• search hit 1 of 1
Back to Result List

Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-151879
  • 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 areThere 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.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: David Kleijn, Rachael Winfree, Ignasi Bartomeus, Luísa G. Carvalheiro, Mickael Henry, Rufus Isaacs, Alexandra-Maria Klein, Claire Kremen, Leithen K. M'Gonigle, Romina Rader, Taylor H. Ricketts, Neal M. Williams, Nancy Lee Adamson, John S. Ascher, András Báldi, Péter Batáry, Faye Benjamin, Jacobus C. Biesmeijer, Eleanor J. Blitzer, Riccardo Bommarco, Mariette R. Brand, Vincent Bretagnolle, Lindsey Button, Daniel P. Cariveau, Rémy Chifflet, Jonathan F. Colville, Bryan N. Danforth, Elizabeth Elle, Michael P. D. Garratt, Felix Herzog, Andrea Holzschuh, Brad G. Howlett, Frank Jauker, Shalene Jha, Eva Knop, Kristin M. Krewenka, Violette Le Féon, Yael Mandelik, Emily A. May, Mia G. Park, Gideon Pisanty, Menno Reemer, Verena Riedinger, Orianne Rollin, Maj Rundlöf, Hillary S. Sardiñas, Jeroen Scheper, Amber R. Sciligo, Henrik G. Smith, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter, Robbin Thorp, Teja Tscharntke, Jort Verhulst, Blandina F. Viana, Bernard E. Vaissière, Ruan Veldtman, Kimiora L. Ward, Catrin Westphal, Simon G. Potts
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-151879
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Fakultät für Biologie / Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften
Language:English
Parent Title (English):Nature Communications
Year of Completion:2015
Volume:6
Issue:7414
Source:Nature Communications 6:7414 (2015). DOI: 10.1038/ncomms8414
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8414
Dewey Decimal Classification:5 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik / 57 Biowissenschaften; Biologie / 578 Naturgeschichte von Organismen
Tag:abundance; biodiversity conservation; decline; ecosystem services; european countries; fruit set; native bees; plant diversity; pollen; productivity
Release Date:2017/10/30
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number:244090
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number:311781
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number:226852
OpenAIRE:OpenAIRE
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung 4.0 International