Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 220

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The winners and losers of land use intensification: pollinator community disassembly is non‐random and alters functional diversity

Open access
Rader, Romina, Bartomeus, Ignasi, Tylianakis, Jason M., Laliberté, Etienne·2014·Diversity and Distributions

Abstract

Aim: Pollination services are at risk from land use change and intensification, but responses of individual pollinator species are often variable, making it difficult to detect and understand community‐level impacts on pollination. We investigated changes in community composition and functional diversity of insect pollinator communities under land use change in a highly modified landscape. Location: Canterbury region, South Island, New Zealand. Methods: We trapped insect pollinators every month for 1 year at 24 sites across four land use types of increasing intensity in New Zealand: gardens with native vegetation, blackcurrant orchards, dairy farms, and rotational cropping farms. We investigated changes in pollinator species and functional richness and differences in species and functional composition. Results: Under increasing land use intensity, both species and functional richness declined markedly. Changes in functional richness, however, were overall not significantly different than expected based on the observed declines in species richness. Nevertheless, there was a significant trend towards greater than expected functional richness within less‐intensive land use types and lower than expected functional richness within intensive land use types. The order of species loss under increasing land use intensity was non‐random, as pollinators with a narrow diet breadth, large body size, solitary behaviour and a preference for non‐floral larval food resources were lost first. Main conclusions: Our study shows that pollinator species bearing particular trait attributes are susceptible to differences in land use. Our study suggests that pollination services may be more vulnerable to environmental changes and disturbances in more intensive land use types as a result of lower pollinator functional richness.

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 · 10.1111/ddi.12221

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 220

Metadata

Authors
Rader, R., Bartomeus, I., Tylianakis, J. M., & Laliberté, E.
Venue
Diversity and Distributions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-05-22
Volume
20
Issue
8
Pages
908-917
ISSN
  • 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-9516
  • 1472-4642
OpenAlex
W2141506835
Cited by
220
References
8
FWCI
16.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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 winners and losers of land use intensification: pollinator community disassembly is non‐random and alters functional diversity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ddi.12221
The paper
Rader, R., Bartomeus, I., Tylianakis, J. M., & Laliberté, E. (2014). The winners and losers of land use intensification: pollinator community disassembly is non‐random and alters functional diversity. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12221

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.