.
    • Table S12. Results of pairwise comparison of richness–ecosystem service relationships according to the methods used to quantify pollination and pest control services.
    • References (66111)

    Download PDF

    Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

    • Database S1 (Microsoft Excel format). Data on pollinator and natural enemy diversity and associated ecosystem services compiled from 89 studies and 1475 locations around the world.

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Navigate This Article