Title |
Species richness declines and biotic homogenisation have slowed down for NW‐European pollinators and plants
|
---|---|
Published in |
Ecology Letters, May 2013
|
DOI | 10.1111/ele.12121 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Luísa Gigante Carvalheiro, William E Kunin, Petr Keil, Jesus Aguirre-Gutiérrez, Willem Nicolaas Ellis, Richard Fox, Quentin Groom, Stephan Hennekens, Wouter Landuyt, Dirk Maes, Frank Meutter, Denis Michez, Pierre Rasmont, Baudewijn Ode, Simon Geoffrey Potts, Menno Reemer, Stuart Paul Masson Roberts, Joop Schaminée, Michiel F WallisDeVries, Jacobus Christiaan Biesmeijer |
Abstract |
Concern about biodiversity loss has led to increased public investment in conservation. Whereas there is a widespread perception that such initiatives have been unsuccessful, there are few quantitative tests of this perception. Here, we evaluate whether rates of biodiversity change have altered in recent decades in three European countries (Great Britain, Netherlands and Belgium) for plants and flower visiting insects. We compared four 20-year periods, comparing periods of rapid land-use intensification and natural habitat loss (1930-1990) with a period of increased conservation investment (post-1990). We found that extensive species richness loss and biotic homogenisation occurred before 1990, whereas these negative trends became substantially less accentuated during recent decades, being partially reversed for certain taxa (e.g. bees in Great Britain and Netherlands). These results highlight the potential to maintain or even restore current species assemblages (which despite past extinctions are still of great conservation value), at least in regions where large-scale land-use intensification and natural habitat loss has ceased. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 15 | 29% |
United States | 3 | 6% |
Netherlands | 3 | 6% |
Ireland | 2 | 4% |
Spain | 2 | 4% |
Australia | 2 | 4% |
Sweden | 2 | 4% |
Italy | 1 | 2% |
Belgium | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 8% |
Unknown | 17 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 37 | 71% |
Scientists | 12 | 23% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 11 | 1% |
France | 6 | <1% |
United States | 6 | <1% |
Switzerland | 3 | <1% |
Germany | 3 | <1% |
Belgium | 3 | <1% |
Poland | 2 | <1% |
Brazil | 2 | <1% |
South Africa | 2 | <1% |
Other | 13 | 2% |
Unknown | 755 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 161 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 136 | 17% |
Student > Master | 129 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 115 | 14% |
Other | 34 | 4% |
Other | 114 | 14% |
Unknown | 117 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 420 | 52% |
Environmental Science | 171 | 21% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 1% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | <1% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | <1% |
Other | 34 | 4% |
Unknown | 158 | 20% |