Search

Your search keyword '"Gratton, Claudio"' showing total 533 results
Start Over Author "Gratton, Claudio" Search Limiters Peer Reviewed
533 results on '"Gratton, Claudio"'

4. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production.

Author

Dainese, Matteo, Martin, Emily A, Aizen, Marcelo A, Albrecht, Matthias, Bartomeus, Ignasi, Bommarco, Riccardo, Carvalheiro, Luisa G, Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca, Gagic, Vesna, Garibaldi, Lucas A, Ghazoul, Jaboury, Grab, Heather, Jonsson, Mattias, Karp, Daniel S, Kennedy, Christina M, Kleijn, David, Kremen, Claire, Landis, Douglas A, Letourneau, Deborah K, Marini, Lorenzo, Poveda, Katja, Rader, Romina, Smith, Henrik G, Tscharntke, Teja, Andersson, Georg KS, Badenhausser, Isabelle, Baensch, Svenja, Bezerra, Antonio Diego M, Bianchi, Felix JJA, Boreux, Virginie, Bretagnolle, Vincent, Caballero-Lopez, Berta, Cavigliasso, Pablo, Ćetković, Aleksandar, Chacoff, Natacha P, Classen, Alice, Cusser, Sarah, da Silva E Silva, Felipe D, de Groot, G Arjen, Dudenhöffer, Jan H, Ekroos, Johan, Fijen, Thijs, Franck, Pierre, Freitas, Breno M, Garratt, Michael PD, Gratton, Claudio, Hipólito, Juliana, Holzschuh, Andrea, Hunt, Lauren, Iverson, Aaron L, Jha, Shalene, Keasar, Tamar, Kim, Tania N, Kishinevsky, Miriam, Klatt, Björn K, Klein, Alexandra-Maria, Krewenka, Kristin M, Krishnan, Smitha, Larsen, Ashley E, Lavigne, Claire, Liere, Heidi, Maas, Bea, Mallinger, Rachel E, Martinez Pachon, Eliana, Martínez-Salinas, Alejandra, Meehan, Timothy D, Mitchell, Matthew GE, Molina, Gonzalo AR, Nesper, Maike, Nilsson, Lovisa, O'Rourke, Megan E, Peters, Marcell K, Plećaš, Milan, Potts, Simon G, Ramos, Davi de L, Rosenheim, Jay A, Rundlöf, Maj, Rusch, Adrien, Sáez, Agustín, Scheper, Jeroen, Schleuning, Matthias, Schmack, Julia M, Sciligo, Amber R, Seymour, Colleen, Stanley, Dara A, Stewart, Rebecca, Stout, Jane C, Sutter, Louis, Takada, Mayura B, Taki, Hisatomo, Tamburini, Giovanni, Tschumi, Matthias, Viana, Blandina F, Westphal, Catrin, Willcox, Bryony K, Wratten, Stephen D, Yoshioka, Akira, Zaragoza-Trello, Carlos, Zhang, Wei, and Zou, Yi

Subjects
Humans, Crops, Agricultural, Ecosystem, Biodiversity, Pest Control, Biological, Agriculture, Pollination, Crop Production, Crops, Agricultural, Pest Control, Biological
Abstract

Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield-related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.

Published
2019

11. Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition.

Author

Karp, Daniel S, Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca, Meehan, Timothy D, Martin, Emily A, DeClerck, Fabrice, Grab, Heather, Gratton, Claudio, Hunt, Lauren, Larsen, Ashley E, Martínez-Salinas, Alejandra, O'Rourke, Megan E, Rusch, Adrien, Poveda, Katja, Jonsson, Mattias, Rosenheim, Jay A, Schellhorn, Nancy A, Tscharntke, Teja, Wratten, Stephen D, Zhang, Wei, Iverson, Aaron L, Adler, Lynn S, Albrecht, Matthias, Alignier, Audrey, Angelella, Gina M, Zubair Anjum, Muhammad, Avelino, Jacques, Batáry, Péter, Baveco, Johannes M, Bianchi, Felix JJA, Birkhofer, Klaus, Bohnenblust, Eric W, Bommarco, Riccardo, Brewer, Michael J, Caballero-López, Berta, Carrière, Yves, Carvalheiro, Luísa G, Cayuela, Luis, Centrella, Mary, Ćetković, Aleksandar, Henri, Dominic Charles, Chabert, Ariane, Costamagna, Alejandro C, De la Mora, Aldo, de Kraker, Joop, Desneux, Nicolas, Diehl, Eva, Diekötter, Tim, Dormann, Carsten F, Eckberg, James O, Entling, Martin H, Fiedler, Daniela, Franck, Pierre, Frank van Veen, FJ, Frank, Thomas, Gagic, Vesna, Garratt, Michael PD, Getachew, Awraris, Gonthier, David J, Goodell, Peter B, Graziosi, Ignazio, Groves, Russell L, Gurr, Geoff M, Hajian-Forooshani, Zachary, Heimpel, George E, Herrmann, John D, Huseth, Anders S, Inclán, Diego J, Ingrao, Adam J, Iv, Phirun, Jacot, Katja, Johnson, Gregg A, Jones, Laura, Kaiser, Marina, Kaser, Joe M, Keasar, Tamar, Kim, Tania N, Kishinevsky, Miriam, Landis, Douglas A, Lavandero, Blas, Lavigne, Claire, Le Ralec, Anne, Lemessa, Debissa, Letourneau, Deborah K, Liere, Heidi, Lu, Yanhui, Lubin, Yael, Luttermoser, Tim, Maas, Bea, Mace, Kevi, Madeira, Filipe, Mader, Viktoria, Cortesero, Anne Marie, Marini, Lorenzo, Martinez, Eliana, Martinson, Holly M, Menozzi, Philippe, Mitchell, Matthew GE, Miyashita, Tadashi, Molina, Gonzalo AR, and Molina-Montenegro, Marco A

Subjects
Animals, Crops, Agricultural, Ecosystem, Pest Control, Biological, Models, Biological, agroecology, biodiversity, biological control, ecosystem services, natural enemies, Crops, Agricultural, Pest Control, Biological, Models
Abstract

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win-win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win-win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.

Published
2018

14. Semi‐natural habitat, but not aphid amount or continuity, predicts lady beetle abundance across agricultural landscapes.

Author

Iuliano, Benjamin, Gratton, Claudio, Kim, Tania N., and Spiesman, Brian J.

Abstract

The amount of semi‐natural habitat surrounding farm fields is a common but inconsistent predictor of natural enemy populations and predation services. Standard land cover metrics may not accurately capture the actual availability of limiting resources for natural enemies and can miss important dynamics across space and time. Theory from animal movement and landscape ecology predicts that regions with more, spatio‐temporally continuous resources (i.e. food and shelter) should have larger predator populations and enhanced biological control. To test these predictions empirically, we designed a study measuring aphids, lady beetles and predation services in agricultural landscapes in Wisconsin, USA. In two study years, we sampled lady beetles and aphids in 336 crop fields (corn, soybean, alfalfa and small grains) and adjacent semi‐natural habitat patches (grasslands and woodlands) across 24 1.5 km buffer landscapes at four to seven time points each, and in 1 year, we assessed predation rates with sentinel egg cards. We used aphid counts to model habitat‐specific aphid phenologies, from which we calculated landscape indices of prey amount and continuity. These indices, along with semi‐natural habitat area, were used to predict lady beetle abundance. While there were strong differences in the abundance and timing of aphids by habitat, semi‐natural habitat amount was still a better predictor of lady beetle counts and sentinel egg predation than either aphid amount or continuity indices in these landscapes. Synthesis and applications. Our findings confirm the robust relationship between lady beetles and semi‐natural habitat in agricultural landscapes, and highlight the complexities of measuring fine‐scale resource heterogeneity in real landscapes. Retaining or adding woodland and grassland patches in agricultural landscapes is likely to support larger lady beetle populations and enhance predation in crop fields. Our results suggest that these habitats may be more important for shelter than prey continuity, though this mechanism warrants further investigation. Future work should continue to refine experimental methods for the successful integration of landscape ecology and animal behaviour to support conservation goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

15. Heterogenous effects of bat declines from white‐nose syndrome on arthropods.

Author

Wray, Amy K., Peery, Marcus Z., Kochanski, Jade M., Pelton, Emma, Lindner, Daniel L., and Gratton, Claudio

Subjects
BATS, WHITE-nose syndrome, LITTLE brown bat, ARTHROPODA, PREY availability
Abstract

In North America, white‐nose syndrome (WNS) has caused precipitous declines in hibernating bat populations, raising the question of whether the rapid loss of arthropodivorous bats may affect the abundance of their prey. During the summers of 2015–2018 (1 year after the arrival of WNS in Wisconsin, USA), we performed intensive arthropod black‐light trapping, ultrasonic acoustic monitoring, and emergence counts at 10 little brown (Myotis lucifugus) and big brown (Eptesicus fuscus) bat maternity roosts with paired control sites. For little brown bats, which are severely affected by WNS, roost counts declined by 95% over the four‐year period, compared to a 38% decline in big brown bat roost counts. Total arthropod abundance decreased by 49%, although decreases among common little brown bat prey were less severe. Our natural predator exclusion experiment supports existing evidence that bats can have measurable trophic impacts on arthropod communities, primarily via top‐down effects on common prey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

24. Insects as drivers of ecosystem processes

Author

Yang, Louie H and Gratton, Claudio

Subjects
Biological Sciences, Ecology, Affordable and Clean Energy, Zoology, Evolutionary biology
Abstract

Insects and other small invertebrates are ubiquitous components of all terrestrial and freshwater food webs, but their cumulative biomass is small relative to plants and microbes. As a result, it is often assumed that these animals make relatively minor contributions to ecosystem processes. Despite their small sizes and cumulative biomass, we suggest that these animals may commonly have important effects on carbon and nutrient cycling by modulating the quality and quantity of resources that enter the detrital food web, with consequences at the ecosystem level. These effects can occur through multiple pathways, including direct inputs of insect biomass, the transformation of detrital biomass, and the indirect effects of predators on herbivores and detritivores. In virtually all cases, the ecosystem effects of these pathways are ultimately mediated through interactions with plants and soil microbes. Merging our understanding of insect, plant and microbial ecology will offer a valuable way to better integrate community-level interactions with ecosystem processes.

Published
2014

29. A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems.

Author

Kennedy, Christina M, Lonsdorf, Eric, Neel, Maile C, Williams, Neal M, Ricketts, Taylor H, Winfree, Rachael, Bommarco, Riccardo, Brittain, Claire, Burley, Alana L, Cariveau, Daniel, Carvalheiro, Luísa G, Chacoff, Natacha P, Cunningham, Saul A, Danforth, Bryan N, Dudenhöffer, Jan-Hendrik, Elle, Elizabeth, Gaines, Hannah R, Garibaldi, Lucas A, Gratton, Claudio, Holzschuh, Andrea, Isaacs, Rufus, Javorek, Steven K, Jha, Shalene, Klein, Alexandra M, Krewenka, Kristin, Mandelik, Yael, Mayfield, Margaret M, Morandin, Lora, Neame, Lisa A, Otieno, Mark, Park, Mia, Potts, Simon G, Rundlöf, Maj, Saez, Agustin, Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf, Taki, Hisatomo, Viana, Blandina Felipe, Westphal, Catrin, Wilson, Julianna K, Greenleaf, Sarah S, and Kremen, Claire

Subjects
Animals, Bees, Flowers, Crops, Agricultural, Ecosystem, Climate, Population Density, Models, Theoretical, Agriculture, Pollination, Agri-environment schemes, diversified farming system, ecologically scaled landscape index, ecosystem services, farm management, habitat fragmentation, landscape structure, organic farming, pollinators, Ecology, Ecological Applications, Evolutionary Biology
Abstract

Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.

Published
2013

46. The rise of novelty in ecosystems

Author

Radeloff, Volker C., Williams, John W., Bateman, Brooke L., Burke, Kevin D., Carter, Sarah K., Childress, Evan S., Cromwell, Kara J., Gratton, Claudio, Hasley, Andrew O., Kraemer, Benjamin M., Latzka, Alexander W., Marin-Spiotta, Erika, Meine, Curt D., Munoz, Samuel E., Neeson, Thomas M., Pidgeon, Anna M., Rissman, Adena R., Rivera, Ricardo J., Szymanski, Laura M., and Usinowicz, Jacob

Published
2015

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results