@article{HolzschuhDaineseGonzalezVaroetal.2016,
  author    = {Holzschuh, Andrea and Dainese, Matteo and Gonzalez-Varo, Juan P. and Mudri-Stojnic, Sonja and Riedinger, Verena and Rundl{\"o}f, Maj and Scheper, Jeroen and Wickens, Jennifer B. and Wickens, Victoria J. and Bommarco, Riccardo and Kleijn, David and Potts, Simon G. and Roberts, Stuart P. M. and Smith, Henrik G. and Vil{\`a}, Montserrat and Vujic, Ante and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf},
  title     = {Mass-flowering crops dilute pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes across Europe},
  series = {Ecology Letters},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Ecology Letters},
  number    = {10},
  doi       = {10.1111/ele.12657},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-187356},
  pages     = {1228-1236},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Mass-flowering crops (MFCs) are increasingly cultivated and might influence pollinator communities in MFC fields and nearby semi-natural habitats (SNHs). Across six European regions and 2 years, we assessed how landscape-scale cover of MFCs affected pollinator densities in 408 MFC fields and adjacent SNHs. In MFC fields, densities of bumblebees, solitary bees, managed honeybees and hoverflies were negatively related to the cover of MFCs in the landscape. In SNHs, densities of bumblebees declined with increasing cover of MFCs but densities of honeybees increased. The densities of all pollinators were generally unrelated to the cover of SNHs in the landscape. Although MFC fields apparently attracted pollinators from SNHs, in landscapes with large areas of MFCs they became diluted. The resulting lower densities might negatively affect yields of pollinator- dependent crops and the reproductive success of wild plants. An expansion of MFCs needs to be accompanied by pollinator-supporting practices in agricultural landscapes.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DePalmaAbrahamczykAizenetal.2016,
  author    = {De Palma, Adriana and Abrahamczyk, Stefan and Aizen, Marcelo A. and Albrecht, Matthias and Basset, Yves and Bates, Adam and Blake, Robin J. and Boutin, C{\´e}line and Bugter, Rob and Connop, Stuart and Cruz-L{\´o}pez, Leopoldo and Cunningham, Saul A. and Darvill, Ben and Diek{\"o}tter, Tim and Dorn, Silvia and Downing, Nicola and Entling, Martin H. and Farwig, Nina and Felicioli, Antonio and Fonte, Steven J. and Fowler, Robert and Franzen, Markus Franz{\´e}n and Goulson, Dave and Grass, Ingo and Hanley, Mick E. and Hendrix, Stephen D. and Herrmann, Farina and Herzog, Felix and Holzschuh, Andrea and Jauker, Birgit and Kessler, Michael and Knight, M. E. and Kruess, Andreas and Lavelle, Patrick and Le F{\´e}on, Violette and Lentini, Pia and Malone, Louise A. and Marshall, Jon and Mart{\´i}nez Pach{\´o}n, Eliana and McFrederick, Quinn S. and Morales, Carolina L. and Mudri-Stojnic, Sonja and Nates-Parra, Guiomar and Nilsson, Sven G. and {\"O}ckinger, Erik and Osgathorpe, Lynne and Parra-H, Alejandro and Peres, Carlos A. and Persson, Anna S. and Petanidou, Theodora and Poveda, Katja and Power, Eileen F. and Quaranta, Marino and Quintero, Carolina and Rader, Romina and Richards, Miriam H. and Roulston, T'ai and Rousseau, Laurent and Sadler, Jonathan P. and Samneg{\aa}rd, Ulrika and Schellhorn, Nancy A. and Sch{\"u}epp, Christof and Schweiger, Oliver and Smith-Pardo, Allan H. and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and Stout, Jane C. and Tonietto, Rebecca K. and Tscharntke, Teja and Tylianakis, Jason M. and Verboven, Hans A. F. and Vergara, Carlos H. and Verhulst, Jort and Westphal, Catrin and Yoon, Hyung Joo and Purvis, Andy},
  title     = {Predicting bee community responses to land-use changes: Effects of geographic and taxonomic biases},
  series = {Scientific Reports},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Scientific Reports},
  doi       = {10.1038/srep31153},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-167642},
  pages     = {31153},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Land-use change and intensification threaten bee populations worldwide, imperilling pollination services. Global models are needed to better characterise, project, and mitigate bees' responses to these human impacts. The available data are, however, geographically and taxonomically unrepresentative; most data are from North America and Western Europe, overrepresenting bumblebees and raising concerns that model results may not be generalizable to other regions and taxa. To assess whether the geographic and taxonomic biases of data could undermine effectiveness of models for conservation policy, we have collated from the published literature a global dataset of bee diversity at sites facing land-use change and intensification, and assess whether bee responses to these pressures vary across 11 regions (Western, Northern, Eastern and Southern Europe; North, Central and South America; Australia and New Zealand; South East Asia; Middle and Southern Africa) and between bumblebees and other bees. Our analyses highlight strong regionally-based responses of total abundance, species richness and Simpson's diversity to land use, caused by variation in the sensitivity of species and potentially in the nature of threats. These results suggest that global extrapolation of models based on geographically and taxonomically restricted data may underestimate the true uncertainty, increasing the risk of ecological surprises.},
  language  = {en}
}