Citizen science data reveals the need for keeping garden plant recommendations up-to-date to help pollinators.
Citizen science data reveals the need for keeping garden plant recommendations up-to-date to help pollinators.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/s41598-020-77537-6
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-24
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
van der Wal R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Anderson HB;Robinson A;Siddharthan A;Sharma N;Bostock H;Salisbury A;Roberts S;van der Wal R
对传粉昆虫数量下降的广泛关注导致了许多建议，其中包括种植“传粉者友好型”植物，并帮助将城市环境转变为这些重要野生动物的宝贵栖息地。虽然各组织广泛交流，园丁也很容易采纳，但这些建议的出处、准确性、特异性和及时性仍不清楚。在这里，我们使用通过全英国公民科学计划(BeeWatch)收集的数据(6429条记录)来确定国家大黄蜂物种对食用植物的使用，并表明许多记录的植物使用并不反映从业者的建议：从业者的大黄蜂友好型植物名单(来自14个不同来源的376种植物)与蜜蜂观察记录(334种植物)之间的相关性很低(r = 0.57)，仅略高于蜜蜂观察记录与从业者的授粉友好型植物名单(9种不同来源的465种植物；r = 0.52)之间的相关性。我们发现传粉者友好的植物列表缺乏独立性(从业者的熊蜂友好型和传粉者友好型列表之间的相关性：R = 0.75)、适当性和精确度，因此未能认识到食用植物偏好的非二进制性质(大黄蜂使用许多植物，但数量很少，例如，薰衣草--蜜蜂观察数据库中最受欢迎的植物--最多只占任何一种大黄蜂物种记录的11%)，以及物种和传粉者群体之间的明显差异。我们呼吁提供和使用由实时(公民科学)数据驱动的最新动态种植建议，并有可能指定传粉者物种或群体，以有力地支持变革性的个人学习之旅和对传粉者友好的花园空间管理。
Widespread concern over declines in pollinating insects has led to numerous recommendations of which “pollinator-friendly” plants to grow and help turn urban environments into valuable habitat for such important wildlife. Whilst communicated widely by organisations and readily taken up by gardeners, the provenance, accuracy, specificity and timeliness of such recommendations remain unclear. Here we use data (6429 records) gathered through a UK-wide citizen science programme (BeeWatch) to determine food plant use by the nations’ bumblebee species, and show that much of the plant use recorded does not reflect practitioner recommendations: correlation between the practitioners’ bumblebee-friendly plant list (376 plants compiled from 14 different sources) and BeeWatch records (334 plants) was low (r = 0.57), and only marginally higher than the correlation between BeeWatch records and the practitioners’ pollinator-friendly plant list (465 plants from 9 different sources; r = 0.52). We found pollinator-friendly plant lists to lack independence (correlation between practitioners’ bumblebee-friendly and pollinator-friendly lists: r = 0.75), appropriateness and precision, thus failing to recognise the non-binary nature of food-plant preference (bumblebees used many plants, but only in small quantities, e.g. lavender—the most popular plant in the BeeWatch database—constituted, at most, only 11% of records for any one bumblebee species) and stark differences therein among species and pollinator groups. We call for the provision and use of up-to-date dynamic planting recommendations driven by live (citizen science) data, with the possibility to specify pollinator species or group, to powerfully support transformative personal learning journeys and pollinator-friendly management of garden spaces.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Bennett, Ashley B.;Lovell, Sarah
通讯作者：
Lovell, Sarah
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
Gordo, Oscar;Sanz, Juan Jose
通讯作者：
Sanz, Juan Jose
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Leve, Marine;Baudry, Emmanuelle;Bessa-Gomes, Carmen
通讯作者：
Bessa-Gomes, Carmen
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Rollings, Rosi;Goulson, Dave
通讯作者：
Goulson, Dave
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Sharma, Nirwan;Greaves, Sam;van der Wal, Rene
通讯作者：
van der Wal, Rene