Insect pollination services in actively and spontaneously restored quarries converge differently to natural reference ecosystem
Journal of Environmental Management, ISSN: 0301-4797, Vol: 318, Page: 115450
2022
- 8Citations
- 30Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Ecological restoration has the potential to accelerate the recovery of biodiversity and ecosystem services in degraded ecosystems. However, current research queries whether active restoration is necessary. We evaluated plant-pollinator networks during spring at replicated sites within an actively restored quarry, at abandoned quarries undergoing spontaneous restoration, and within a natural reference area, to compare pollinator community composition and function. Overall, we aimed to assess which approach is more effective in rehabilitating pollination networks. We found that while both approaches allowed for the restoration of pollination function, active restoration provided faster recovery: pollination network structure was more similar to the reference ecosystem after 20–30 years of active restoration, than 40 years of natural succession in spontaneously restored areas. Different restoration approaches sustained distinct pollinator communities providing a similar service in different areas: honey bees played an important role in the natural area, bumblebees in the abandoned quarries and wild bees in the restored sites, suggesting a possible conflict between diverse wild bee communities and honey bee homogenized pollinator communities. In quarries, flower resource availability and diversity influenced networks’ structural properties by constraining species interactions and composition. In spontaneously restored areas a rich herbaceous layer of ruderal species from early successional stages buffered against the shortage of flower resources at critical periods. Active restoration, though effective, should include practices that consider wild bee communities and mitigate flower resource scarcity. The use of “bridging” plants that flower in different periods, should be considered in active restoration programs to enhance the pollinator community.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479722010234; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115450; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85132712567&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35738124; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301479722010234; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115450
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know