Next Article in Journal
Perspectives on Sustainable Management of Jackfruit Trees for Food Consumption in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Previous Article in Journal
The Global Green New Deal: The New Norm?
 
 
Please note that, as of 4 December 2024, Environmental Sciences Proceedings has been renamed to Environmental and Earth Sciences Proceedings and is now published here.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

The Significance of Pollination for Global Food Production and the Guarantee of Nutritional Security: A Literature Review †

by
Pedro Gomes Peixoto
,
Heytor Lemos Martins
*,
Bruna Cristina Pinto
,
Ana Luiza Franco
,
Larissa Souza Amaral
and
Cristina Veloso de Castro
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Ambientais, Universidade do Estado de Minas Gerais, Unidade Frutal, Frutal 38202-436, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the ICSD 2021: 9th International Conference on Sustainable Development, Virtual, 20–21 September 2021.
Environ. Sci. Proc. 2022, 15(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007
Published: 1 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 9th International Conference on Sustainable Development)

Abstract

:
Animal pollination is economically, socially, and culturally relevant. It is responsible for ensuring the production of biofuels, fibers, medicines, building materials, and mainly for the global production of food. The zoochorous pollination syndrome is widely discussed because of the coevolution between plants and animals; so, the pollinators have bioecological characteristics that allow several plants, mainly angiosperms, to complete their reproductive cycles. Thus, this work aims to discuss and synthesize information on studies related to the importance of pollination for global food production and the guarantee of nutritional security, one of the Objectives of the Sustainable Development goals (OSD). A narrative literary review was carried out to obtain data. Pollinators are needed to achieve several OSD, such as Zero Hunger and Life on Earth. Practical activities should be implemented to increase the survival and establishment of these organisms. The commitment of different sectors of society to pollinators is fundamental, and the lack of pollinators leads to losses in productivity and environmental quality.

1. Introduction

Pollination is a term that refers to the transfer of male and female gametes into plants, while pollinators are the means by which gametes travel between plants. The transport of gametes can happen by abiotic and biotic means, such as wind and rain and by the direct action of the plant or animals. The concept has transformed over the past few years to serve as a broad term for structuring a wide range of ecological interactions [1,2,3]. Flowering plants (angiosperms) invariably have no control over how they receive and disperse gametes [4]. However, about 87.5% of angiosperms are dependent on animal vectors for collection, transport, and pollination for reproduction [5].
Animal pollination syndrome dates back to the evolutionary past of mutually beneficial relationships between animals and plants. A long evolutionary history marks the interaction between plants and pollinators, the central hypothesis that explains the current observed ecological interactions comes from mutualistic relationships with benefits for both organisms. When searching for food (foraging), animals that can use floral resources, especially nectar, were rewarded for having access to this resource of high energy value. Over time, this meant a possible preference for certain animals with the capacity to exploit more efficient floral resources for specific plants, which allows for coevolution [6]. This process can lead to extreme ecological interaction with animals using resources unique to a certain plant species, and the plant depending exclusively on this animal for its reproduction. Plants even develop floral traits that are more attractive to animals; for example, in the case of insects, some plants have showy reflective colors at specific lengths for some pollinators, in addition to the nectar mentioned earlier.
Animal pollination is economically [7], socially, and culturally relevant; it is directly related to agriculture and food security [8]. It is responsible for ensuring the production of biofuels [9,10], fibers [7,11], medicines [12], building materials, and mainly for the global production of food [7,13], which is directly dependent on pollination and other factors such as the availability of water, nutrients, soil, and sunlight. The zoochory pollination syndrome is widely discussed due to the evolutionary period between plants and animals; so, the pollinators have bioecological characteristics that allow several plants, mainly angiosperms (±90%), to complete their reproductive cycles. In Brazil, for example, Giannini and collaborators analyzed 141 crops and found 85 dependent on pollination [14]. In 2019, a version of the Thematic Report on Pollination, Pollinators, and Food Production in Brazil of 289 foods was published, with 191 presented studies on the interaction with pollinating organisms, of which 91 presented reliable data on the need for pollinators [15]. Scientists consider that there is a lack of knowledge about the importance of plants and pollination [16], which has objective effects on humanity [8,17], (e.g., loss of production/productivity, decrease in physical and chemical quality aspects, decreased reproduction rate, among others).
Thus, this work aims to discuss and synthesize information on studies related to the importance of the pollination phenomenon for global food production and the guarantee of nutritional security, one of the objectives of sustainable development proposed by the United Nations.

Methodology

This study was carried out through a narrative literary review, collecting data/work carried out from a qualitative approach. All searches were performed in the Google Academic and Science Direct databases, using the keywords: food production AND pollinators OR global trade.

2. Current Overview of Global Food Production

The human population is growing. Projections indicate that by 2050 humanity will demand a significant increase in food production and distribution [18]. However, the land has limited space for occupation and use. Currently, 38% of the terrestrial surface is occupied by agricultural production systems, which is approximately about 5 billion hectares [19]. The productivity of the agricultural system has historically been satiated mainly through area expansion projects and the application of soil fertility conditioning inputs and application of agrochemicals to control animal and plant pests [20]. However, the increase in productive areas solely through expansion does not directly reflect an increase in agricultural productivity [21]. Furthermore, the reduction in and the fragmentation of habitats [22] reduces the resilience of the agroecosystems [23,24] and increases the emission of greenhouse gases [25,26].
Studies indicate that global agricultural production needs to grow [27,28]; estimates indicate values between 70 and 110% to meet the growing demands associated with human use and livestock feeding by the year 2050 [27,29]. Thus, researchers aim to find effective strategies to increase food production in the future [30], one of which is better production in a smaller area [31].
During the last few years, the human population has gone through exponential growth, which imposes demands for resources that, more and more, are becoming scarce. According to the Global Hunger Index, 690 million people are malnourished due to lack of adequate food and access to food [32], which implies the search for new productive areas, increasing pressure on ecosystems with the process of replacement and changes in land-use systems, which in general lead to scenarios of environmental degradation, with the reduction in natural areas and the ecosystem services provided (e.g., nutrient cycling and pollination), which in general reduce the stability of productive areas of the primary commodities and foods [33] and resilience of these areas [23].
Furthermore, the production and consumption of food have been globalized, which gives rise to the concept of virtual resources, that is, resources that are virtually added to internationally traded products.

3. Significance of the Pollinator

Pollination is an ecosystem service, which means that it is considered a consumer good and a service that benefits human beings. This service is responsible for reproducing several plants and crops that are substantially benefited directly or indirectly by pollination by animals such as bees, butterflies, bats, and birds. It is estimated that 75% of all crops profit, to varying degrees, from this type of pollination [34]. Thus, pollination enables the production of food in quantity and quality, which allows food security in several countries, especially in developing countries [35], whose economy is based on agricultural export products.
The decrease in animal pollinators causes severe consequences for the economy and ecosystems. There is a decrease in non-domesticated plants, imbalance in natural environments, decrease in food production and social welfare. The main factors are of anthropogenic origin and are mainly related to land use change, which results in the loss and fragmentation of habitats, in addition to the use of pesticides [31,32], environmental pollution, climate change, dispersal of invasive species, and diseases [36].
Recent studies show the relevance of pollination services related to the diversity of pollinating species; in the most diverse types of food crops (±70%), the volume of agricultural production dependent on animal pollination increased by 300% from 1966 to 2016 [8]. Below we highlight the main pollination-dependent crops (Table 1).
The quality of the fruit’s flavor, quality, yield, and nutritional aspects may be linked to the quality of pollination. In a study with strawberries, self-pollination greatly affected production, but animal and manual pollination did not differ in terms of fruit quality. However, manual pollination is often a paid service, especially for large production areas. Hence, animal pollination attends to physiological processes that can result in cheaper fruit and a high-quality standard [37].
For other vegetables, pollination can favor various ways of maintaining the quality of the fruit, seeds, and crops [38], for example, jabuticaba (Plinia sp.). Even in self-compatible species for pollination, the presence and action of a pollinating organism are necessary, which allows an intensification of fruiting [39] (Figure 1), increasing its added value and productivity.
Due to removing natural areas to transform them into agricultural production areas, we have the loss of animal diversity and, within it, the pollinators. Agricultural landscapes devoid of high crop diversity imply a drastic reduction in bee species [39]. These groups, as already discussed, have different ecological roles and environmental services such as pollination of vegetables, fruits, vegetables, among others, that are of fundamental importance for the survival of humans (food) and other animals in the food chain.
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [40], it is estimated that some species of bee pollinate approximately 73% of plant species cultivated in the world, 19% by flies, 6.5% by bats, 5% for wasps, 5% for beetles, 4% for birds, and 4% for butterflies and moths. Given the importance of this environmental service, beekeepers saw pollination by hives as an essential technique to increase agricultural production and an investment opportunity to rent bees for income generation purposes.
In many countries around the world, such as the USA and countries in Europe, beekeeping began to have pollination as its primary goal, a highly profitable business, making honey a byproduct. This service is an alternative to minimize the effects of the potential natural disaster of the lack of these pollinators globally, which interferes with the production of various foods. The methodology consists of transporting the hives to planting areas in times of flowering, where they can remain for a period of up to three months, ensuring more significant and better productivity [41].
Research shows that when using bees in agricultural cultivation areas, there is an increase in production, such as in apple, cherry, watermelon, pumpkin, and blueberry crops, with economic values for these productions being 1.06 billion, 177 million, 146 million, 101 million, and 50 million dollars, respectively [42]. Thus, the importance of bees for the economic valuation of crops and the need to maintain the biodiversity of pollinating organisms through the maintenance and restructuring of habitats to remain in the environment to help even more in production is noticeable.

4. Final Considerations

Animal pollinators are organisms that provide essential services at ecosystem levels that directly affect the economy and human wellbeing. Thus, as much as the production and trade of food in the world involves different factors and interests, a traditional paradigm shift is necessary. There is a perception that it is utopian to aim to achieve several Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations (Zero Hunger and Life on Land), but we are optimistic.
In order to leverage pollination services, practical activities must be implemented to increase the survival and establishment of these organisms, which include practical actions such as increasing habitats, preserving portions of natural environments, and banishing harmful pesticides. Most farmers and society generally are not aware of the socioenvironmental and economic value of pollinating agents in terms of food production and several other factors. Nevertheless, there is a need for broad dissemination programs about their importance for humanity and nature for this to be possible.
There is increasingly a scenario of commitment on the part of companies, organizations, and studies that are elucidating quantitatively and qualitatively the role of pollinators in maintaining and balancing terrestrial ecosystems for social wellbeing and the economy. The current perception is that there is much to be done. However, it is increasingly important to note that there is interest in having public and private institutional policies to preserve and pollinate organisms. The lack of these regulatory and compensatory stimuli can invariably lead to losses in productivity and environmental quality.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007/s1, Figure S1: African bee (Apis mellifera L.) consuming floral resources of jabuticabeira (Plinia sp.), a Brazilian fruit tree. This pollenizer in Brazil represents one of the most recurrent species in natural and anthropogenic environments; Table S1: Most typical food items globally, highlighting those that depend directly or indirectly on pollination and/or benefit from pollinating organisms.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.G.P. and H.L.M.; methodology, P.G.P. and L.S.A.; investigation, P.G.P., B.C.P., H.L.M., C.V.d.C., A.L.F., L.S.A.; writing—original draft preparation, P.G.P., B.C.P., A.L.F., L.S.A.; writing—review and editing, C.V.d.C., A.L.F., H.L.M., P.G.P.; visualization, C.V.d.C.; supervision, P.G.P. and B.C.P.; project administration, H.L.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We thank the organizing committee of the 9th Annual International Conference on Sustainable Development 2021, as well as Environmental Sciences Proceedings for the opportunity for scientific communication and dissemination.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Vogel, S. Blütenbiologische Typen als Elemente der Sippengliederung, dargestellt anhand der Flora Südafrikas. Bot. Stud. 1954, 1, 1–338. [Google Scholar]
  2. Faegri, K.; Van-der-Pij, L. The Principles of Pollination Ecology; Pergamon Press: Oxford, UK, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  3. Rosas-Guerrero, V.; Aguilar, R.; Martén-Rodríguez, S.; Ashworth, L.; Lopezaraiza-Mikel, M.; Bastida, J.M.; Quesada, M. A quantitative review of pollination syndromes: Do floral traits predict effective pollinators? Ecol. Lett. 2014, 17, 388–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Mitchell, R.J.; Irwin, R.E.; Flanagan, R.J.; Karron, J.D. Ecology and evolution of plant–pollinator interactions. Ann. Bot. 2009, 103, 1355–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Ollerton, J.; Rachael, W.; Sam, T. How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 2011, 120, 321–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hu, S.; Dilcher, D.l.; Jarzen, D.M.; Taylor, D.W. Early steps of angiosperm-pollinator coevolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 105, 240–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Levin, M.D. Value of Bee Pollination to U.S. Agriculture. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1983, 29, 50–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. IPBES-Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production; Potts, S.G., Imperatriz-Fonseca, V.L., Ngo, H.T., Eds.; IPBES: Bonn, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  9. Gardiner, M.A.; Tuell, J.K.; Isaacs, R.; Gibbs, J.; Ascher, J.S.; Landis, D.A. Implica-tions of three biofuel crops for beneficial arthropods in agricultural landscapes. Bioenergy Res. 2010, 3, 6–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Romero, M.; Quezada-Euàn, J. Pollinators in biofuel agricultural systems: The diversity and performance of bees (Hyme-noptera: Apoidea) on Jatropha curcas in Mexico. Apidologie 2013, 44, 419–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pires, V.C.; Silveira, F.A.; Sujii, E.R.; Torezani, K.R.S.; Rodrigues, W.A.; Albuquerque, F.A.; Rodrigues, S.M.M.; Salomão, A.N.; Pires, C.S.S. Importance of bee pollination for cotton production in conventional and organic farms in Brazil. J. Pollinat. Ecol. 2014, 13, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Easton-Calabria, A.; Demary, K.C.; Oner, N.J. Beyond Pollination: Honey Bees (Apis mellifera) as Zootherapy Keystone Species. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 6, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Klein, A.M.; Vaissière, B.E.; Cane, J.H.; Steffan-Dewenter, I.S.; Cunningham, A.; Kremen, C.; Tscharntke, T. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc. R. Soc. 2007, 274, 303–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Giannini, T.C.; Cordeiro, G.D.; Freitas, B.M.; Saraiva, A.M.; Imperatriz-Fonseca, V.L. The Dependence of Crops for Pollinators and the Economic Value of Pollination in Brazil. J. Econ. Entomol. 2015, 108, 849–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Wolowski, M.; Agostini, K.; Rech, A.; Varassin, I.; Maues, M.; Freitas, L.; Carneiro, L.; Bueno, R.; Consolaro, H.; Carvalheiro, L.; et al. Relatório Temático Sobre Polinização, Polinizadores e Produção de Alimentos No Brasil; Plataforma Brasileira de Biodiversidade e Serviços Ecossistêmicos (BPBES) e a Rede Brasileira de Interações Planta-Polinizador (REBIPP): Campinas, Brasil, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Oliveira, W.; Silva, J.L.S.; Porto, R.G.; Cruz-Neto, O.; Tabarelli, M.; Viana, B.F.; Peres, C.A.; Lopes, A.V. Plant and Pollination Blindness: Risky Business for Human Food Security. BioScience 2020, 70, 109–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hill, R.; Nates-Parra, G.; Quezada-Euán, J.J.G.; Buchori, D.; LeBuhn, G.; Maués, M.M.; Pert, P.L.; Kwapong, P.K.; Saeed, S.; Breslow, S.J.; et al. Biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 214–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. FAO. Food and Agriculture Organization. ‘Climatesmart’ Agriculture, Policies, Practices and Finances for Food Security, Adaptation and Mitigation; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  19. FAO. Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations. Land Use in Agriculture by the Numbers. 2020. Available online: http://www.fao.org/sustainability/news/detail/en/c/1274219/ (accessed on 11 June 2021).
  20. Garibaldi, L.A.; Aizen, M.A.; Klein, A.M.; Cunningham, S.A.; Harder, L.D. Global growth and stability of agricultural yield decrease with pollinator dependence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 5909–5914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Seppelt, R.; Beckmann, M.; Ceausu, S.; Cord, A.; Gerstner, K.; Gurevitch, J.; Kambach, S.; Klotz, S.; Mendenhall, C.; Phillips, H.; et al. Harmonizing biodiversity conservation and productivity in the context of increasing demands on landscapes. Bioscience 2016, 66, 890–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. De Palma, A.; Abrahamczyk, S.; Aizen, M.; Albrecht, M.; Basset, Y.; Bates, A.; Blake, R.J.; Boutin, C.; Bugter, R.; Connop, S.; et al. Predicting bee community responses to land-use changes: Effects of geographic and taxonomic biases. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 31153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Aizen, M.A.; Aguiar, S.; Biesmeijer, J.C.; Garibaldi, L.A.; Inouye, D.W.; Jung, C.; Martins, D.J.; Medel, R.; Morales, C.L.; Ngo, H.; et al. Global agricultural productivity is threatened by increasing pollinator dependence without a parallel increase in crop diversification. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2019, 25, 3516–3527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Potts, S.G.; Biesmeijer, J.C.; Kremen, C.; Neumann, P.; Schweiger, O.; Kunin, W.E. Global pollinator declines: Trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2010, 25, 345–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hertel, T.W.; Ramankutty, N.; Baldos, U.L.C. Global market integration increases likelihood that a future African Green Revolution could increase crop land use and CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 13799–13804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Baldos, U.L.C.; Hertel, T.W. Global food security in 2050: The role of agricultural productivity and climate change. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2014, 58, 554–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Tilman, D.; Balzer, C.; Hill, J.; Befort, B.L. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 20260–20264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Kastner, T.; Rivas, M.J.I.; Koch, W.; Nonhebel, S. Global changes in diets and the consequences for land requirements for food. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 6868–6872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Alexandratos, N. World Food and Agriculture to 2030/50 Proceedings of a Technical Meeting of Experts; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2009; pp. 1–32. [Google Scholar]
  30. Erb, K.H.; Lauk, C.; Kastner, T.; Mayer, A.; Theurl, M.C.; Haberl, H. Exploring the biophysical option space for feeding the world without deforestation. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Wu, W.; Yu, Q.; You, L.; Chen, K.; Tang, H.; Liu, J. Global cropping intensity gaps: Increasing food production without cropland expansion. Land Use Policy 2018, 76, 515–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Von Grebmer, K.; Bernstein, J.; Alders, R.; Dar, O.; Kock, R.; Rampa, F.; Wiemers, M.; Acheampong, K.; Hanano, A.; Higgins, B.; et al. 2020 Global Hunger Index: One Decade to Zero Hunger: Linking Health and Sustainable Food Systems; Welthungerhilfe: Bonn, Germany; Concern Worldwide: Dublin, Ireland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hasan, S.S.; Zhen, L.; Miah, M.G.; Ahamed, T.; Sami, A. Impact of land use change on ecosystem services: A review. Environ. Dev. 2020, 34, 100527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lautenbach, S.; Seppelt, R.; Liebscher, J.; Dormann, C.F. Spatial and Temporal Trends of Global Pollination Benefit. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e35954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Porto, R.G.; De Almeida, R.F.; Cruz-Neto, O.; Tabarelli, M.; Viana, B.F.; Peres, C.A.; Lopes, A.V. Pollination ecosystem services: A comprehensive review of economic values, research funding and policy actions. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 1425–1442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Vanbergen, A.J.; INITIATIVE, the Insect Pollinators. Threats to an ecosystem service: Pressures on pollinators. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 11, 251–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Wietzke, A.; Westphal, C.; Gras, P.; Kraft, M.; Pfohl, K.; Karlovky, P.; Pawelzik, E.; Tscharntke, T.; Smit, I. Insect pollination as a key factor for strawberry physiology and marketable fruit quality. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2018, 258, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Danner, M.A.; Citadin, I.; Sasso, S.A.Z.; Sachet, M.R.; Malagi, G. Modo de reprodução e viabilidade do pólen de três espécies de jabuticabeira. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 2011, 33, 345–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Hemberger, J.; Crossley, M.S.; Gratton, C. Historical decrease in agricultural landscape diversity is associated with shifts in bumble bee species occurrence. Ecol. Lett. 2021, 24, 1800–1813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. FAO. Conservation and management of pollinators for sustainable agriculture—The international response. In Solitary Bees: Conservation, Rearing and Management for Pollination; Freitas, B.M., Pereira, J.O.P., Eds.; Imprensa Universitária: Fortaleza, Brazil, 2004; pp. 19–22. [Google Scholar]
  41. SEBRAE. Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro e Pequenas Empresas. Conheça a Atividade de Aluguel de Colmeias. 2015. Available online: https://www.sebrae.com.br/sites/PortalSebrae/artigos/conheca-a-atividade-de-aluguel-de-colmeias,5661cc31effce410VgnVCM2000004d00210aRCRD. (accessed on 29 July 2021).
  42. Reilly, J.R.; Artz, D.R.; Biddinger, D.; Bobiwash, K.; Boyle, N.K.; Brittain, C.; Brokaw, J.; Campbell, J.W.; Daniels, J.; Elle, E.; et al. Crop production in the USA is frequently limited by a lack of pollinators. Proc. R. Soc. B 2020, 287, 20200922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. African bee (Apis mellifera L.) consuming floral resources of jabuticabeira (Plinia sp.), a Brazilian fruit tree. This pollenizer in Brazil represents one of the most recurrent species in natural and anthropogenic environments. Source: Franco, A. L.
Figure 1. African bee (Apis mellifera L.) consuming floral resources of jabuticabeira (Plinia sp.), a Brazilian fruit tree. This pollenizer in Brazil represents one of the most recurrent species in natural and anthropogenic environments. Source: Franco, A. L.
Environsciproc 15 00007 g001
Table 1. Most common food items in the world, highlighting those that depend directly or indirectly on pollination and/or benefit from pollinating organisms.
Table 1. Most common food items in the world, highlighting those that depend directly or indirectly on pollination and/or benefit from pollinating organisms.
Popular NameScientific NamePopular NameScientific Name
CoffeeCoffea spp.FigFicus carica
SoybeanGlycine maxAtemoyaAnnona squamosa
TomatoLycopersicon spp.Kiwi fruitActinidia deliciosa
Seed cottonGossypium spp.Castor beanRicinus communis
Cocoa beanTheobroma cacaoBroad beanVicia faba
OrangeCitrus spp.PersimmonCavanillea philippensis
WatermelonCitrullus lanatusKakiDiospyros kaki
PassionfruitPassiflora edulisSweet passion fruitPassiflora alata
ApplePyrus malusQuinceCydonia spp.
MelonseedCucumis meloCow peasVigna unguiculata
BeanPhaseolus spp.LinseedLinum usitatissimum
CoconutCocos nuciferaLycheeLitchi chinensis
GuavaPsidium guajavaBeanPhaseolus vulgaris
PeachPrunus persicaPomegranatePunica granatum
AvocadoPersea americanaCherryEugenia uniflora
Sunflower seedHelianthus annuusSurinam cherryStenocalyx michelii
PapayaCarica papayaTree cottonGossypium arboreum
PlumPrunus spp.CambuciCampomanesia phaea
AnnattoBixa orellanaGliricídiaGliricidia sepium
TangerineCitrus reticulataBrazil nutBertholletia excelsa
Cashew nutAnacardium occidentaleMacadamiaMacadamia integrifolia
LemonCitrus spp.MombinSpondias mombin
GuaranaPaullinia cupanaPumpkinCucurbita spp.
GroundnutArachis hypogaeaVanillaVanilla spp.
PeppersCapsicum annuumSoursopAnnona muricata
CupuaçuTheobroma grandiflorumAdesmiaAdesmia latifolia
AcerolaMalpighia emarginataAraticumAnnona crassiflora
PearPyrus communisApricotPrunus armeniaca
Oil palmElaeis guineensisStrawberriesFragaria spp.
AlmondAmygdalus communisMangoMangifera indica
EggplantSolanum melongena
Adapted from: Klein, 2007; Giannini, et al., 2015; Reilly, Jr. et al., 2020.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Peixoto, P.G.; Martins, H.L.; Pinto, B.C.; Franco, A.L.; Amaral, L.S.; Castro, C.V.d. The Significance of Pollination for Global Food Production and the Guarantee of Nutritional Security: A Literature Review. Environ. Sci. Proc. 2022, 15, 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007

AMA Style

Peixoto PG, Martins HL, Pinto BC, Franco AL, Amaral LS, Castro CVd. The Significance of Pollination for Global Food Production and the Guarantee of Nutritional Security: A Literature Review. Environmental Sciences Proceedings. 2022; 15(1):7. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peixoto, Pedro Gomes, Heytor Lemos Martins, Bruna Cristina Pinto, Ana Luiza Franco, Larissa Souza Amaral, and Cristina Veloso de Castro. 2022. "The Significance of Pollination for Global Food Production and the Guarantee of Nutritional Security: A Literature Review" Environmental Sciences Proceedings 15, no. 1: 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007

APA Style

Peixoto, P. G., Martins, H. L., Pinto, B. C., Franco, A. L., Amaral, L. S., & Castro, C. V. d. (2022). The Significance of Pollination for Global Food Production and the Guarantee of Nutritional Security: A Literature Review. Environmental Sciences Proceedings, 15(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022015007

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop