Article Dans Une Revue Nature Communications Année : 2015

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

1 WUR - Wageningen University and Research [Wageningen]
2 Resource Ecology Group
3 Rutgers University [Camden]
4 CSIC - Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas [España] = Spanish National Research Council [Spain]
5 School of Biology
6 Department of Terrestrial Zoology
7 AE - Abeilles et environnement
8 Department of Entomology
9 Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg = University of Freiburg
10 Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management
11 School of Environmental and Rural Science
12 University of Vermont [Burlington]
13 UC Davis - University of California [Davis]
14 PO Box 20653
15 Department of Biological Sciences
16 MTA Centre for Ecological Research [Tihany]
17 Georg-August-University = Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
18 Department of Entomology
19 Department of Ecology
20 Kirstenbosch Research Center
21 Stellenbosch University
22 South African Cultural History Museum of Cape Town
23 CEBC - Centre d'Études Biologiques de Chizé - UMR 7372
24 Department of Biological Sciences
25 Plateforme Regionale d'Innovation "Agriculture Biologique et Périurbaine Durable"
26 UOR - University of Reading
27 Agroscope
28 Department of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter
29 HortResearch - Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand
30 Department of Animal Ecology
31 University of Texas at Austin [Austin]
32 UNIBE - Universität Bern = University of Bern = Université de Berne
33 HUJ - The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
34 Naturalis Biodiversity Center [Leiden]
35 ITSAP - Institut de l'abeille
36 Department of Biology
37 Center for Ecosystem Studies
38 Skane University Hospital [Lund]
39 Department of Entomology and Nematology
40 Biology Institute
Mickaël Henry
Nancy Lee Adamson
  • Fonction : Auteur
Felix Herzog
Frank Jauker
Jort Verhulst
  • Fonction : Auteur
Bernard Vaissière

Résumé

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 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.
Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
15-Pub10-Kleijnetal2015_NatureCommunications_1.pdf (404.09 Ko) Télécharger le fichier
Origine Fichiers éditeurs autorisés sur une archive ouverte
Loading...

Dates et versions

hal-02631272 , version 1 (27-05-2020)

Licence

Identifiants

Citer

David Kleijn, Rachael Winfree, Ignasi Bartomeus, Luisa G. Carvalheira, Mickaël Henry, et al.. Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation. Nature Communications, 2015, 6, 8 p. ⟨10.1038/ncomms8414⟩. ⟨hal-02631272⟩
278 Consultations
83 Téléchargements

Altmetric

Partager

More