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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100
Sala, O. E., Stuart Chapin, F., III, Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., et al. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5459.1770 · Cited by 9,280
Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity
Cardinale, B. J., Duffy, J. E., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D. U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., Narwani, A., Mace, G. M., Tilman, D., Wardle, D. A., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11148 · Cited by 7,457 · cited 1×
“As species’ traits determine their contribution to ecosystem processes, loss of particular traits may translate to changes in ecosystem functioning and services (Kleijn et al., 2004; Larsen et al., 2005; Cardinale et al., 2012).”
How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals?
Ollerton, J., Winfree, R., & Tarrant, S. (2011) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18644.x · Cited by 3,874
Lavorel, S., & Garnier, E. (2002) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00664.x · Cited by 3,452
PLANT FUNCTIONAL MARKERS CAPTURE ECOSYSTEM PROPERTIES DURING SECONDARY SUCCESSION
Garnier, E., Cortez, J., Billès, G., Navas, M.-L., Roumet, C., Debussche, M., Laurent, G., Blanchard, A., Aubry, D., Bellmann, A., et al. (2004) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/03-0799 · Cited by 2,313
Plant-Pollinator Interactions over 120 Years: Loss of Species, Co-Occurrence, and Function
Burkle, L. A., Marlin, J. C., & Knight, T. M. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1232728 · Cited by 1,118 · cited 2×
“, 2013a) and the preferential loss of specialist, parasitic and cavity-nesting pollinators (Williams et al., 2010; Burkle et al., 2013).”
A meta-analysis of bees’ responses to anthropogenic disturbance
Winfree, R., Aguilar, R., Vázquez, D. P., LeBuhn, G., & Aizen, M. A. (2009) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/08-1245.1 · Cited by 1,050
Extinction order and altered community structure rapidly disrupt ecosystem functioning
Larsen, T. H., Williams, N. M., & Kremen, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00749.x · Cited by 695
Cited by
Non-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination
Rader, R., Bartomeus, I., Garibaldi, L. A., Garratt, M. P. D., Howlett, B. G., Winfree, R., Cunningham, S. A., Mayfield, M. M., Arthur, A. D., Andersson, G. K. S., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1517092112 · Cited by 1,000
Self-citationLandscape simplification filters species traits and drives biotic homogenization
Gámez-Virués, S., Perović, D. J., Gossner, M. M., Börschig, C., Blüthgen, N., de Jong, H., Simons, N. K., Klein, A.-M., Krauss, J., Maier, G., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms9568 · Cited by 666
Gutiérrez-Chacón, C., Valderrama-A, C., & Klein, A.-M. (2020) · Journal of Insect Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10841-019-00205-2 · Cited by 32
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.