Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8414
DC FieldValue
dc.titleDelivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation
dc.contributor.authorKleijn, D
dc.contributor.authorWinfree, R
dc.contributor.authorBartomeus, I
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-26T09:04:40Z
dc.date.available2020-10-26T09:04:40Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationKleijn, D, Winfree, R, Bartomeus, I (2015). Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation. Nature Communications 6 : 7414. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8414
dc.identifier.issn2041-1723
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/180461
dc.description.abstractThere 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. © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
dc.publisherNature Publishing Group
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceUnpaywall 20201031
dc.subjectagricultural management
dc.subjectbee
dc.subjectconservation planning
dc.subjectcrop production
dc.subjectdominance
dc.subjectendangered species
dc.subjectpersistence
dc.subjectpollination
dc.subjectspecies conservation
dc.subjectwild population
dc.subjectagricultural species
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectbee
dc.subjectbiodiversity
dc.subjectconservation biology
dc.subjectcost effectiveness analysis
dc.subjectcrop
dc.subjectcrop production
dc.subjectecosystem
dc.subjectnonhuman
dc.subjectpollination
dc.subjectpollinator
dc.subjectwildlife conservation
dc.subjectanimal
dc.subjectbee
dc.subjectbiodiversity
dc.subjecteconomics
dc.subjectenvironmental protection
dc.subjectApoidea
dc.subjectAnimals
dc.subjectBees
dc.subjectBiodiversity
dc.subjectConservation of Natural Resources
dc.subjectCrops, Agricultural
dc.subjectPollination
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentBIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
dc.description.doi10.1038/ncomms8414
dc.description.sourcetitleNature Communications
dc.description.volume6
dc.description.page7414
dc.published.statepublished
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1038_ncomms8414.pdf471.2 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons