Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 435

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The decline of butterflies in Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions

Open access
Warren, Martin S., Maes, Dirk, van Swaay, Chris A. M., Goffart, Philippe, Van Dyck, Hans, Bourn, Nigel A. D., Wynhoff, Irma, Hoare, Dan, Ellis, Sam·2021·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

We review changes in the status of butterflies in Europe, focusing on long-running population data available for the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Belgium, based on standardized monitoring transects. In the United Kingdom, 8% of resident species have become extinct, and since 1976 overall numbers declined by around 50%. In the Netherlands, 20% of species have become extinct, and since 1990 overall numbers in the country declined by 50%. Distribution trends showed that butterfly distributions began decreasing long ago, and between 1890 and 1940, distributions declined by 80%. In Flanders (Belgium), 20 butterflies have become extinct (29%), and between 1992 and 2007 overall numbers declined by around 30%. A European Grassland Butterfly Indicator from 16 European countries shows there has been a 39% decline of grassland butterflies since 1990. The 2010 Red List of European butterflies listed 38 of the 482 European species (8%) as threatened and 44 species (10%) as near threatened (note that 47 species were not assessed). A country level analysis indicates that the average Red List rating is highest in central and mid-Western Europe and lowest in the far north of Europe and around the Mediterranean. The causes of the decline of butterflies are thought to be similar in most countries, mainly habitat loss and degradation and chemical pollution. Climate change is allowing many species to spread northward while bringing new threats to susceptible species. We describe examples of possible conservation solutions and a summary of policy changes needed to conserve butterflies and other insects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.2002551117

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 72 references

Cited by

See all 435

Metadata

Authors
Warren, M. S., Maes, D., van Swaay, C. A. M., Goffart, P., Van Dyck, H., Bourn, N. A. D., Wynhoff, I., Hoare, D., & Ellis, S.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2021-01-11
Volume
118
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W3119490575
Cited by
435
References
72
FWCI
34.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The decline of butterflies in Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.2002551117
The paper
Warren, M. S., Maes, D., van Swaay, C. A. M., Goffart, P., Van Dyck, H., Bourn, N. A. D., Wynhoff, I., Hoare, D., & Ellis, S. (2021). The decline of butterflies in Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002551117

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.