Search

Climate change and human land use are causing changes to species ranges and abundances. However, factors influencing the species-specific speed and direction of changes are not well understood. In addition, intra-specific variation in the responses has rarely been investigated and thus it is not known if the same species show similar population changes in different areas. We compared the rate of changes in range size (since the 1970s) and population abundance (since the 1980s) as well as shifts in mean weighted latitude of range (since the 1970s) and density (since the 1990s) among the same bird species in Finland and Great Britain, two countries that share similar north-south climatic gradients. Similar responses between countries could indicate that climate change is causing parallel changes in species' ranges and abundances in the countries. Furthermore, we tested whether the responses differed between habitat types, which could indicate that local habitat availability and land use may be more important than climate change. Wetland species showed parallel range size change in the wo countries, but no such connection was found in open and forested habitats. Population abundance trends were also parallel in both countries and northern species showed more negative population trends than southern species. The speed of change in species' average latitudes was positively correlated between the two countries when using occurrence data, but negatively correlated when using species density. Species that show similar changes in population sizes in Finland and Great Britain, that are likely caused by large scale population drivers, such as climate change. However, speed of latitudinal shifts in species' densities were not connected between the two countries. These potential differences are likely driven by spatial variation in land use changes and habitat availability.

Around fifteen thousand fieldworkers annually count breeding birds using standardized protocols in 28 European countries. The observations are collected by using country-specific and standardized protocols, validated, summarized and finally used for the production of continent-wide annual and long-term indices of population size changes of 170 species. Here, we present the database and provide a detailed summary of the methodology used for fieldwork and calculation of the relative population size change estimates. We also provide a brief overview of how the data are used in research, conservation and policy. We believe this unique database, based on decades of bird monitoring alongside the comprehensive summary of its methodology, will facilitate and encourage further use of the Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme results. The Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme database is organised into five datasets: (1) European species indices, (2) European species trends, (3) European species trends for three short periods, (4) a list of details on the national monitoring schemes and (5) a matrix of countries providing data for population size estimates of individual species. Moreover, national-level species indices and uncertainty estimates are also available in the PECBMS database. Due to specific privacy ownership rights, the most recent (2016-2017) data from Spain (10.5281/zenodo.4590140) and Cyprus (10.5281/zenodo.4590189) are under Restricted Access and researchers interested in these most recent updates are required to provide a brief description of the data use. The Austrian and Portuguese datasets are publicly available but researchers using these datasets are kindly requested to notify the national scheme coordinators of their use. A list of regularly updated contacts to all national scheme coordinators is provided at the PECBMSwebsite (https://pecbms.info/country/). We aim to maintain the PECBMS database with annual updates. The annual updates will be available through the PECBMS database deposited at this Zenodo repository to ensure long-term public availability of the data. Updates on data acquisiton and data processing in the dataset released in 2021 are available from:https://pecbms.info/what-is-new-in-2021-data-update/ Updates on data acquisiton and data processing in the dataset released in 2022 are available from:https://pecbms.info/what-is-new-in-2022-data-update/ &nbsp

The land sharing-sparing framework aims to quantify the trade-off between food production and biodiversity conservation, but it has been criticised for offering, for reasons of simplicity, an unrealistically limited set of different land uses. Here, we develop the framework to evaluate a much larger suite of land-use strategies in which the areas and yields of three land-use compartments, natural habitat, high-yield farmland, and lower-yield farmland, are varied simultaneously. For two regions of England, we use functions that relate the local population density of breeding bird species to farm yield to simulate species-specific region-wide population sizes under each strategy. We find that average population sizes averaged across all species are maximised when farmland yields are higher than the current average, sparing land for a combination of both natural habitat and low-yield farmland. This conclusion is relatively insensitive to the maximum yield considered feasible under extreme land sparing, and holds across a range of region-wide food production targets. To some extent, our conclusion depends on which species groups were included in the assessment. Considered alone, farmland birds preferred a strategy with little or no natural habitat. Nonetheless, the optimal strategy was broadly consistent across all widely-recognised listings of species of conservation concern. Our study suggests that in long-farmed agricultural landscapes with little remaining natural habitat, such as are found in lowland England, conservation outcomes are likely to be maximised by mixed strategies in which high-yield production enables an increase in area of both natural habitat and low-yield farmland elsewhere in the region., This study was funded by the RSPB, the Isaac Newton Trust (research grant RG85918) and Natural England (project code ECM 52869).

Empirical evidence from many regions suggests that most species would be least negatively affected if human food demand were met through high-yield agricultural production and conservation of nonfarm ecosystems (land sparing), rather than through wildlife-friendly farming over a larger area (land sharing). However, repeated glaciation and a long history of agriculture may lead to different results in regions such as western Europe. We compared the consequences of land sparing and land sharing on breeding bird species in 2 lowland regions of England, The Fens, with 101 species, and Salisbury Plain, with 83. We derived density-yield responses for each species and then estimated regional population size under regional food production strategies, including land sharing and land sparing, a range of intermediate strategies, and a novel mixed strategy. In both regions, more species achieved maximum regional population size under land sparing than land sharing. In The Fens, the majority of birds were loser species (estimated to have smaller populations under all food production strategies than in the preagricultural baseline scenario), whereas in Salisbury Plain the majority were winners (smaller populations in the preagricultural baseline scenario). Loser species overwhelmingly achieved maximum regional population size under land sparing, whereas winner species achieved maximum regional population size under either land sharing or an intermediate strategy, highlighting the importance of defining which groups of species are the target of conservation. A novel 3-compartment strategy (combining high-yield farming, natural habitat, and low-yield farming) often performed better than either land sharing or land sparing. Our results support intermediate or 3-compartment land-sparing strategies to maximize bird populations across lowland agricultural landscapes. To deliver conservation outcomes, any shift toward land sparing must, however, ensure yield increases are sustainable in the long term, do not entail increased negative effects on surrounding areas, and are linked to allocation of land for nature.

It is important for conservationists to be able to assess the risks that climate change poses to species, in order to inform decision making. Using standardised and repeatable methods, we present a national-scale assessment of the risks of range loss and opportunities for range expansion that climate change could pose for over 3000 plants and animals. Species were selected by their occurrence in England, the primary focus of the study, but climate change impacts were assessed across Great Britain, widening their geographical relevance. A basic risk assessment that compared projected future changes in potential range with recently observed changes classified 21% of species as being at high risk and 6% at medium risk of range loss under a B1 climate change scenario. A greater number of species were classified as having a medium (16%) or high (38%) opportunity to potentially expand their distribution. A more comprehensive assessment, incorporating additional ecological information, including potentially confounding and exacerbating factors (e.g. dispersal, habitat availability and other constraints), was applied to 402 species, of which 35% were at risk of range loss and 42% may expand their range extent. This study covers a temperate region with a significant proportion of species at their poleward range limit; the balance of risks and opportunities from climate change may be different elsewhere. The outcome of both risk assessments varied between taxonomic groups, with bryophytes and vascular plants containing the greatest proportion of species at risk from climate change. Upland habitats contained more species at risk than other habitats. Whilst the overall pattern was clear, confidence was generally low for individual assessments, with the exception of well-studied taxa such as birds. In response to climate change, nature conservation needs to plan for changing species distributions and an uncertain future.