Enhancing flowering plant richness within crop fields can benefit pollinator richness and crop pollination, as demonstrated for mango and sunflower in South Africa. Similar results were found for wild plants within watermelon and muskmelon fields in the US . In Ghana, banana intercropping with cocoa boosted pollinator abundance and cocoa pod set . A diverse set of flower species with different phenologies is likely to increase resource stability for pollinators and thus the resilience of pollination services. Herbicides and mowing can negatively affect pollinators by reducing floral resources provided by weeds , but can be useful for reducing the abundance of invasive grasses that could otherwise displace native flowering plants . Organic farming combines some of the practices described above and can enhance wild pollinator populations in comparison to conventional farming , probably because of the absence of synthetic insecticides and/or greater non-crop floral resources. Farmland heterogeneity can also be increased by organic management practices, which account for less than 1% of global agriculture . When the extent of organic farming was expanded in a German agrolandscape from 5% to 20%, bee richness rose by 50%, grow bags garden while the density of solitary bees and bumble bees increased by 60% and 150%, respectively .
Pollination-related benefits of organic practices were also found for strawberry in Sweden and canola in Canada . Sowing flowering crops, instead of crops that do not offer floral resources for pollinators, may enhance wild pollinators in heterogeneous landscapes . In western France, solitary-bee richness and abundance were higher in margins of canola fields than in fields of other crops . In the UK, bumble bee abundance was higher in areas adjacent to bean fields than to wheat fields but only during crop flowering , suggesting a short-term behavioral response to flower abundance rather than a long-term population enhancement. Similarly, in Germany, canola improved bumble bee early-colony growth but not whole-season sexual reproduction , and greater land cover of mass-flowering crops increased the number of bumble bee workers but not colony numbers . Therefore, although crops can provide abundant resources, the short duration of floral availability, the low diversity of resources, the application of insecticides, and the presence of tillage may limit the capacity of one crop species to support wild pollinator populations on its own . Furthermore, large monocultures of flowering crops can suffer from pollination deficit and trigger indirect negative effects on pollinators . Sowing crops that bloom in different periods may therefore increase wild-insect populations; in Sweden, bumble bee reproduction was improved in landscapes with both late-season flowering red clover and early-season mass-flowering crops . Moreover, managing crop phenology to better match the availability of efficient pollinators should enhance pollination, but we found no studies on this practice .The effectiveness of pollinator-supporting practices is influenced by interactive effects between large and small scale factors. For example, the effects of landscape composition on bee richness are greater on farms with low habitat diversity than on farms with high habitat diversity .
Similarly, in Argentina, the importance of wildflower strips as pollinator sources for sunflower increased in the absence of large remnants of natural habitats nearby . In South Africa, the importance of weed richness for enhancing sunflower seed set increased with larger distances from natural areas . Throughout Europe, extensive programs aim to mitigate biodiversity loss on farmland through practices such as organic farming or wildflower strips, thereby offering a unique opportunity to understand interactions among these methods. A meta-analysis showed that these practices enhanced pollinator richness , but their effectiveness varied with the magnitude of increase in flowering plant cover resulting from the practices, farmland type, and landscape context . Because intensively managed croplands are generally devoid of flowering plants, pollinator-supporting practices in these landscapes result in the largest increase in floral resources and thus pollinator richness . On the other hand, conventionally managed grasslands generally contain more flowering plant species than arable fields,making it more difficult to enhance floral resources and pollinators . Finally, local effects were more positive in structurally simple landscapes than in cleared or complex landscapes, presumably because cleared landscapes lack sources of pollinator colonists and complex landscapes have less need of restoration. Recently, researchers have begun to explore the relative effectiveness of different pollinator-supporting practices. In Europe, flower strips were more effective than grass-sown or naturally regenerated strips .
Globally, the effect of landscape composition and farm management was more important for improving bee richness than the effect of landscape configuration . interestingly, conventional farms with high in-field habitat diversity maintained similar pollinator abundance as organic farms with low in-field habitat diversity, across the gradient of heterogeneity in surrounding land use. Thus, different combinations of local and landscape practices can result in similar outcomes in terms of promoting pollinator richness, providing alternative solutions suited to different agricultural settings. The importance of small-scale practices is likely greater for insects with short flight ranges foraging from a fixed nest, such as small- to medium-sized bees, which usually forage within an area of a few hundred meters and comprise the greatest fraction of bee species . Consistent with the idea that small-scale practices alone can have high impact, a study designed to separate the effects of local- versus landscape-scale habitat on pollination services delivered to blueberries found that the local scale had stronger positive effects . Indeed, farmers acting individually are more likely to improve the quality of their own fields and the immediate surroundings than to be able to manage complete landscapes for pollinators. Assuming a foraging range of 200 m from the nest for small bee species , diverse and high quality habitats need to be provided within 13 ha .Understanding the socioeconomic consequences of pollinator-supporting practices is essential to effectively enhancing wild pollinator richness in “real-world” landscapes . Farmers generally face implementation costs, such as those for planting hedgerows, and opportunity costs, such as those for setting aside natural habitats that could otherwise be cultivated . Off-field practices have the advantage that land owners do not need to change their typical crop management; however, they still entail implementation and opportunity costs. On the other hand, on-field practices generally necessitate changes in how farmers manage their crops, which may reduce implementation costs but potentially increase opportunity costs . Occasionally, the costs of implementing these pollinator-supporting practices are higher than the income derived from their implementation , resulting in a low likelihood of adoption. However, such practices can generate other benefits for society, such as the enhancement of biodiversity; mitigation of soil erosion; and improvements in pest control, nutrient cycling, and/or water use efficiency . Many countries have therefore developed government sponsored programs that compensate farmers for enhancing biodiversity and ecosystem services, which are essential for human well-being but have no market value. In other situations, pollinator-supporting practices are profitable to farmers independent of government payments . Some of these practices imply lower costs or fewer additional costs . In the US state of Michigan, plantings of native wildflowers gradually increased wild bee and syrphid abundance as well as blueberry yield in fields adjacent to the plantings, as compared with fields with a standard grassy perimeter . While the cost of establishing the plantings resulted in negative profit in the first year, the gain from pollinator enhanced yield outpaced the costs of the establishment and maintenance by the fourth year, grow bag for tomato and growers made cumulative profits . The plantings were on land that could not be cropped with blueberry because of soil or topography limitations, so there was no opportunity cost of “lost” crop production.
The perennial wildflower plantings, if properly managed, will likely provide this benefit for many years. Furthermore, such practices have the added benefit of supplying habitat for natural enemies and enhancing biological control of pests in fields adjacent to the plantings. Although economic valuations of pollination services exist , studies that consider both the costs and benefits of pollinator-supporting practices are rare . We highlight the importance of estimating the marginal profits of implementing such practices , because management usually only partially increases or decreases ecosystem services .Single-species bee management is the mainstream approach to crop pollination. Despite providing acceptable yields in some systems, this form of management does not replace the contribution of rich assemblages of wild pollinators , and carries the risks associated with facilitating pathogen, disease, and predator incidence. Therefore, we argue for integrated management of single species and wild pollinator assemblages . Indeed, practices that enhance wild pollinators will likely also increase resources for managed species and help to sustain, for instance, honey bee colony health. Promotion of biodiversity within agricultural landscapes is essential for sustaining associated ecosystem services. This paper provides a general framework to enhance wild insects and associated pollination services, which resource managers and policy makers can adapt to specific landscape conditions, crop varieties, and crop management strategies. These practices will have additional benefits to crop pollination, including the enhancement of scenic values, cultural values, plant and insect diversity, and other ecosystem services. Transdisciplinary work is essential to implement pollinator-supporting practices in real-world landscapes and support long term yields of pollinator-dependent crops.The style of a typical wine strongly depends on various factors such as cultivar, year of harvest, wine making practices, and climate conditions, of which the wine making process is one of the most important factors. Pre-fermentation treatments are critical in cool and cold climate regions due to the fact that the grapes may not have ripened optimally. In addition, the presence and concentration of wine aroma components are significantly influenced by the applied pre-treatment techniques, as a high amount of aroma precursors are located in the grape skin and pulp. To enhance and optimize extraction of flavor components and precursors, cold maceration which refers to the release of components from the pomace after crushing is often applied in white wine making. This process strongly determines the final styles of wine produced. Extended extraction can also be achieved by skin fermentation in order to make fully-flavored and complex styles of white wine. Some important volatiles, such as C-6 alcohols and aldehydes are derived originally from the solid parts of grape berry and, therefore, promoted by increased extraction through maceration. Additionally, maceration enhances the concentration of many non-volatiles such as polyphenols which in turn result in more mouthfeel and in higher levels of antioxidants in the final wine. Sensory assessments have demonstrated that these pre-treatments confer fresh properties to white wines, enhance flavor intensity, and improve fruity and floral flavor in the wines, while may also add bitterness to white wines. However, maceration practices are largely cultivar dependent, and vary with vineyard and vintage conditions . Low maceration temperature is normally employed in white wine making, while duration may vary from wine to wine. For instance, Selli et al. investigated “Muscat” wines produced with 6 h of maceration at 15 ˝C and found higher quality than after 12 h. In another study, the concentration of terpenes, norisoprenoids, and benzene compounds in “Albillo” wines was considerably enhanced by CM for 15 and 23 h. Furthermore, the total aroma concentration increased with the extension of CM time in “Chardonnay” wines. However, no differences were detected for most free volatiles between macerated and non-macerated “Listán blanco” wine. In this sense, the development of suitable wine making techniques for specific cultivars is crucial in a certain location/region. “Solaris” is a new disease tolerant cultivar grown in northern Europe with advantages such as stable yields and reliable berry ripening despite the cool climate. An average of 97 days is required to fully ripen the berries and the typical yield is 0.5 kg/m2 . “Solaris” has an average must of 20.9 ˝Brix and about 9.4 g/L titratable acidity and is considered to be ripe every year over the last 10 years in Denmark. It is largely predominant in Denmark, England, Southern Sweden and other regions in Northern Europe , producing a good single varietal wine. Selecting the best cultivars is crucial, especially in marginal and cool climate regions, to explore the potential of making different styles of wine, specific wine making techniques for the cultivar need to be developed. However, to date, little is known about the potential of different wine style production from this newly-released cultivar, especially on the impact of different pre-fermentation processes on Solaris wine quality. Therefore, the overall aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different pre-fermentation treatments on volatile profile, chemical parameters, and sensory features of “Solaris” white wines.