| 1. |
- Carvalheiro, Luisa Gigante, et al.
(author)
-
The potential for indirect effects between co-flowering plants via shared pollinators depends on resource abundance, accessibility and relatedness
- 2014
-
In: Ecology Letters. - : Wiley. - 1461-023X .- 1461-0248. ; 17:11, s. 1389-1399
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Co-flowering plant species commonly share flower visitors, and thus have the potential to influence each other's pollination. In this study we analysed 750 quantitative plant-pollinator networks from 28 studies representing diverse biomes worldwide. We show that the potential for one plant species to influence another indirectly via shared pollinators was greater for plants whose resources were more abundant (higher floral unit number and nectar sugar content) and more accessible. The potential indirect influence was also stronger between phylogenetically closer plant species and was independent of plant geographic origin (native vs. non-native). The positive effect of nectar sugar content and phylogenetic proximity was much more accentuated for bees than for other groups. Consequently, the impact of these factors depends on the pollination mode of plants, e.g. bee or fly pollinated. Our findings may help predict which plant species have the greatest importance in the functioning of plant-pollination networks.
|
|
| 2. |
- Dicks, Lynn V., et al.
(author)
-
Farmland conservation
- 2015
-
In: What works in conservation. - 9781783741571 - 9781783741588 - 9781783741595 - 9781783741601 - 9781783741618 ; , s. 245-284
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This book is meant as a guide to the evidence available for different conservation interventions and as a starting point in assessing their effectiveness. The assessments are based on the available evidence for the target group of species for each intervention. The assessment may therefore refer to different species or habitat to the one(s) you are considering. Before making any decisions about implementing interventions it is vital that you read the more detailed accounts of the evidence in order to assess their relevance for your study species or system.Full details of the evidence are available at www.conservationevidence.comThere may also be significant negative side-effects on the target groups or other species or communities that have not been identified in this assessment.A lack of evidence means that we have been unable to assess whether or not an intervention is effective or has any harmful impacts.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sutcliffe, Laura M. E., et al.
(author)
-
Harnessing the biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland
- 2015
-
In: Diversity & distributions. - : Wiley. - 1366-9516 .- 1472-4642. ; 21:6, s. 722-730
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.
|
|
| 4. |
- Sutherland, William J., et al.
(author)
-
A Horizon Scan of Global Conservation Issues for 2016
- 2016
-
In: Trends in Ecology & Evolution. - : Elsevier BV. - 0169-5347 .- 1872-8383. ; 31:1, s. 44-53
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper presents the results of our seventh annual horizon scan, in which we aimed to identify issues that could have substantial effects on global biological diversity in the future, but are not currently widely well known or understood within the conservation community. Fifteen issues were identified by a team that included researchers, practitioners, professional horizon scanners, and journalists. The topics include use of managed bees as transporters of biological control agents, artificial superintelligence, electric pulse trawling, testosterone in the aquatic environment, building artificial oceanic islands, and the incorporation of ecological civilization principles into government policies in China.
|
|
| 5. |
- Alejandre, Elizabeth M., et al.
(author)
-
Characterization Factors to Assess Land Use Impacts on Pollinator Abundance in Life Cycle Assessment
- 2023
-
In: Environmental Science and Technology. - : American Chemical Society (ACS). - 0013-936X .- 1520-5851. ; 57:8, s. 3445-3454
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- While wild pollinators play a key role in global food production, their assessment is currently missing from the most commonly used environmental impact assessment method, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This is mainly due to constraints in data availability and compatibility with LCA inventories. To target this gap, relative pollinator abundance estimates were obtained with the use of a Delphi assessment, during which 25 experts, covering 16 nationalities and 45 countries of expertise, provided scores for low, typical, and high expected abundance associated with 24 land use categories. Based on these estimates, this study presents a set of globally generic characterization factors (CFs) that allows translating land use into relative impacts to wild pollinator abundance. The associated uncertainty of the CFs is presented along with an illustrative case to demonstrate the applicability in LCA studies. The CFs based on estimates that reached consensus during the Delphi assessment are recommended as readily applicable and allow key differences among land use types to be distinguished. The resulting CFs are proposed as the first step for incorporating pollinator impacts in LCA studies, exemplifying the use of expert elicitation methods as a useful tool to fill data gaps that constrain the characterization of key environmental impacts.
|
|
| 6. |
- Amano, Tatsuya, et al.
(author)
-
Transforming Practice : Checklists for Delivering Change
- 2022
-
In: Transforming Conservation : A Practical Guide to Evidence and Decision Making - A Practical Guide to Evidence and Decision Making. - 9781800648562 - 9781800648586 ; , s. 367-386
-
Book chapter (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Delivering a revolution in evidence use requires a cultural change across society. For a wide range of groups (practitioners, knowledge brokers, organisations, organisational leaders, policy makers, funders, researchers, journal publishers, the wider conservation community, educators, writers, and journalists), options are described to facilitate a change in practice, and a series of downloadable checklists is provided.
|
|
| 7. |
- Dicks, Lynn V., et al.
(author)
-
Farmland Conservation : Evidence for the effects of interventions in northern and western Europe
- 2014
-
Book (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This synopsis covers evidence for the effects of conservation interventions for native farmland wildlife. It is restricted to evidence captured on the website www.conservationevidence.com. It includes papers published in the journal Conservation Evidence, evidence summarized on our database and systematic reviews collated by the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. It is the thrid volume in the series Synopses of Conservation Evidence. Evidence was collected from all European countries west of Russia, but not those south of France, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary and Romania. A list of interventions to conserve wildlife on farmland was developed collaboratively by a team of thirteen experts. A number of interventions that are not currently agri-environment options were added during this process, such as 'Provide nest boxes for bees (solitary or bumblebees)' and 'Implement food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming'. Interventions relating to the creation or management of habitats not considered commercial farmland (such as lowland heath, salt marsh and farm woodland) were removed. The list of interventions was organized into categories based on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) classifications of direct threats and conservation actions. Interventions that fall under the threat category 'Agriculture' are grouped by farming system, with separate sections for interventions that apply to arable or livestock farms, or across all farming types.
|
|
