@article{KleijnWinfreeBartomeusetal.2015,
  author    = {Kleijn, David and Winfree, Rachael and Bartomeus, Ignasi and Carvalheiro, Lu{\´i}sa G. and Henry, Mickael and Isaacs, Rufus and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and Kremen, Claire and M'Gonigle, Leithen K. and Rader, Romina and Ricketts, Taylor H. and Williams, Neal M. and Adamson, Nancy Lee and Ascher, John S. and B{\´a}ldi, Andr{\´a}s and Bat{\´a}ry, P{\´e}ter and Benjamin, Faye and Biesmeijer, Jacobus C. and Blitzer, Eleanor J. and Bommarco, Riccardo and Brand, Mariette R. and Bretagnolle, Vincent and Button, Lindsey and Cariveau, Daniel P. and Chifflet, R{\´e}my and Colville, Jonathan F. and Danforth, Bryan N. and Elle, Elizabeth and Garratt, Michael P. D. and Herzog, Felix and Holzschuh, Andrea and Howlett, Brad G. and Jauker, Frank and Jha, Shalene and Knop, Eva and Krewenka, Kristin M. and Le F{\´e}on, Violette and Mandelik, Yael and May, Emily A. and Park, Mia G. and Pisanty, Gideon and Reemer, Menno and Riedinger, Verena and Rollin, Orianne and Rundl{\"o}f, Maj and Sardi{\~n}as, Hillary S. and Scheper, Jeroen and Sciligo, Amber R. and Smith, Henrik G. and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and Thorp, Robbin and Tscharntke, Teja and Verhulst, Jort and Viana, Blandina F. and Vaissi{\`e}re, Bernard E. and Veldtman, Ruan and Ward, Kimiora L. and Westphal, Catrin and Potts, Simon G.},
  title     = {Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation},
  series = {Nature Communications},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Nature Communications},
  number    = {7414},
  doi       = {10.1038/ncomms8414},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-151879},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost- effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost- effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BartomeusPottsSteffanDewenteretal.2014,
  author    = {Bartomeus, Ignasi and Potts, Simon G. and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and Vaissiere, Bernard E. and Woyciechowski, Michal and Krewenka, Kristin M. and Tscheulin, Thomas and Roberts, Stuart P. M. and Szentgyoergyi, Hajnalka and Westphal, Catrin and Bommarco, Riccardo},
  title     = {Contribution of insect pollinators to crop yield and quality varies with agricultural intensification},
  series = {PEERJ},
  volume    = {2},
  journal   = {PEERJ},
  number    = {e328},
  issn      = {2167-9843},
  doi       = {10.7717/peerj.328},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-116928},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Background. Up to 75\% of crop species benefit at least to some degree from animal pollination for fruit or seed set and yield. However, basic information on the level of pollinator dependence and pollinator contribution to yield is lacking for many crops. Even less is known about how insect pollination affects crop quality. Given that habitat loss and agricultural intensification are known to decrease pollinator richness and abundance, there is a need to assess the consequences for different components of crop production. Methods. We used pollination exclusion on flowers or inflorescences on a whole plant basis to assess the contribution of insect pollination to crop yield and quality in four flowering crops (spring oilseed rape, field bean, strawberry, and buckwheat) located in four regions of Europe. For each crop, we recorded abundance and species richness of flower visiting insects in ten fields located along a gradient from simple to heterogeneous landscapes. Results. Insect pollination enhanced average crop yield between 18 and 71\% depending on the crop. Yield quality was also enhanced in most crops. For instance, oilseed rape had higher oil and lower chlorophyll contents when adequately pollinated, the proportion of empty seeds decreased in buckwheat, and strawberries' commercial grade improved; however, we did not find higher nitrogen content in open pollinated field beans. Complex landscapes had a higher overall species richness of wild pollinators across crops, but visitation rates were only higher in complex landscapes for some crops. On the contrary, the overall yield was consistently enhanced by higher visitation rates, but not by higher pollinator richness. Discussion. For the four crops in this study, there is clear benefit delivered by pollinators on yield quantity and/or quality, but it is not maximized under current agricultural intensification. Honeybees, the most abundant pollinator, might partially compensate the loss of wild pollinators in some areas, but our results suggest the need of landscape-scale actions to enhance wild pollinator populations.},
  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}
}
@article{GulbertiMollHameletal.2015,
  author    = {Gulberti, A. and Moll, C.K.E. and Hamel, W. and Buhmann, C. and Koeppen, J.A. and Boelmans, K. and Zittel, S. and Gerloff, C. and Westphal, M. and Schneider, T.R. and Engel, A.K.},
  title     = {Predictive timing functions of cortical beta oscillations are impaired in Parkinson's disease and influenced by L-DOPA and deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus Impaired beta-band timing functions in PD},
  series = {NeuroImage: Clinical},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {NeuroImage: Clinical},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.nicl.2015.09.013},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-150049},
  pages     = {436-449},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Cortex-basal ganglia circuits participate in motor timing and temporal perception, and are important for the dynamic configuration of sensorimotor networks in response to exogenous demands. In Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS) induces motor performance benefits. Hitherto, little is known concerning contributions of the basal ganglia to sensory facilitation and cortical responses to RAS in PD. Therefore, we conducted an EEG study in 12 PD patients before and after surgery for subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) and in 12 age-matched controls. Here we investigated the effects of levodopa and STN-DBS on resting-state EEG and on the cortical-response profile to slow and fast RAS in a passive-listening paradigm focusing on beta-band oscillations, which are important for auditory-motor coupling. The beta-modulation profile to RAS in healthy participants was characterized by local peaks preceding and following auditory stimuli. In PD patients RAS failed to induce pre-stimulus beta increases. The absence of pre-stimulus beta-band modulation may contribute to impaired rhythm perception in PD. Moreover, post-stimulus beta-band responses were highly abnormal during fast RAS in PD patients. Treatment with levodopa and STN-DBS reinstated a post-stimulus beta-modulation profile similar to controls, while STN-DBS reduced beta-band power in the resting-state. The treatment-sensitivity of beta oscillations suggests that STN-DBS may specifically improve timekeeping functions of cortical beta oscillations during fast auditory pacing.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GamezViruesPerovićGossneretal.2015,
  author    = {G{\´a}mez-Viru{\´e}s, Sagrario and Perović, David J. and Gossner, Martin M. and B{\"o}rschig, Carmen and Bl{\"u}thgen, Nico and de Jong, Heike and Simons, Nadja K. and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and Krauss, Jochen and Maier, Gwen and Scherber, Christoph and Steckel, Juliane and Rothenw{\"o}hrer, Christoph and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and Weiner, Christiane N. and Weisser, Wolfgang and Werner, Michael and Tscharntke, Teja and Westphal, Catrin},
  title     = {Landscape simplification filters species traits and drives biotic homogenization},
  series = {Nature Communications},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Nature Communications},
  number    = {8568},
  doi       = {10.1038/ncomms9568},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-141925},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Biodiversity loss can affect the viability of ecosystems by decreasing the ability of communities to respond to environmental change and disturbances. Agricultural intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss and has multiple components operating at different spatial scales: from in-field management intensity to landscape-scale simplification. Here we show that landscape-level effects dominate functional community composition and can even buffer the effects of in-field management intensification on functional homogenization, and that animal communities in real-world managed landscapes show a unified response (across orders and guilds) to both landscape-scale simplification and in-field intensification. Adults and larvae with specialized feeding habits, species with shorter activity periods and relatively small body sizes are selected against in simplified landscapes with intense in-field management. Our results demonstrate that the diversity of land cover types at the landscape scale is critical for maintaining communities, which are functionally diverse, even in landscapes where in-field management intensity is high.},
  language  = {en}
}