Study

The value of uncropped field margins for foraging bumblebees

  • Published source details Kells A.R., Holland J.M. & Goulson D. (2001) The value of uncropped field margins for foraging bumblebees. Journal of Insect Conservation, 5, 283-291.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Leave field margins unsprayed within the crop (conservation headlands)

Action Link
Bee Conservation

Leave arable field margins uncropped with natural regeneration

Action Link
Bee Conservation

Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Leave field margins unsprayed within the crop (conservation headlands)

    Kells et al. (2001) counted bumblebees Bombus spp. and honey bees Apis mellifera on 50 m transects in five 6 m wide field margins managed as conservation headlands, and ten naturally regenerated, uncropped field margins in the West Midlands, England. They recorded averages of less than three bees/transect in conservation headlands, compared to averages of between 10 and 50 bees/transect in naturally regenerated margins.

  2. Leave arable field margins uncropped with natural regeneration

    A replicated controlled trial of UK arable field margins allowed to regenerate naturally for one year found that they supported significantly more honey bees and bumblebees than unsprayed cropped margins managed as conservation headlands (averages between 10 and 50 bees/transect on naturally regenerated margins compared to <3 bees/transect in conservation headlands; Kells et al. 2001).

  3. Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields

    A replicated controlled trial in 1999 of arable field margins in the UK (Kells et al. 2001) found that margins allowed to regenerate naturally for one year supported significantly more honey bees Apis spp. and bumblebees Bombus spp. than unsprayed cropped margins managed as conservation headlands (average 10-50 bees/transect on naturally regenerated margins compared to <3 bees/transect in conservation headlands). The trial was replicated once on each of five farms, with two uncropped field margins and one control conservation headland margin per farm. Margins were 4-6 m wide and located on the boundary of spring-sown cereal fields. Transects (0.5 x 50 m2) parallel to the field edge were walked at 8-10 day intervals over a 40-day period in each margin to record bee numbers, species and flower preferences.

     

  4. Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

    A replicated controlled trial in 1999 on five arable farms in the West Midlands, UK (Kells et al. 2001) found fewer bees (Apidae) on conservation headlands compared to naturally regenerated margins (average less than three bees/transect in conservation headlands vs averages of 10-50 bees/transect in naturally regenerated margins. Bumblebees Bombus spp. and honey bees Apis mellifera were counted on 50 m transects in five 6 m-wide field margins managed as conservation headlands, and ten naturally regenerated, uncropped field margins between 29 June and 9 August. Two unsown margins and one conservation headland were created on each farm.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust