The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing the efficacy of agri‐environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and diversity on arable field margins
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Declines in abundance and diversity of bumble bees (Bombus spp.) in Europe have been linked to agricultural intensification and the resulting loss of suitable foraging and nesting habitats. Environmental Stewardship (ES) is a new scheme in England offering the opportunity to restore habitats of value for these important pollinators to agricultural land. Scientific evaluation of the options prescribed within the scheme is essential to ensure that their objectives are met and that the benefits can be realized by the full bumble bee species assemblage. We compared the efficacy of different ES options for field margins on arable land in enhancing the abundance and diversity of flowering resources and foraging bumble bees. Our study was conducted over 3 years using a multisite experiment. Overall, uncropped margins sown with mixtures containing nectar and pollen‐producing plants were more effective in providing bumble bee forage than margins sown with a grass mix, allowed to regenerate naturally or managed as conservation headlands. A mixture of agricultural legumes established quickly and attracted on average the highest total abundance and diversity of bumble bees, including the rare long‐tongued species Bombus ruderatus and Bombus muscorum. However, marked differences were observed between species and sexes in their responses to field margin management over time. A diverse mixture of native wildflowers attracted more of the shorter‐tongued Bombus spp. and provided greater continuity of forage resources, especially early in the season. Allowing Cirsium spp. to flower on such margins also increased their attractiveness to male bumble bees. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that the legume‐based ‘pollen and nectar flower mix’, as prescribed under Entry Level Stewardship in England, can quickly provide a highly attractive forage resource for bumble bees, but that issues of seasonal flowering phenology and longevity of the mixture need to be addressed. Establishment of ‘floristically enhanced margins’ under Higher Level Stewardship will be important to provide diverse perennial communities of forage plants and to support a greater range of Bombus spp. and other pollinators. The population‐level responses of bumble bees to introduced seed mixtures and other agri‐environment options require further study in order to maximize the benefits of such schemes in intensively farmed landscapes.
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
ter Braak, C. J. F., & Šmilauer, P. (2002) · Cited by 9,306
Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—Ecosystem service management
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan‐Dewenter, I., & Thies, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x · Cited by 4,455
ter Braak, C. J. F., & Šmilauer, P. (1998) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling · Cited by 3,383
Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key?
Benton, T. G., Vickery, J. A., & Wilson, J. D. (2003) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00011-9 · Cited by 3,205
New flora of the British Isles
Stace, C. A., & Thompson, H. S. (1991) · Cited by 1,567
Post‐war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain
Robinson, R. A., & Sutherland, W. J. (2002) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00695.x · Cited by 1,560
How effective are European agri‐environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity?
Kleijn, D., & Sutherland, W. J. (2003) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2003.00868.x · Cited by 1,519
Mcgkegok, S. E. (1971) · Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America · doi:10.1093/besa/17.3.164 · Cited by 1,213
Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds
Steffan-Dewenter, I., Münzenberg, U., Bürger, C., Thies, C., & Tscharntke, T. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1421:sdeolc]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,187
Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation.
Morris, M. G., Pollard, E., & Yates, T. J. (1995) · The Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2404667 · Cited by 1,051
Cited by
Decline and conservation of bumble bees
Goulson, D., Lye, G. C., & Darvill, B. (2008) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093454 · Cited by 1,183
Self-citationDoes conservation on farmland contribute to halting the biodiversity decline?
Kleijn, D., Rundlöf, M., Scheper, J., Smith, H. G., & Tscharntke, T. (2011) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.05.009 · Cited by 671
Ecological services of faba bean
Köpke, U., & Nemecek, T. (2010) · Field Crops Research · doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2009.10.012 · Cited by 390
Bioenergy, Food Production and Biodiversity – An Unlikely Alliance?
Manning, P., Taylor, G., & E. Hanley, M. (2015) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12173 · Cited by 88
Intersection between biodiversity conservation, agroecology, and ecosystem services
Liere, H., Jha, S., & Philpott, S. M. (2017) · Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.1080/21683565.2017.1330796 · Cited by 86
Metadata
- Authors
- CARVELL, C., MEEK, W. R., PYWELL, R. F., GOULSON, D., & NOWAKOWSKI, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-11-29
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 29-40
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W1823837557
- Cited by
- 444
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 13.37
- 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: Comparing the efficacy of agri‐environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and diversity on arable field margins. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01249.x
- The paper
- CARVELL, C., MEEK, W. R., PYWELL, R. F., GOULSON, D., & NOWAKOWSKI, M. (2007). Comparing the efficacy of agri‐environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and diversity on arable field margins. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01249.x
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.