Simon G. Potts
University of Reading
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Simon G. Potts.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution | 2010
Simon G. Potts; Jacobus C. Biesmeijer; Claire Kremen; Peter J. Neumann; Oliver Schweiger; William E. Kunin
Pollinators are a key component of global biodiversity, providing vital ecosystem services to crops and wild plants. There is clear evidence of recent declines in both wild and domesticated pollinators, and parallel declines in the plants that rely upon them. Here we describe the nature and extent of reported declines, and review the potential drivers of pollinator loss, including habitat loss and fragmentation, agrochemicals, pathogens, alien species, climate change and the interactions between them. Pollinator declines can result in loss of pollination services which have important negative ecological and economic impacts that could significantly affect the maintenance of wild plant diversity, wider ecosystem stability, crop production, food security and human welfare.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution | 2013
Riccardo Bommarco; David Kleijn; Simon G. Potts
Rising demands for agricultural products will increase pressure to further intensify crop production, while negative environmental impacts have to be minimized. Ecological intensification entails the environmentally friendly replacement of anthropogenic inputs and/or enhancement of crop productivity, by including regulating and supporting ecosystem services management in agricultural practices. Effective ecological intensification requires an understanding of the relations between land use at different scales and the community composition of ecosystem service-providing organisms above and below ground, and the flow, stability, contribution to yield, and management costs of the multiple services delivered by these organisms. Research efforts and investments are particularly needed to reduce existing yield gaps by integrating context-appropriate bundles of ecosystem services into crop production systems.
Biodiversity and Conservation | 2010
Francesco de Bello; Sandra Lavorel; Sandra Díaz; R. Harrington; Johannes H. C. Cornelissen; Richard D. Bardgett; Matty P. Berg; Pablo A. Cipriotti; Christian K. Feld; Daniel Hering; Pedro Martins da Silva; Simon G. Potts; Leonard Sandin; José Paulo Sousa; Jonathan Storkey; David A. Wardle; Paula A. Harrison
Managing ecosystems to ensure the provision of multiple ecosystem services is a key challenge for applied ecology. Functional traits are receiving increasing attention as the main ecological attributes by which different organisms and biological communities influence ecosystem services through their effects on underlying ecosystem processes. Here we synthesize concepts and empirical evidence on linkages between functional traits and ecosystem services across different trophic levels. Most of the 247 studies reviewed considered plants and soil invertebrates, but quantitative trait–service associations have been documented for a range of organisms and ecosystems, illustrating the wide applicability of the trait approach. Within each trophic level, specific processes are affected by a combination of traits while particular key traits are simultaneously involved in the control of multiple processes. These multiple associations between traits and ecosystem processes can help to identify predictable trait–service clusters that depend on several trophic levels, such as clusters of traits of plants and soil organisms that underlie nutrient cycling, herbivory, and fodder and fibre production. We propose that the assessment of trait–service clusters will represent a crucial step in ecosystem service monitoring and in balancing the delivery of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, services in ecosystem management.
Ecology Letters | 2011
Lucas A. Garibaldi; Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter; Claire Kremen; Juan M. Morales; Riccardo Bommarco; Saul A. Cunningham; Luísa G. Carvalheiro; Natacha P. Chacoff; Jan H. Dudenhöffer; Sarah S. Greenleaf; Andrea Holzschuh; Rufus Isaacs; Kristin M. Krewenka; Yael Mandelik; Margaret M. Mayfield; Lora Morandin; Simon G. Potts; Taylor H. Ricketts; Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi; Blandina Felipe Viana; Catrin Westphal; Rachael Winfree; Alexandra M. Klein
Sustainable agricultural landscapes by definition provide high magnitude and stability of ecosystem services, biodiversity and crop productivity. However, few studies have considered landscape effects on the stability of ecosystem services. We tested whether isolation from florally diverse natural and semi-natural areas reduces the spatial and temporal stability of flower-visitor richness and pollination services in crop fields. We synthesised data from 29 studies with contrasting biomes, crop species and pollinator communities. Stability of flower-visitor richness, visitation rate (all insects except honey bees) and fruit set all decreased with distance from natural areas. At 1 km from adjacent natural areas, spatial stability decreased by 25, 16 and 9% for richness, visitation and fruit set, respectively, while temporal stability decreased by 39% for richness and 13% for visitation. Mean richness, visitation and fruit set also decreased with isolation, by 34, 27 and 16% at 1 km respectively. In contrast, honey bee visitation did not change with isolation and represented > 25% of crop visits in 21 studies. Therefore, wild pollinators are relevant for crop productivity and stability even when honey bees are abundant. Policies to preserve and restore natural areas in agricultural landscapes should enhance levels and reliability of pollination services.
Ecology Letters | 2013
Christina M. Kennedy; Eric Lonsdorf; Maile C. Neel; Neal M. Williams; Taylor H. Ricketts; Rachael Winfree; Riccardo Bommarco; Claire Brittain; Alana L. Burley; Daniel P. Cariveau; Luísa G. Carvalheiro; Natacha P. Chacoff; Saul A. Cunningham; Bryan N. Danforth; Jan-Hendrik Dudenhöffer; Elizabeth Elle; Hannah R. Gaines; Lucas A. Garibaldi; Claudio Gratton; Andrea Holzschuh; Rufus Isaacs; Steven K. Javorek; Shalene Jha; Alexandra M. Klein; Kristin M. Krewenka; Yael Mandelik; Margaret M. Mayfield; Lora Morandin; Lisa A. Neame; Mark Otieno
Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.
Ecology | 2003
Simon G. Potts; Betsy Vulliamy; Amots Dafni; Gidi Ne'eman; Pat Willmer
Pollinators provide essential ecosystem services, and declines in some pollinator communities around the world have been reported. Understanding the fundamental components defining these communities is essential if conservation and restoration are to be successful. We examined the structure of plant-pollinator communities in a dynamic Mediterranean landscape, comprising a mosaic of post-fire regenerating habitats, and which is a recognized global hotspot for bee diversity. Each community was characterized by a highly skewed species abundance distribution, with a few dominant and many rare bee species, and was consistent with a log series model indicating that a few environmental factors govern the community. Floral community composition, the quantity and quality of forage resources present, and the geographic locality organized bee communities at various levels: (1) The overall structure of the bee community (116 species), as revealed through ordination, was dependent upon nectar resource diversity (defined as the variety of nectar volume-concentration combinations available), the ratio of pollen to nectar energy, floral diversity, floral abundance, and post-fire age. (2) Bee diversity, measured as species richness, was closely linked to floral diversity (especially of annuals), nectar resource diversity, and post-fire age of the habitat. (3) The abundance of the most common species was primarily related to post-fire age, grazing intensity, and nesting substrate availability. Ordination models based on age-characteristic post-fire floral community structure explained 39-50% of overall variation observed in bee community structure. Cluster analysis showed that all the communities shared a high degree of similarity in their species composition (27-59%); however, the geographical location of sites also contributed a smaller but significant component to bee community structure. We conclude that floral resources act in specific and previously unexplored ways to modulate the diversity of the local geographic species pool, with specific disturbance factors, superimposed upon these patterns, mainly affecting the dominant species.
Ecological Monographs | 2008
Catrin Westphal; Riccardo Bommarco; Gabriel Carré; Ellen Lamborn; Nicolas Morison; Theodora Petanidou; Simon G. Potts; Stuart Roberts; Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi; Thomas Tscheulin; Bernard E. Vaissière; Michal Woyciechowski; Jacobus C. Biesmeijer; William E. Kunin; Josef Settele; Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
Bee pollinators are currently recorded with many different sampling methods. However, the relative performances of these methods have not been systematically evaluated and compared. In response to the strong need to record ongoing shifts in pollinator diversity and abundance, global and regional pollinator initiatives must adopt standardized sampling protocols when developing large-scale and long-term monitoring schemes. We systematically evaluated the performance of six sampling methods (observation plots, pan traps, standardized and variable transect walks, trap nests with reed internodes or paper tubes) that are commonly used across a wide range of geographical regions in Europe and in two habitat types (agricultural and seminatural). We focused on bees since they represent the most important pollinator group worldwide. Several characteristics of the methods were considered in order to evaluate their performance in assessing bee diversity: sample coverage, observed species richness, species richness estimators, collector biases (identified by subunit-based rarefaction curves), species composition of the samples, and the indication of overall bee species richness (estimated from combined total samples). The most efficient method in all geographical regions, in both the agricultural and seminatural habitats, was the pan trap method. It had the highest sample coverage, collected the highest number of species, showed negligible collector bias, detected similar species as the transect methods, and was the best indicator of overall bee species richness. The transect methods were also relatively efficient, but they had a significant collector bias. The observation plots showed poor performance. As trap nests are restricted to cavity-nesting bee species, they had a naturally low sample coverage. However, both trap nest types detected additional species that were not recorded by any of the other methods. For large-scale and long-term monitoring schemes with surveyors with different experience levels, we recommend pan traps as the most efficient, unbiased, and cost-effective method for sampling bee diversity. Trap nests with reed internodes could be used as a complementary sampling method to maximize the numbers of collected species. Transect walks are the principal method for detailed studies focusing on plant-pollinator associations. Moreover, they can be used in monitoring schemes after training the surveyors to standardize their collection skills.
Ecological Entomology | 2005
Simon G. Potts; Betsy Vulliamy; Stuart Roberts; Chris O'Toole; Amots Dafni; Gidi Ne'eman; Pat Willmer
Abstract. 1. The habitat components determining the structure of bee communities are well known when considering foraging resources; however, there is little data with respect to the role of nesting resources.
Nature Communications | 2015
David Kleijn; Rachael Winfree; Ignasi Bartomeus; Luísa G. Carvalheiro; Mickaël Henry; Rufus Isaacs; Alexandra-Maria Klein; Claire Kremen; Leithen K. M'Gonigle; Romina Rader; Taylor H. Ricketts; Neal M. Williams; Nancy Lee Adamson; John S. Ascher; András Báldi; Péter Batáry; Faye Benjamin; Jacobus C. Biesmeijer; Eleanor J. Blitzer; Riccardo Bommarco; Mariëtte R. Brand; Vincent Bretagnolle; Lindsey Button; Daniel P. Cariveau; Rémy Chifflet; Jonathan F. Colville; Bryan N. Danforth; Elizabeth Elle; Michael P. D. Garratt; Felix Herzog
There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences | 2014
H. Charles J. Godfray; Tjeerd Blacquière; Linda M. Field; Rosemary S. Hails; Gillian Petrokofsky; Simon G. Potts; Nigel E. Raine; Adam J. Vanbergen; Angela R. McLean
There is evidence that in Europe and North America many species of pollinators are in decline, both in abundance and distribution. Although there is a long list of potential causes of this decline, there is concern that neonicotinoid insecticides, in particular through their use as seed treatments are, at least in part, responsible. This paper describes a project that set out to summarize the natural science evidence base relevant to neonicotinoid insecticides and insect pollinators in as policy-neutral terms as possible. A series of evidence statements are listed and categorized according to the nature of the underlying information. The evidence summary forms the appendix to this paper and an annotated bibliography is provided in the electronic supplementary material.