8 - Pollination in New Zealand's Agricultural Landscapes

8.1 - The importance of pollinators and the international concerns

Pollination is one of the critical steps in plant reproduction that has been singled out for initial emphasis by the CBD's scientific advisors (SBSTTA294). This concern stemmed partly from the heavy reliance for pollination on a single species, the honey bee (Apis mellifera). The consequent vulnerability of ecosystem function was highlighted by recent world-wide spread of Varroa mites and associated diseases that have dramatically reduced both feral and managed hives of honey bees. Pollination is one of the key 'ecosystem services' provided by biodiversity and a 'plinth' upon which so much depends295. Contributing concerns include296:

  • Destruction of potential nesting sites
  • Pesticide exposure
  • Interbreeding of honey bees with African honey bees (this makes them unmanageable)
  • Climate change and habitat fragmentation effects on wild pollinators
  • Increasing reliance on native pollinators297 that may be depleted and are not well understood or even described in many instances, together with
  • Varroa mite and disease infestation of honey bees

Anecdotal evidence suggests declines in pollinators have occurred in Asia, North America and Europe. Nevertheless two recent reviews298 have clearly showed the long-term persistence of members of complex bee communities in North America, and there are several ways that agricultural activities might increase rather than decrease pollination and the abundance of alternative pollinators.

The Brazilian government held an international workshop in 1998 to propose a framework for an International Initiative on Pollinators and recommendations of that workshop were adopted as part of the CBD's agricultural biodiversity work programme299. Recommendations from the workshop (Table 2) include the need for increased research and sharing of case studies, the main focus of this contract report. A brief review of New Zealand pollinator systems and evidence for its disruption is needed before sensible priorities can be set.

8.2 - Characteristics of New Zealand's native flora and its pollinators

Many New Zealand lowland forest trees have small, shallow, clustered and colourless flowers300. This unspecialised floral form is suitable for pollination by a large variety of small insects such as flies and thrips301 and many indigenous species are visited successfully pollinated by introduced honey bees302. The prevailing view that relatively few specialised pollinator-plant relationships exist in New Zealand6 again303 has recently been challenged by discovery of apparent dependence of threatened Mistletoes on native birds and bees for opening flower buds, and that native short-tailed bats are specialised pollinators of Dactylanthus taylorii, a threatened parasitic plant304. There is also a danger that visitation is confused with pollination. For example, flowers of Corokia cotoneaster, an endemic divaricating shrub are visited by a wide range of insects, but a single species of native bee appears to be the effective pollinator305. These recent discoveries suggest that more specialised pollinator-plant dependencies will be found as more research unfolds, but they do not in themselves provide a significant challenge to the generalisation that New Zealand plants are not usually dependant on particular pollinators. This is important for biodiversity considerations because tight linkage between plants and specialised pollinators could cause 'extinction cascades' if elimination of the specialised pollinators occurs306. Reduction in some New Zealand pollinators may matter less than elsewhere because it is more likely that other species can take their place to provide the essential ecosystem service. This is not a warrant to not care about pollinators in general, but it suggests that flow-on effects to native flora in New Zealand agricultural systems may be relatively lower priority than in other countries. Focused active management of the few specialised plant-pollinator interactions may still be needed, especially where the plant is threatened.

The relative simple nature of floral structures of New Zealand native plants is paralleled by a relatively simplified suite of vertebrate pollinators compared to overseas. Fruitbats are important pollinators in Australian and tropical regions, and co-evolution is reflected in flower characteristics307. The absence of fruitbats and terrestrial mammals in New Zealand's evolutionary history is therefore probably an important reason why our plant-pollinator interactions are generalised. Virtually none of the New Zealand pollinator publications include reference to mammals, whereas most of the publications from Australia and the Pacific do. Pollen has been collected from our two bats308 but birds and insects were and remain the main pollinators309. Even amongst the bird pollinators we have a relatively depauperate diversity of honeyeater birds, the main nectarivorous family. An important past role of lizards as pollinators and seed dispersers has been hypothesised310.

Generalised decline in both distribution and abundance of many of the previously important pollinators has occurred in New Zealand, especially in the last century and a half since the rodents and mustelids were introduced311. Populations of at least seven previously important pollinating birds and two species of native bats have declined dramatically on the past century in New Zealand, and lizard distribution and abundance has been contracted by the impacts of introduced mammalian predators and habitat despoliation. Land conversion to intensified agriculture and predominant pastoral habitats has recapitulated this decline on a localised extinction scale. A critical lack of pollinators may slow restoration or maintenance of valued native and introduced non-production plants in New Zealand's agricultural landscapes.

Wind pollination312 and self-compatibility313 of many species may buffer ecosystems from widespread or rapid response to elimination or reduction in pollinators, or the number and quality of seeds set may have little influence on subsequent population recruitment if a density dependent regulation on seedling establishment and survival operates. Elimination of earlier pollinators such as bats and lizards may be partially counteracted by introduced insects or even mammals. For example, loss of native bat pollinators did not prevent limited cross-pollination and seed set of a dioecious liane, Freycinetia baueriana. Introduced possums are now acting as a pollinator and seed disperser for the species314. Introduced rats are both predators and pollinators of Dactylanthus flowers315. Similarly native bee and native bird pollinators of pohutakawa (Metrosideros excelsa) have been eliminated but are replaced by introduced pollinators so that the degree of selfing is unchanged. Elimination of displacement of the natives therefore is not responsible for the current patterns of poor regeneration of the species316 and most endangered plants are not limited by pollination317. Nineteen New Zealand plants listed as threatened or rare are referenced as honey bee forage sources. All have declined and are threatened by grazers and habitat alteration and none are known to be experiencing pollination problems. Placement of honey bee hives next to patches of endangered plants should be trialed as a potential way of increasing seed production.

8.3 - Pollination of important agricultural plants in New Zealand

New Zealand's agricultural production is nearly entirely based on introduced plants, most of which are effectively pollinated by honey bees318 or bumblebees319. Alkali bees and alfalfa leaf-cutting bees were introduced for lucerne pollination and long-tongued bumblebees for clover. Arrival of specialised pollinators by natural dispersal320 and/or accidental321 or deliberate introduction322 suggests that a flow of new pollinators will occur to gradually increase biodiversity. In general there have been calls for more importation of introduced pollinators on the general assumption that the more diverse the fauna, the better for pollination and biodiversity323.

Difficulties in pollinating kiwifruit, a high export earner, has spawned a comprehensive and long-standing pollination research programme324. An unusual potential case study for the CBD website is the development of a machine to assist kiwifruit pollination which blows bee-collected pollen onto vines325. Vigorous ongoing research of kiwifruit pollination is funded largely by the industry itself326. Similarly several recent publications about specific pollination issues for particular crops327 testify to the need for ongoing research of economically important pollination problems. New Zealand can boast to having the scientific capacity and an excellent track record in solving economically important crop pollination problems. We urge that this crop research continues much as at present according to industry priorities and funding availability. The pollination research agenda to be developed for this CBD contract is for added research on pollination directed mainly to biodiversity priorities rather than maintaining or increasing crop productivity or quality.

The importance of pollinators for clover stems from the flow-on effects that these have on nutrification of soils by nitrogen fixation. There is an urgent need to understand the impact of reduced pollination on the clover populations in pastoral swards because the Varroa threat may alter seed set and seed quality. We were unable to obtain details of Varroa and other honey bee related research projects being undertaken by Dr Mark Goodwin's Crop Research team at Ruakura Research Centre, but are assured by him that more than 10 projects have adequately covered the direct impacts of Varroa on honey bee colonies in New Zealand.

8.4 - Native bees in New Zealand

Taxonomic description of New Zealand native bees is nearing completion and publication of a monograph is imminent328. This monograph will also summarise what is known of their enemies, distribution (geographical, seasonal, altitudinal), flower visiting records, nest sites, numbers per collection, etc.329. New Zealand's native bee fauna is depauperate compared to Australia's330, but even so we have about 40 species from 2 families (36 species of Colletidae and 4 or 5 Halicidae)331. The detail of their life-cycles, feeding, distribution and population trends are unknown and not being systematically studied, but it is clear that several live in agricultural landscapes. Some assist pollination of crops and other introduced species, so the CBD agricultural biodiversity agenda to retain a suite of potential pollinators of food crops could be realised in New Zealand by fostering native bees. Instances of native bees far out numbering honey bees on some introduced plants suggest that their role is sometimes very important. Naturally they are also potentially very important pollinators of native flora that persist and may be fostered more within agricultural landscapes, so a better understanding of native bee ecology and ecosystem servicing would be very useful and we recommend that it has high priority in MAF's pollination research.

Potential impacts of agricultural chemicals and habitat alteration could be both positive and negative. If the predators and parasites of native bees are affected by toxins more than are the bees themselves, a net benefit may accrue. Some Leioproctus are attacked by cuckoo wasps (Gasteruptionidae). Female parasitoids lay an egg in a bee cell. The parasitoid larva eats the bee egg or small larva, then consumes all the stored pollen and nectar. Hylaeus prepupae are attacked by a small eulophid parasitoid, Melittobia. Females lay up to 100 eggs on a prepupa. The resultant parasitoid larvae completely consume the bee prepupa, so that about 14 days after the eggs were laid, 100 new adult parasitoids appear. There are several other enemies, but the above two are the most important by far. There are anecdotal reports that Leioproctus had been cleaned out in some breeding areas by Vespula wasps. Spider hunter wasps do not take native bees. Spiders would catch a few but their impact would be minimal compared to that of the two main enemies332.

Similarly alteration of habitat by agricultural activities could sometimes assist native bees. For example, most known sites of Colletidae nests have been made or modified by humans (roadside cuttings, earth bared by machinery, ground maintained weed-free by herbicides, and soil in animal tracks). Donovan (1980) concludes that nest sites rather than food is the main factor limiting native bee numbers. If so, agricultural activities may be of net benefit to native bee diversity in New Zealand, but we caution that this will remain speculative until more detailed research is completed.

8.5 - Introduced bees: a net benefit or threat to biodiversity?

Distributional and resource considerations

Introduced honey bees, four species of bumblebees, alkali bees and lucerne leafcutter bees have been introduced to New Zealand for honey and to provide pollination. All form self-maintaining feral populations that supplement populations promoted by active management practices such as provision of nest boxes, supplementary foods, disease control and sometimes active rearing assistance. The distribution of alkali and leafcutting bees is probably restricted to near lucerne crops and abundance is highest in the South Island, especially around Blenheim.

Systematic study of feral populations has not been done so the comparative importance of wild cf managed bees for pollination in New Zealand is largely unknown. Active management of bees is likely to promote the number of local wild hives but the size of this influence on population distribution, abundance and population dynamics is unknown.

The capacity to rear and shift large numbers of honey bees is both a potential benefit to biodiversity and a potential threat. It allows management to provide pollination where seed and fruit production and quality is compromised by lack of naturally occurring pollinators, but artificially high bee densities could potentially disrupt natural hybridisation and seed sets and reduce native pollinator populations through competition.

Beekeeping in honeydew beech forests: a special case

Beekeeping in South Island honeydew beech forests adjacent to farmland or in reserves within pine plantations in the northern half of South Island caused concern that feeding and movement patterns of honeyeater birds (especially bellbirds and tui) may be disrupted by competition with bees333. Research showed that stocking rates currently experienced in Carter Holt Harvey forests of the Canterbury foothill slopes of the Southern Alps and imposed by DoC elsewhere were unlikely to cause problems for the birds334. This represents a useful potential case study of the way maximum stocking limits for honey bees could be used to maximise economic returns for beekeepers without compromising biodiversity outcomes. It is the only example we know of in the world where honeybee stocking rate limits to protect biodiversity have been researched and so it represents a potentially useful case study for the CBD parties.

Effects of introduced bees on native bees

The ecology and behaviour of native bees has been so little studied that inference of whether they benefit or are threatened by introduced species is largely speculation. Biosecurity precautions have so far ensured that introduced bees have not brought parasites or diseases that impact on native bees. Competition for nectar and pollen and nest sites has been mooted and is the topic of much research in Australia. Specific instances of apparent competition for specific floral resources have been demonstrated but there is as yet insufficient evidence for informed generalisation about whether honey bees often impact on native species, and if so, whether the impact is demographically important335. Donovan (1980) argues that competition for nest sites is probably minimal because most native species are too small to be affected. The exception may be competition between leaf-cutter bees and the larger species of Helaeniae, but even here field placement by farmers of trap nest holes may increase the nesting opportunities for the native species above natural levels. Most native bees reproduce in the late spring and summer when natural floral sources are flushing so competition for floral nectar and pollen may be reduced.

Effects of honey bees on weeds

Recent concern that honey bees may threaten natural areas by increasing weed abundances through increased pollination was investigated by reviewing the literature to determine which weed taxa surveyed from New Zealand Protected Natural Areas (PNAs) are visited by honey bees336. The contribution made by honey bees to weed reproduction was assessed by checking reproductive strategies and pollination mechanisms of a subset of problem weeds. A substantial proportion of surveyed weeds in PNAs are probably visited by honey bees (43 percent) including half of the problem weeds. However, reproduction of the majority of problem weeds is characterised by plastic reproductive mechanisms and/or simple pollination mechanisms where honey bee influence is low or unimportant. Although honey bees may be important pollinators of some weeds, they probably do not contribute substantially to weed problems. Weeds can add biodiversity to agricultural landscapes unless they become competitive dominants that squeeze out other species.

8.6 - Wasps: super competitors and predators but also pollinators

Recent invasion of New Zealand by the social wasps Vespula germanica and V. vulgaris spurred a greatly intensified research programme on their ecology, impacts and control337. They potentially pollinate many species, though this has not been studied in detail. However they undoubtedly have a large indirect impact on pollination in New Zealand because of their depredations of both managed and feral honey bee hives338. The ongoing research programme on wasps is important for several biodiversity reasons and should persist until effective biocontrol to less than 80 percent of current population levels is achieved339. The prime reasons for this research is beyond the scope of the present contract and will therefore not be considered further.

8.7 - Conclusions

Is pollination research and management an important priority?

The generalised decline of pollinators gives legitimacy to rising concerns that native plant reproduction may be compromised by lack of pollination, but there is not a single intensive study that demonstrates pollination failure influences population dynamics of either rare or abundant native plants. Most threatened plants are impacted by introduced grazers and habitat loss rather than lack of pollination340, but ongoing decline could create such problems in the future. Predation of flowers seed by rodents and possums, disruption of dispersal and germination, and especially grazing of emerged seedlings by introduced browsers have all been mooted as potentially critical determinants of plant population dynamics that could have far more important impacts than reduction in pollination. However disruption to pollination is much harder to observe than predation and grazing/browsing effects, so we should not be surprised if future research highlights pollination disruption as a threat for some species or ecological communities. Grazing (the plant equivalent of predation) is a demonstrated critical and immediate threat to survival of adults and recruitment that must be lifted before the more subtle and longer-term challenge of enhancing pollination and reproduction becomes a priority. For example predation of fruiting bodies by brush-tailed possums is potentially the key determinant of Dactylanthus declines.

Lack of firm evidence for widespread influences of a comparative lack of pollinators is not the same as firm evidence that such influences do not occur. Also, ongoing reduction in pollinators may make pollination a critical factor later, so care of pollinators now is a safeguard against future problems and environmental damage that may become irreversible. The environmentally precautionary principle341 asserts that uncertainty must be interpreted in the way that leads to maximum protection of the environment, so research and management to promote pollination should not be ignored in an ideal world. The dilemma facing New Zealand conservation mangers and scientists is that the environmental precautionary principle is not very helpful when the scale of the environmental emergency and a critical lack of research funds and time forces prioritisation. When faced with abundant evidence of immediate pervasive threats from predation and competition from introduced species and habitat degradation and loss, dedication of resources to a potential but somewhat cryptic putative threat like pollination disruption would be unwise. We therefore rank pollination research and management as relatively unimportant and only of medium urgency compared to other biodiversity concerns in New Zealand. A watching brief on pollinators is recommended as a minimum commitment so that escalation of investment can occur in the light of any new information. The very low overall current commitment to pollination research in New Zealand is inadequate to develop and retain sufficient knowledge to maintain this watching brief, so we recommend a modest investment in this area, albeit not as much as in more pressing focal areas such as landscape and soil biota.

Ways that New Zealand could help the CBD's pollinator work programme

Several ways that New Zealand could now help the international effort, other parties, and New Zealand pollinators are outlined in the second column of Table 2. Although we are in a strong position concerning the taxonomic impediment (Section A) for native bees, it is unclear how many of the other insect pollinators are described. Systematic surveys will be needed to collect examples of what is visiting important production and non-production plants before the existence or otherwise of such an impediment can be reported. We recommend that MAF facilitates attempts to initiate overseas aid programmes that fund New Zealand bee taxonomists to assist other CBD parties to solve their taxonomic impediment to understanding and managing pollinators.

Although nationally we have little information and expertise on the conservation of insect pollinators (section C of Table 2), New Zealand's expertise in crop pollination is strong and varied, albeit necessarily centred on important crops grown in New Zealand. This knowledge and expertise on production impacts (section D of Table 2) can be put to excellent use to assist emerging nations in crop pollination problems and in training. We recommend that MAF facilitates attempts to initiate overseas aid programmes that fund New Zealand crop pollination biologists to assist other CBD parties to solve their pollination problems.

The main goal to share information on trends and reasons for them, remedial actions and best professional practice for management of the potential pollinator problem (Section F) will be generally well beyond our grasp until much more fundamental research on New Zealand's pollination processes and pollinators has been initiated. This is an indirect signal of how big a knowledge gap remains in a comparatively wealthy country like New Zealand, despite having a fine and well-funded scientific tradition. It is perhaps also indicative of comparative neglect of biodiversity research and management centred on highly modified habitats within agricultural landscapes.

Pollination Research Gaps

We recommend that resources for pollinator research or adaptive management programmes are allocated in the following order:

First priority: Development of native bee monitoring and sampling protocols: Of the potential research actions suggested by the International Initiative on Pollinators, the establishment and testing of methods for monitoring trends in native bee abundance and distribution (Action B3; Table 2) is potentially the most exportable benefit that New Zealand could share with other parties as well as being a high priority within New Zealand. Pollinators have potential value as more general bio-indicators aside from their intrinsic importance to ecosystems342. The extreme spatial and temporal variation in bee abundance343 makes this an extremely difficult task that will require concerted effort and the very best of statistical awareness and modelling by an insect ecologist to find a robust and cost-effective tool. Two years of intensive research will be needed to trail and select best survey designs.

Second priority: Prediction of indirect impact of Varroa on long-term nutrification and productivity of pastoral grass swards and soils. Disruption of beekeeping over large areas of low productivity land used for extensive pastoralism could have considerable economic and ecological effects. Much of the research on grass community ecology and nutrification may already be known but is too scattered to allow an approximate risk analysis of the long-term effect on clover populations if seed quality and abundance is reduced by inadequate pollination. Three months work from grass population specialists and modellers would be needed for this preliminary risk analysis. This first stage of risk assessment should be able to better predict the intensity and duration of subsequent work required.

Third priority: Honey bee impacts on native bees: Another valuable but complex research project would be experimental tests of impacts of exotic pollinators on native bees (Action B5: Table 2). Complex 'unexpected' indirect ecological interactions are common place344 so effects of honey bees may be to increase rather than decrease native bee abundance. We recommend that any such experiment uses experimental placements of high stocking rates of honey bees in a 'Before/During /After' study design. Honey bees are the best candidates because they reach by far the highest abundance of the introduced bees - if no effect is found for them it can be inferred that similar impacts are unlikely to occur from the bumble bees. Honey bees are also the most widespread and ecologically important introduced pollinator in New Zealand, and any evidence of honey bee impacts is more likely to be applicable to overseas where European honey bees are also the main pollinators.

Fourth priority: Monitoring feral bees, native bees and other insect pollinators across the Varroa invasion front: If B5 experiment (Third priority) indicates potential impacts of honey bees on native species, and Varroa mite has the expected impact of reducing honey bee numbers, the monitoring method established and tested within the first priority should be applied behind, over and ahead of the Varroa invasion front to test whether native bees decline or increase as a result. Feral honey bees were wiped out in parts of USA when Varroa arrived. If the same happens in New Zealand large scale changes in natural (unmanaged) levels of pollination may result. A watch for conspicuous changes in other insect pollinators345 across the invasion front would be a prudent adjunct to the main objective.

Fifth priority: Determination of whether pollination affects population dynamics of key native and introduced plants in agricultural landscapes. There is a general lack of agricultural community-level studies of pollination either within reserved enclaves or spread amongst the farmed land. Some rare or threatened species should be included, but most attention should be directed to population processes or the ecological dominants. This is needed to evaluate whether seed quality of abundance is reduced by pollination failure sufficiently to affect population recruitment of other valued non-crop species in New Zealand's agricultural landscapes. Much scattered literature and unpublished observations already exist, so an initial review of existing knowledge would be prudent to identify a short-list of key species, bioregions and habitat mosaics to target in further research. This initial review would require 6 months but the ensuing study may require a decade. This is an example of the type of long-term fundamental research on ecological processes recognised as needed by the NSS SLM strategy.

Other research priorities

Potential impacts of agricultural chemicals346, habitat fragmentation and climate change are all potential threats in New Zealand pollinators but are too subtle and complex to rank as priorities for funding in the first instance. Some inferences about the effects of habitat disturbance and habitat creation by agriculture are likely to emerge from the detailed ecology and behavioural observations necessary to develop sampling and survey methods (first priority). The top five topics are a compromise to meet a mix of needs: to first learn how to design robust sampling methods so we can eventually determine the status and trends of the native bee numbers, and to respond to the current Varroa threat and an opportunity to learn from its perturbation of the pollination system. Regular review (at least every five years) of pollination research priorities is recommended, especially as more information about Varroa spread and impacts come to light.

Table 2: Recommendations of the International Workshop on pollinators, Brazil, 1998 and potential responses from New Zealand

Proposed Action

 Potential New Zealand Contribution

A Taxonomic Impediment:

 

A1. Assess the scale of the Taxonomic Impediment.

A monograph of systematics of New Zealand’s native bees is about to be completed. Copies should be sent to the International Initiative on Pollinators

A2. Maintain continuity of existing taxonomic and reference collections of bees.

These will be lodged with the New Zealand Athropod collection where they are well cared for and curated.

A3. Establish Centres of Excellence in Bee Taxonomy.

 

NA

A4. Train bee taxonomists.

 

New Zealand’s native bee taxonomist (B.J Donovan†) could perhaps be contracted to train taxonomists from CBD parties, either in New Zealand or their home country‡.

 

A5. Train parataxonomists.

 

As for A4.

A6. Repatriate data (capacity building and benefit sharing).

 

A search of the national arthropod collections could be quickly completed to check that New Zealand is not holding collections on pollinators from other countries

 

A7. Stimulate taxonomic output.

 

A CBD case study about completion of New Zealand’s taxonomic research of native bees and assessment of our progress in describing other pollinating insects could help stimulate taxonomic efforts elsewhere.

 

A8. Hold a workshop on motivation and training of parataxonomists.

 

New Zealand’s insect taxonomist could perhaps be contracted to facilitate such a workshop funded by MAF

A9. Hold a workshop on automated systems for bee identification.

As for A8

B Monitoring the Decline:

 

B1. Establish a committee to co-ordinate a global monitoring plan and network.

 

NA

B2. Refine plans and methods for implementation of a global monitoring plan.

NA

B3. Assess methods, prepare manuals for monitoring pollinators and train participants.

 

Commission research from an ecologist to develop and test statistically robust methods of sampling native bees and monitoring population trends

B4. Implement a pilot global monitoring programme in selected areas worldwide.

 

Establish a monitoring scheme behind, over and ahead of the Varroa invasion front in New Zealand and contribute the results to the International Initiative on Pollinators.

B5. Assess the potential impact of exotic pollinators on native pollinators.

 

Commission research on effects of experimental placements of honeybees on the behaviour, reproductive success and persistence of native bees.

B6. Establish a network of websites with databases for all pollinator monitoring data.

 

Describe the MAF research and monitoring on the MAF website and provide a link to the other teams contributing to the International Initiative on Pollinators

B7. Prepare a Global Biodiversity Outlook Report on the status and trends of pollinators.

 

NA

B8. Promote follow-up activities to ensure continuity and improve the proposed programme.

 

Once New Zealand has evaluated whether they have a problem of declining pollinators a follow-up programme to apply remedial action could be contemplated. Until then planning is premature.

C. Causes of Decline:

  

 

C1. Assess pollinator diversity and pollinator efficiency in representative agroecosystems and adjacent natural and semi-natural environments.

 

Commission (i) a review of pollination of a range of significant plants (with production and biodiversity value), and (ii) research/survey on pollinators behind, over and ahead of the Varroa invasion front in New Zealand.

D Economic Importance:

  

 

D1. Establish a network of experts and a network of databases.

 

MAF could facilitate generation of a list of potential experts and fund their involvement in the International Initiative on Pollinators. New Zealand has a large number of scientists that are expert in solving problems concerning pollination of crops

 

D2. Determine the pollination requirements of each crop species.

 

This is being reported for most main New Zealand crop species, but a special effort is needed to make the other CBD parties aware of the information we have available to share.

 

D3. Determine best pollinators for each crop species.

 

Being done in New Zealand for New Zealand crops.

D4. Determine impact of pollinator presence/absence on fruit and seed yield.

 

Being done in New Zealand for New Zealand crops.

D5. Establish pollination models for selected crops.

 

Being done in New Zealand for New Zealand crops.

D6. Develop a generalised economic method for evaluation of crop-pollinator-pollination systems.

 

Commission work from a team of economists and ecologists to develop a generalised model.

D7. Conduct cost/benefit analyses for different crop and pollination systems, at the farm level.

 

Being done in New Zealand for New Zealand crops.

D8. Conduct total crop production cost analyses for different crop-pollinator-pollination systems, at the national level, including externalities.

 

Development of case studies on a few high profile and well-researched New Zealand crops (e.g. Kiwifruit) as examples.

D9. Conduct cost analyses for changes from one crop-pollination system to another, at the international level, including infrastructure maintenance.

 

NA

D10. Disseminate information generated by various means.

 

Submit multiple copies of this contract report and review, and the associated report and Endnote database on literature to the International Initiative on Pollinators

E Conservation and Restoration:

  

 

E1. Establish an international advisory group on pollinator conservation.

 

Submit names of New Zealand pollination experts and provide a stipend or contract to allow their contribution as part of the advisory group.

E2. Establish an international information network on pollinator conservation and a global directory of pollinator experts.

 

As for E1.

E3. Assess the state of scientific and indigenous knowledge on pollinator conservation.

 

Invite Te Puni Kokiri to identify whether Matauranga Maori concerning pollinator conservation exists and whether it can be shared with other CBD parties.

E4. Develop and update global and national lists of threatened pollinator species.

 

A brief review of the conservation status of New Zealand’s vertebrate pollinators could be quickly generated and supplied, but trend data on insect pollinator distribution and abundance

E5. Develop model-testing protocols for the introduction of non-native pollinators and to assess impacts of agrochemicals on pollinators.

 

This research is low priority for New Zealand considering the much bigger direct threats and unknowns about our pollination systems.

E6. Develop an international communication outreach capacity.

 

Offer case studies, workshops and research results as outlined above.

E7. Produce multilingual manuals on pollinator conservation and restoration for farmers.

 

Active management of pollinator conservation is in it’s infancy in New Zealand. Little practical experience can be contributed here.

E8. Create "bee smart" certification labels for "pollination friendly" products.

 

Ask MfE to add this to their work programme on green labelling.

F. Sustainable Use:

  

 

F1. Disseminate information on pollination in agricultural environments through databases, websites, and networks.

 

Distribute this contract report and review and associated database as widely as possible. Finding a publicly accessible platform to allow others to use the database from the MAF website would be valuable for this initiative.

F2. Establish a roster of existing pollination and pollinators experts to serve as a pool for consultations in technology transfer.

 

Submit names of New Zealand pollination experts and provide a stipend or contract to allow their contribution as part of the advisory group.

F3. Promote applied research on pollination in agricultural ecosystems through training of post-graduates to work on gap issues.

 

Provide student stipends and invite potential supervisors to become involved.

F4. Protect natural habitats, within agricultural landscapes, as sources of wild pollinators for crop improvement.

 

This can only follow after much more fundamental research on New Zealand insect pollinators is available. A long-term research and then adaptive management strategy should be dedicated to this eventual goal.

F5. Evaluate positive and negative effects of alternative practices and technologies in agricultural production on pollinator conservation and effectiveness.

 

As for F4.

F6. Evaluate impacts on pollination of practices and technologies used in agricultural production.

 

As for F4.

F7. Improve the knowledge on the real needs of pollination of tropical crops and forest trees.

 

As for C1. i.e. Commission a review of pollination and population recruitment of a range of significant plants (with production and biodiversity value)

F8. Gather and disseminate/exchange information of best practices.

 

As for F4.

F9. Conduct risk/impact assessments of main causes of pollination decline.

 

As for F4.

F10. Develop guidelines for policy makers and for farmers.

 

As for F4.

N/A Not applicable to New Zealand.

† There is only one other person with any interest in native bees in New Zealand - Pat Quinn, a retired electrical engineer. He collects, and has some interest in nests etc. of Hylaeus. A number of other entomologists collect, but go no further than pin the insects before sending to Dr Donovan.

‡ Dr Barry Donovan is already funded from the U.S. to revise the bees of New Caledonia over the next 3 years.

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Contact for Enquiries

MAF Information Services
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND

Fax: +64 4 894 0721
Contact this person

 
Print this page Print this page