Pollinating species are in decline globally, with land use an important driver. However, most of the evidence on which these claims are made is patchy, based on studies with low taxonomic and geographic representativeness. Here, we model the effect of land-use type and intensity on global pollinator biodiversity, using a local-scale database covering 303 studies, 12,170 sites, and 4502 pollinating species. Relative to a primary vegetation baseline, we show that low levels of intensity can have beneficial effects on pollinator biodiversity. Within most anthropogenic land-use types however, increasing intensity is associated with significant reductions, particularly in urban (43% richness and 62% abundance reduction compared to the least intensive urban sites), and pasture (75% abundance reduction) areas. We further show that on cropland, the strongly negative response to intensity is restricted to tropical areas, and that the direction and magnitude of response differs among taxonomic groups. Our findings confirm widespread effects of land-use intensity on pollinators, most significantly in the tropics, where land use is predicted to change rapidly.
Ecological systematic reviews and meta‐analyses have significantly increased our understanding of global biodiversity decline. However, for some ecological groups, incomplete and biased datasets have hindered our ability to construct robust, predictive models. One such group consists of the animal pollinators. Approximately 88% of wild plant species are thought to be pollinated by animals, with an estimated annual value of $230–410 billion dollars. Here we apply text‐analysis to quantify the taxonomic and geographical distribution of the animal pollinator literature, both temporally and spatially. We show that the publication of pollinator literature increased rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s. Taxonomically, we show that the distribution of pollinator literature is concentrated in the honey bees (Apis) and bumble bees (Bombus), and geographically in North America and Europe. At least 25% of pollination‐related abstracts mention a species of honey bee and at least 20% a species of bumble bee, and approximately 46% of abstracts are focussed on either North America (32%) or Europe (14%). Although these results indicate strong taxonomic and geographic biases in the pollinator literature, a large number of studies outside North America and Europe do exist. We then discuss how text‐analysis could be used to shorten the literature search for ecological systematic reviews and meta‐analyses, and to address more applied questions related to pollinator biodiversity, such as the identification of likely interacting plant–pollinator pairs and the number of pollinating species.
Biodiversity continues to decline under the effect of multiple human pressures. We give a brief overview of the main pressures on biodiversity, before focusing on the two that have a predominant effect: land-use and climate change. We discuss how interactions between land-use and climate change in terrestrial systems are likely to have greater impacts than expected when only considering these pressures in isolation. Understanding biodiversity changes is complicated by the fact that such changes are likely to be uneven among different geographic regions and species. We review the evidence for variation in terrestrial biodiversity changes, relating differences among species to key ecological characteristics, and explaining how disproportionate impacts on certain species are leading to a spatial homogenisation of ecological communities. Finally, we explain how the overall losses and homogenisation of biodiversity, and the larger impacts upon certain types of species, are likely to lead to strong negative consequences for the functioning of ecosystems, and consequently for human well-being.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.