TY  - JOUR
A1  - Kleijn, David
A1  - Winfree, Rachael
A1  - Bartomeus, Ignasi
A1  - Carvalheiro, Luísa G.
A1  - Henry, Mickael
A1  - Isaacs, Rufus
A1  - Klein, Alexandra-Maria
A1  - Kremen, Claire
A1  - M'Gonigle, Leithen K.
A1  - Rader, Romina
A1  - Ricketts, Taylor H.
A1  - Williams, Neal M.
A1  - Adamson, Nancy Lee
A1  - Ascher, John S.
A1  - Báldi, András
A1  - Batáry, Péter
A1  - Benjamin, Faye
A1  - Biesmeijer, Jacobus C.
A1  - Blitzer, Eleanor J.
A1  - Bommarco, Riccardo
A1  - Brand, Mariette R.
A1  - Bretagnolle, Vincent
A1  - Button, Lindsey
A1  - Cariveau, Daniel P.
A1  - Chifflet, Rémy
A1  - Colville, Jonathan F.
A1  - Danforth, Bryan N.
A1  - Elle, Elizabeth
A1  - Garratt, Michael P. D.
A1  - Herzog, Felix
A1  - Holzschuh, Andrea
A1  - Howlett, Brad G.
A1  - Jauker, Frank
A1  - Jha, Shalene
A1  - Knop, Eva
A1  - Krewenka, Kristin M.
A1  - Le Féon, Violette
A1  - Mandelik, Yael
A1  - May, Emily A.
A1  - Park, Mia G.
A1  - Pisanty, Gideon
A1  - Reemer, Menno
A1  - Riedinger, Verena
A1  - Rollin, Orianne
A1  - Rundlöf, Maj
A1  - Sardiñas, Hillary S.
A1  - Scheper, Jeroen
A1  - Sciligo, Amber R.
A1  - Smith, Henrik G.
A1  - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf
A1  - Thorp, Robbin
A1  - Tscharntke, Teja
A1  - Verhulst, Jort
A1  - Viana, Blandina F.
A1  - Vaissière, Bernard E.
A1  - Veldtman, Ruan
A1  - Ward, Kimiora L.
A1  - Westphal, Catrin
A1  - Potts, Simon G.
T1  - Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation
JF  - Nature Communications
N2  - 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.
KW  - ecosystem services
KW  - european countries
KW  - abundance
KW  - native bees
KW  - biodiversity conservation
KW  - plant diversity
KW  - fruit set
KW  - productivity
KW  - decline
KW  - pollen
Y1  - 2015
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-151879
VL  - 6
IS  - 7414
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Viljur, Mari‐Liis
A1  - Abella, Scott R.
A1  - Adámek, Martin
A1  - Alencar, Janderson Batista Rodrigues
A1  - Barber, Nicholas A.
A1  - Beudert, Burkhard
A1  - Burkle, Laura A.
A1  - Cagnolo, Luciano
A1  - Campos, Brent R.
A1  - Chao, Anne
A1  - Chergui, Brahim
A1  - Choi, Chang‐Yong
A1  - Cleary, Daniel F. R.
A1  - Davis, Thomas Seth
A1  - Dechnik‐Vázquez, Yanus A.
A1  - Downing, William M.
A1  - Fuentes‐Ramirez, Andrés
A1  - Gandhi, Kamal J. K.
A1  - Gehring, Catherine
A1  - Georgiev, Kostadin B.
A1  - Gimbutas, Mark
A1  - Gongalsky, Konstantin B.
A1  - Gorbunova, Anastasiya Y.
A1  - Greenberg, Cathryn H.
A1  - Hylander, Kristoffer
A1  - Jules, Erik S.
A1  - Korobushkin, Daniil I.
A1  - Köster, Kajar
A1  - Kurth, Valerie
A1  - Lanham, Joseph Drew
A1  - Lazarina, Maria
A1  - Leverkus, Alexandro B.
A1  - Lindenmayer, David
A1  - Marra, Daniel Magnabosco
A1  - Martín‐Pinto, Pablo
A1  - Meave, Jorge A.
A1  - Moretti, Marco
A1  - Nam, Hyun‐Young
A1  - Obrist, Martin K.
A1  - Petanidou, Theodora
A1  - Pons, Pere
A1  - Potts, Simon G.
A1  - Rapoport, Irina B.
A1  - Rhoades, Paul R.
A1  - Richter, Clark
A1  - Saifutdinov, Ruslan A.
A1  - Sanders, Nathan J.
A1  - Santos, Xavier
A1  - Steel, Zachary
A1  - Tavella, Julia
A1  - Wendenburg, Clara
A1  - Wermelinger, Beat
A1  - Zaitsev, Andrey S.
A1  - Thorn, Simon
T1  - The effect of natural disturbances on forest biodiversity: an ecological synthesis
JF  - Biological Reviews
N2  - Disturbances alter biodiversity via their specific characteristics, including severity and extent in the landscape, which act at different temporal and spatial scales. Biodiversity response to disturbance also depends on the community characteristics and habitat requirements of species. Untangling the mechanistic interplay of these factors has guided disturbance ecology for decades, generating mixed scientific evidence of biodiversity responses to disturbance. Understanding the impact of natural disturbances on biodiversity is increasingly important due to human‐induced changes in natural disturbance regimes. In many areas, major natural forest disturbances, such as wildfires, windstorms, and insect outbreaks, are becoming more frequent, intense, severe, and widespread due to climate change and land‐use change. Conversely, the suppression of natural disturbances threatens disturbance‐dependent biota. Using a meta‐analytic approach, we analysed a global data set (with most sampling concentrated in temperate and boreal secondary forests) of species assemblages of 26 taxonomic groups, including plants, animals, and fungi collected from forests affected by wildfires, windstorms, and insect outbreaks. The overall effect of natural disturbances on α‐diversity did not differ significantly from zero, but some taxonomic groups responded positively to disturbance, while others tended to respond negatively. Disturbance was beneficial for taxonomic groups preferring conditions associated with open canopies (e.g. hymenopterans and hoverflies), whereas ground‐dwelling groups and/or groups typically associated with shady conditions (e.g. epigeic lichens and mycorrhizal fungi) were more likely to be negatively impacted by disturbance. Across all taxonomic groups, the highest α‐diversity in disturbed forest patches occurred under moderate disturbance severity, i.e. with approximately 55% of trees killed by disturbance. We further extended our meta‐analysis by applying a unified diversity concept based on Hill numbers to estimate α‐diversity changes in different taxonomic groups across a gradient of disturbance severity measured at the stand scale and incorporating other disturbance features. We found that disturbance severity negatively affected diversity for Hill number q = 0 but not for q = 1 and q = 2, indicating that diversity–disturbance relationships are shaped by species relative abundances. Our synthesis of α‐diversity was extended by a synthesis of disturbance‐induced change in species assemblages, and revealed that disturbance changes the β‐diversity of multiple taxonomic groups, including some groups that were not affected at the α‐diversity level (birds and woody plants). Finally, we used mixed rarefaction/extrapolation to estimate biodiversity change as a function of the proportion of forests that were disturbed, i.e. the disturbance extent measured at the landscape scale. The comparison of intact and naturally disturbed forests revealed that both types of forests provide habitat for unique species assemblages, whereas species diversity in the mixture of disturbed and undisturbed forests peaked at intermediate values of disturbance extent in the simulated landscape. Hence, the relationship between α‐diversity and disturbance severity in disturbed forest stands was strikingly similar to the relationship between species richness and disturbance extent in a landscape consisting of both disturbed and undisturbed forest habitats. This result suggests that both moderate disturbance severity and moderate disturbance extent support the highest levels of biodiversity in contemporary forest landscapes.
KW  - natural disturbance
KW  - diversity–disturbance relationship
KW  - disturbance severity
KW  - disturbance extent
KW  - intermediate disturbance hypothesis
KW  - forest communities
KW  - α‐diversity
KW  - β‐diversity
Y1  - 2022
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-287168
VL  - 97
IS  - 5
SP  - 1930
EP  - 1947
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Holzschuh, Andrea
A1  - Dainese, Matteo
A1  - Gonzalez-Varo, Juan P.
A1  - Mudri-Stojnic, Sonja
A1  - Riedinger, Verena
A1  - Rundlöf, Maj
A1  - Scheper, Jeroen
A1  - Wickens, Jennifer B.
A1  - Wickens, Victoria J.
A1  - Bommarco, Riccardo
A1  - Kleijn, David
A1  - Potts, Simon G.
A1  - Roberts, Stuart P. M.
A1  - Smith, Henrik G.
A1  - Vilà, Montserrat
A1  - Vujic, Ante
A1  - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf
T1  - Mass-flowering crops dilute pollinator abundance in agricultural landscapes across Europe
JF  - Ecology Letters
N2  - 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.
KW  - wild plant pollination
KW  - Colony growth
KW  - Densities
KW  - Context
KW  - crop pollination
KW  - Oilseed rape
KW  - Nesting resources
KW  - Bee abundance
KW  - Yield
KW  - Richness
KW  - Habitats
KW  - Agricultural intensification
KW  - agri-environment schemes
KW  - biofuels
KW  - ecosystem services
KW  - field boundaries
KW  - landscape compositionv
KW  - non-crop habitats
KW  - semi-natural habitats
KW  - spillover
Y1  - 2016
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-187356
VL  - 19
IS  - 10
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Bartomeus, Ignasi
A1  - Potts, Simon G.
A1  - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf
A1  - Vaissiere, Bernard E.
A1  - Woyciechowski, Michal
A1  - Krewenka, Kristin M.
A1  - Tscheulin, Thomas
A1  - Roberts, Stuart P. M.
A1  - Szentgyoergyi, Hajnalka
A1  - Westphal, Catrin
A1  - Bommarco, Riccardo
T1  - Contribution of insect pollinators to crop yield and quality varies with agricultural intensification
JF  - PEERJ
N2  - 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.
KW  - biodiversity
KW  - pollination
KW  - honeybee
KW  - wild bees
KW  - agroecosystems
KW  - native pollinators
KW  - species richness
KW  - bee pollinators
KW  - wild
KW  - ecosystemservices
KW  - fruit-quality
KW  - oilseed rape
KW  - land-use
KW  - honey
KW  - patterns
Y1  - 2014
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-116928
SN  - 2167-9843
VL  - 2
IS  - e328
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Breeze, Tom D.
A1  - Vaissiere, Bernhard E.
A1  - Bommarco, Riccardo
A1  - Petanidou, Theodora
A1  - Seraphides, Nicos
A1  - Kozak, Lajos
A1  - Scheper, Jeroen
A1  - Biesmeijer, Jacobus C.
A1  - Kleijn, David
A1  - Gyldenkærne, Steen
A1  - Moretti, Marco
A1  - Holzschuh, Andrea
A1  - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf
A1  - Stout, Jane C.
A1  - Pärtel, Meelis
A1  - Zobel, Martin
A1  - Potts, Simon G.
T1  - Agricultural Policies Exacerbate Honeybee Pollination Service Supply-Demand Mismatches Across Europe
JF  - PLOS ONE
N2  - Declines in insect pollinators across Europe have raised concerns about the supply of pollination services to agriculture. Simultaneously, EU agricultural and biofuel policies have encouraged substantial growth in the cultivated area of insect pollinated crops across the continent. Using data from 41 European countries, this study demonstrates that the recommended number of honeybees required to provide crop pollination across Europe has risen 4.9 times as fast as honeybee stocks between 2005 and 2010. Consequently, honeybee stocks were insufficient to supply >90% of demands in 22 countries studied. These findings raise concerns about the capacity of many countries to cope with major losses of wild pollinators and highlight numerous critical gaps in current understanding of pollination service supplies and demands, pointing to a pressing need for further research into this issue.
KW  - economy services
KW  - fruit set
KW  - sequential introduction
KW  - enhance
KW  - biodiversity
KW  - abundance
KW  - declines
KW  - crops
KW  - colonies
KW  - density
Y1  - 2014
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-117692
SN  - 1932-6203
VL  - 9
IS  - 1
ER  -