Search

Your search keyword '"Rémy Chifflet"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Rémy Chifflet" Language english
3 results on '"Rémy Chifflet"'

1. Correction: Corrigendum: Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation

Author

David Kleijn, Rachael Winfree, Ignasi Bartomeus, Luísa G Carvalheiro, Mickaël Henry, Rufus Isaacs, Alexandra-Maria Klein, Claire Kremen, Leithen K. M’Gonigle, Romina Rader, Taylor H. Ricketts, Neal M. Williams, Nancy Lee Adamson, John S. Ascher, András Báldi, Péter Batáry, Faye Benjamin, Jacobus C. Biesmeijer, Eleanor J. Blitzer, Riccardo Bommarco, Mariëtte R. Brand, Vincent Bretagnolle, Lindsey Button, Daniel P. Cariveau, Rémy Chifflet, Jonathan F. Colville, Bryan N. Danforth, Elizabeth Elle, Michael P. D. Garratt, Felix Herzog, Andrea Holzschuh, Brad G. Howlett, Frank Jauker, Shalene Jha, Eva Knop, Kristin M. Krewenka, Violette Le Féon, Yael Mandelik, Emily A. May, Mia G. Park, Gideon Pisanty, Menno Reemer, Verena Riedinger, Orianne Rollin, Maj Rundlöf, Hillary S. Sardiñas, Jeroen Scheper, Amber R. Sciligo, Henrik G. Smith, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter, Robbin Thorp, Teja Tscharntke, Jort Verhulst, Blandina F. Viana, Bernard E. Vaissiére, Ruan Veldtman, Kimiora L. Ward, Catrin Westphal, and Simon G. Potts

Subjects
Science
Abstract

Nature Communications 6: Article number: 7414 (2015); Published: 16 June 2015; Updated: 18 February 2016. The authors inadvertently omitted Kimiora L. Ward, who managed and contributed data, from the author list. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

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

Author

Felix Herzog, Frank Jauker, Teja Tscharntke, Claire Kremen, Jonathan F. Colville, Rémy Chifflet, Gideon Pisanty, Maj Rundlöf, Mariëtte R. Brand, András Báldi, Romina Rader, Vincent Bretagnolle, Violette Le Féon, Menno Reemer, Alexandra-Maria Klein, Henrik G. Smith, Ruan Veldtman, Riccardo Bommarco, Daniel P. Cariveau, Shalene Jha, Péter Batáry, Simon G. Potts, Jort Verhulst, Michael P.D. Garratt, Taylor H. Ricketts, Robbin W. Thorp, Kristin M. Krewenka, Orianne Rollin, Catrin Westphal, Luísa G. Carvalheiro, Verena Riedinger, Eleanor J. Blitzer, Blandina Felipe Viana, Leithen K. M'Gonigle, Neal M. Williams, David Kleijn, Mia G. Park, John S. Ascher, Rachael Winfree, Mickaël Henry, Elizabeth Elle, Ignasi Bartomeus, Bryan N. Danforth, Brad G. Howlett, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter, Bernard E. Vaissière, Nancy Lee Adamson, Jacobus C. Biesmeijer, Andrea Holzschuh, Emily A. May, Faye Benjamin, Yael Mandelik, Lindsey Button, Hillary S. Sardiñas, Jeroen Scheper, Eva Knop, Amber R. Sciligo, Rufus Isaacs, Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR), Resource Ecology Group, Wageningen University and Research [Wageningen] (WUR), Rutgers University [Camden], Rutgers University System (Rutgers), Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas [Madrid] (CSIC), School of Biology, University of Leeds, Department of Terrestrial Zoology, NCB Naturalis, Abeilles & Environnement (UR 406 ), Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE), Department of Entomology, University of Arkansas [Fayetteville], University of Freiburg [Freiburg], Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England (UNE), University of Vermont [Burlington], University of California [Davis] (UC Davis), PO Box 20653, Partenaires INRAE, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore (NUS), Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA Centre for Ecological Research, Georg-August-University [Göttingen], Michigan State University [East Lansing], Michigan State University System-Michigan State University System, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Kirstenbosch Research Center, National Botanical Institute, Stellenbosch University, Iziko South African Museum, Centre d'Études Biologiques de Chizé - UMR 7372 (CEBC), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Université de La Rochelle (ULR)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Dartmouth College [Hanover], Plateforme Regionale d'Innovation 'Agriculture Biologique et Périurbaine Durable', Kirstenbosch Research Centre, South African National Biodiversity Institute, University of Reading (UOR), Agroscope, Department of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg [Wurtzbourg, Allemagne] (JMU), Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand (HortResearch), Department of Animal Ecology, Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (JLU), University of Texas at Austin, Universität Bern- University of Bern [Bern], Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Institut Technique et Scientifique de l'Apiculture et de la Pollinisation (ITSAP-Institut de l'Abeille), Department of Biology, Northern Arizona University [Flagstaff], Center for Ecosystem Studies, Lund University [Lund], Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California-University of California, Biology Institute, University of Arizona, and Naturalis Biodiversity Center [Leiden]

Subjects
Pollination, [SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio], Biodiversity, General Physics and Astronomy, habitat naturel, decline, Ecosystem services, biodiversité, Common species, Pollinator, 2. Zero hunger, abundance, Multidisciplinary, Ecology, native bees, food and beverages, Bees, PE&RC, Pollinator decline, Ecosystems Research, pollen, [SDE]Environmental Sciences, Plantenecologie en Natuurbeheer, Conservation of Natural Resources, productivity, Life on Land, Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, Crops, conservation de la population, Biology, Article, General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Animals, fruit-set, ddc:578, Agricultural, pollinisateur, business.industry, pollination, wild pollinator, conservation, fungi, abeille sauvage, butinage, conservation du paysage, General Chemistry, 15. Life on land, plant diversity, european countries, Agriculture, Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Threatened species, 570 Life sciences, biology, biodiversity conservation, business, ecosystem services
Abstract

© 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved. 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.

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Landscape context and habitat type as drivers of bee diversity in European annual crops

Author

Jenn Harrison-Cripps, Philip Roche, Rémy Chifflet, Simon G. Potts, Guy Rodet, Nicolas Morison, Michal Woyciechowski, Gabriel Carré, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter, Catrin Westphal, Bernard E. Vaissière, Josef Settele, Riccardo Bommarco, Stuart P. M. Roberts, Kristin M. Krewenka, Thomas Tscheulin, Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Ecosystèmes méditerranéens et risques (UR EMAX), Centre national du machinisme agricole, du génie rural, des eaux et forêts (CEMAGREF), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING GBR, Partenaires IRSTEA, Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l'environnement et l'agriculture (IRSTEA)-Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l'environnement et l'agriculture (IRSTEA), UNIVERSITY OF GOTTINGEN DEU, CENTRE FOR AGRI ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY OF READING GBR, HELMHOLZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH HALLE DEU, University of Bayreuth, INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE KRAKOW POL, and University of the Aegean

Subjects
2. Zero hunger, 0106 biological sciences, Ecology, ROYAUME UNI, Biodiversity, Species diversity, FRANCE, Woodland, 15. Life on land, 010603 evolutionary biology, 01 natural sciences, 010602 entomology, Geography, Habitat, Pollinator, POLOGNE, [SDE]Environmental Sciences, Species evenness, Animal Science and Zoology, Landscape ecology, Arable land, SUEDE, Agronomy and Crop Science, ALLEMAGNE
Abstract

To better understand the dynamics of bee populations in crops, we assessed the effect of landscape context and habitat type on bee communities in annual entomophilous crops in Europe. We quantified bee communities in five pairs of crop-country: buckwheat in Poland, cantaloupe in France, field beans in the UK, spring oilseed rape in Sweden, and strawberries in Germany. For each country, 7–10 study fields were sampled over a gradient of increasing proportion of semi-natural habitats in the surrounding landscape. The CORINE land cover classification was used to characterize the landscape over a 3 km radius around each study field and we used multivariate and regression analyses to quantify the impact of landscape features on bee abundance and diversity at the sub-generic taxonomic level. Neither overall wild bee abundance nor diversity, taken as the number of sub-genera, was significantly affected by the proportion of semi-natural habitat. Therefore, we used the most precise level of the CORINE classification to examine the possible links between specific landscape features and wild bee communities. Bee community composition fell into three distinct groups across Europe: group 1 included Poland, Germany, and Sweden, group 2 the UK, and group 3 France. Among all three groups, wild bee abundance and sub-generic diversity were affected by 17 landscape elements including some semi-natural habitats (e.g., transitional woodland-shrub), some urban habitats (e.g., sport and leisure facilities) and some crop habitats (e.g., non-irrigated arable land). Some bee taxa were positively affected by urban habitats only, others by semi-natural habitats only, and others by a combination of semi-natural, urban and crop habitats. Bee sub-genera favoured by urban and crop habitats were more resistant to landscape change than those favoured only by semi-natural habitats. In agroecosystems, the agricultural intensification defined as the loss of semi-natural habitats does not necessarily cause a decline in evenness at the local level, but can change community composition towards a bee fauna dominated by common taxa.

Published
2009
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results