Fissidens filicicola

Wild <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/most-people-think-insects-will-become-a-sustainable-food-source/">insect</a> pollinators are critical to the formation of seeds and fruit in around 90 percent of flowering plant species, and 75 percent of crop species. Although bees are the best-documented of the insect pollinators, there are many other groups of insects that are also involved. These include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps and ants. The populations of these crucial organisms are in decline worldwide, mostly due to the activities of humans.&nbsp;



In response to this situation, the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation launched a campaign to encourage the public to create more favorable conditions for pollinators in their private gardens. The project, known as “Operation: Rädda bina” (“Operation: Save the bees”), ran between 2018 and 2021, and around 11,000 Swedes responded initially to the appeal. Researchers from <a href="https://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/">Lund University</a> have now evaluated the success of the measures undertaken by the citizen scientists in their own gardens.



People who responded to the campaign were asked to register pollinator-friendly interventions that they had carried out in their gardens and other green spaces. The campaign encouraged three different interventions: (i) establishing a flowering “garden meadow,” (ii) planting bee-friendly flowers in a garden, and (iii) setting up bee hotels. Those who registered an intervention then completed online questionnaires about their intervention and their perception of any changes in pollinator populations in their garden.&nbsp;



“We wanted to investigate measures that the public themselves chose to implement in their garden, and how these can be the most efficient," said study co-author Anna Persson.



Of the initial respondents, just over 3,200 completed the project. Of these, 809 established flowering meadows, 1,232 planted bee-friendly flowers in their gardens, and 1,210 established a bee hotel. Approximately 19 percent of meadows, 23 percent of plantings, and 20 percent of the bee hotels were situated in the 10 most populated cities/municipalities in Sweden.



When the citizen scientists had to assess the prevalence of pollinators in their gardens, after establishing their intervention, they were asked whether they saw “many,” “few,”,or “no” insects. Because this was rather a simple and subjective metric, the researchers also asked the respondents to count the exact number of pollinators they saw in the garden in a 10-minute period on a sunny day in July. This data was used to confirm the accuracy of the simpler abundance categories, namely many, few or none.&nbsp;&nbsp;



The results, published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.1099100">Frontiers in Sustainable Cities</a>, indicate that pollinators benefited most where flowering meadows were allowed to grow. This could be where a person decided not to mow a patch of grassland and let it rather grow tall with wild flowers, or where a meadow stood unused and untouched for several years. In both instances, the benefit was greater if the meadow was older and if there was a diversity of flowering species present.



People who planted bee-friendly flowers in their garden found the benefit for pollinators was greatest when the flowering plants were older and covered a large area. This is important, because people who initially record no benefit from their newly-planted flowers should not give up, but should continue with the knowledge that older, more established flower beds will bring the pollinators in time.&nbsp;



Bee hotels, in turn, tended to attract more inhabitants if they were located in flower-rich gardens, if they were older, and if the nest holes were no larger than one centimeter in diameter.



Anna Persson believes the results of the study are helpful when giving guidance to those who want to make their gardens attractive for pollinators.



“For example, we can show that it will pay off to create large and species-rich meadows and flower plantings, and that it is important not to give up after a few years, because the measures improve over time. This should be emphasized in future campaigns."



Persson also hopes that the results can inspire more people to adapt their own green space so that it becomes more favorable for insects. Gardens often cover about 30 percent of the land area in cities and towns, so garden owners, as a group, have the potential to contribute considerably to urban biodiversity.



The accuracy of citizen scientist accounts can sometimes be questioned, because the participants may have certain expectations about the results they will see.&nbsp;



“Our study could be affected by so-called ‘expectation bias,'" said Persson. “This means that people who have taken measures and created more species-rich gardens also expect to see more insects, and thus risk reporting too high a number.”



However, the researchers found that the actual counts of insects correlated well with what participants categorized as “many” or “few” insects. A total of 350 participants counted the insects they saw in their garden in a 10-minute period, and their responses helped to verify the accuracy of the dataset.



This study is particularly relevant since a third of Sweden’s bee species are currently considered to be endangered. The results show that steps taken by individual homeowners to make conditions in the garden more favorable to pollinators really do make a difference. This is encouraging, as pollinators are critical for functioning ecosystems and need all the help they can get at this stage.



“The situation for bees and other pollinators shows that measures to help them are important," said Karin Lexén, Secretary General of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation. "It’s great that the campaign has attracted so much attention, and that citizen science can continue to contribute to new knowledge."



---



By <a href="mailto:bosman@truewan.co.za">Alison Bosman</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Gardeners can make small changes to benefit pollinators

Wild insect pollinators are critical to the formation of seeds...

Fantastic,Azure,Alpine,Lake,Champfer.,Unusual,And,Picturesque,Scene.,Location

A new study led by the <a href="https://www.sfu.ca/">Simon Frasier University</a> (SFU) has found that nutrients from salmon carcasses can significantly alter the growth and reproduction of plant species in the surrounding habitats, even causing some <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/sunflowers-use-an-internal-clock-to-bloom-at-optimal-times/">flowers</a> to grow larger and more plentiful. This is the first study documenting the connection between salmon and coastal plant growth and reproduction, while shedding light on how the impact of climate change on the rivers and streams traveled by salmon could help inform ecosystem planning and management.



During a three-year field study, the scientists experimentally added pink salmon carcasses into the estuary of a small river from British Columbia’s central coast, a region featuring a large meadow of grasses and wildflowers.&nbsp;



“Following our experiments, we found that some species of wildflower grew larger leaves where a salmon carcass was deposited, and in some years, some species grew larger flowers or produced more seeds,” reported study lead author Allison Dennert, a PhD student in Biology at SFU.



The researchers undertook similar experiments with drift seaweed rockweed, a plant that provides a different set of nutrients than salmon carcasses. In addition, they also experimented with a combination of salmon carcasses and rockweed – along with a control group – and examined their impact on four widespread wildflower species (silverweed, yarrow, Douglas’ aster, and common red paintbrush).



The experiments revealed that the addition of salmon carcasses led to larger leaves, especially in yarrow and common red paintbrush, along with a greater seed set in yarrow in the third year of the study.



“Understanding the interconnection between ecosystems is incredibly important to our knowledge of how to protect them,” said Dennert. “Currently, lands and waters are managed under separate provincial and federal jurisdictions. Scientifically and management-wise, we think of the land and sea as separate and unconnected entities. This work furthers the idea that ecosystems don’t exist in isolation, and that what happens in one can influence the other,” she concluded.



The study is published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221008">Royal Society Open Science</a>.



—-



By <a href="mailto:andrei.ionescu5891@gmail.com">Andrei Ionescu</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Dead salmon can boost the growth of  wildflowers

A new study led by the Simon Frasier University (SFU)...

Concern for the status of the Amazon rainforest usually centers on understanding the extent of <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/the-covid-19-pandemic-did-not-reduce-deforestation/">deforestation</a> and its devastating consequences. But this may only be part of the story. The authors of a new review article, published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abp8622">Science</a>, say that about 2.5 million square kilometers of the Amazon (that is almost 40 percent of remaining rainforest), is degraded by the impacts of human activities.&nbsp;



The review used data from previously published scientific studies and satellite imagery to identify the changes in the Amazon region between 2001 and 2018. Thirty-five researchers were involved, from institutions&nbsp;such as Brazil’s University of Campinas (Unicamp), the Amazon Environmental Research&nbsp;Institute (IPAM), National Institute for Space Research (INPE), and UK’s Lancaster&nbsp;University. The work is the result of the AIMES (Analysis, Integration and Modelling of the Earth&nbsp;System) project, linked to the <a href="https://futureearth.org/">Future Earth</a> international initiative, which brings together&nbsp;scientists and researchers who study sustainability.



The authors define the concept of degradation as transient or&nbsp;long-term changes in forest conditions, caused by humans. Degradation is different from&nbsp;deforestation, where the forest is removed altogether and a new land use, such as agriculture,&nbsp;is established in its place. Although highly degraded forests can lose almost all of the trees and animal species,&nbsp;the land use itself does not change.



In addition, the activities that lead to the degradation of forests can also generate carbon emissions; these are equivalent to or even greater than the emissions arising from deforestation itself. The authors identify four key disturbances driving forest degradation: forest fires, edge effects (changes that occur in forests adjacent to deforested areas), selective logging (such as illegal logging) and extreme drought. They also consider the effects of other, less well-studied factors such as habitat fragmentation. Different forest areas can be affected by one or more of these disturbances.



“Despite uncertainty about the total effect of these disturbances, it is clear that their cumulative effect can be as important as deforestation, for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss,” said study co-author Jos Barlow, a professor of conservation science at Lancaster University.



The Amazon rainforest is a vital, yet vulnerable, major ecosystem on Earth. It provides crucial global ecosystem services that help maintain the planet’s carbon and water cycles, and is home to a staggering one-third of all known species. Modern agricultural and industrial practices, along with changes brought about by global warming, are degrading Amazonian environments at a very rapid pace.&nbsp;



The scientists assess that the degradation of the Amazon also has significant socioeconomic impacts, which should be further investigated in the future.



“Degradation benefits the few, but places important burdens on many,” said Dr. Rachel Carmenta, a co-author based at the University of East Anglia. “Few people profit from the degradation processes, yet many lose out across all dimensions of human well-being – including health, nutrition and the place attachments held for the forest landscapes where they live. Furthermore, many of these burdens are hidden at present; recognizing them will help enable better governance with social justice at the center.”



According to the researchers, these degradation factors will continue to produce carbon emissions that will affect the atmosphere, irrespective of whether deforestation is halted in the Amazon.&nbsp;



“Even in an optimistic scenario, when there is no more deforestation, the effects of climate change will see degradation of the forest continue, leading to further carbon emissions,” said Dr. David Lapola, leader of the study and researcher at the Centre for Meteorological and Climatic Research Applied to Agriculture at Unicamp. However, “… preventing the advance of deforestation remains vital, and could also allow more attention to be directed to other drivers of forest degradation.”



The authors propose creating a monitoring system for forest degradation, as well as prevention and curbing of illegal logging and controlling the use of fire. One suggestion is the concept of “smart forests” which, like the idea of “smart cities,” would use different types of technologies and sensors to collect useful data in order to improve the quality of the environment.



Dr. Lapola and colleagues emphasize that policies to halt deforestation will not necessarily address the factors that cause degradation to remaining forest. These policies must therefore be complemented by other approaches to curb the disturbances that degrade the remaining forest ecosystems.&nbsp;



“Public and private actions and policies to curb deforestation will not necessarily address degradation as well,” said Dr. Lapola. “It is necessary to invest in innovative strategies.”



---



By <a href="mailto:bosman@truewan.co.za">Alison Bosman</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Humans are destroying what's left of the Amazon

Concern for the status of the Amazon rainforest usually centers...

Protected natural areas in the UK are struggling to halt declines in insects and <a href="https://www.earth.com/video/spiders-are-using-their-webs-to-extend-their-hearing/">spiders</a>. Protected habitats including nature reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and Special Areas of Conservation have long been a key tool in conservation efforts.



A <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320722004372">new study</a> collating records for 1,230 invertebrate species between 1990 and 2018 suggests that protected areas can still experience biodiversity decline.



Researchers from the <a href="https://www.ceh.ac.uk/">UK Centre for Ecology &amp; Hydrology</a> (UKCEH) found that while protected areas were richer in species than unprotected areas, both have suffered similar rates of decline in native insects and spiders over the past 30 years. In particular, the study found severe declines among pollinators, such as bees and hoverflies.



“We see parallel trends for invertebrates in both protected and unprotected areas,” said Dr. Rob Cooke, lead author of the study. “It is worrying, as you would expect species to show more positive trends in protected areas.”



The researchers used data from invertebrate recording schemes that contained observations of ants, bees, hoverflies, ladybirds, spiders and wasps. The team examined changes in biodiversity throughout the study period.



The results showed that there were almost double the number of rare species in protected areas compared to unprotected parts of the UK. These trends remained stable in both protected and unprotected areas, suggesting that rare species benefit from conservation efforts. However, strong declines were found for common species, especially in protected areas.



The study showed that between 1990-2018:



<ul><li>Occupancy of all invertebrates in protected areas declined by 12.8% while in unprotected areas it declined by 11.5%.</li><li>Pollinators declined by 17.5% in protected areas and 20.3% in unprotected areas</li><li>Common species declined by 12.8% in protected areas and 6% in unprotected areas</li></ul>



“Protected areas are often designated specifically to help rare species. But the more common species appear to be falling through the cracks. It should serve as a warning as today’s common species can be tomorrow’s rare species," said Dr. Cooke.



The experts suggest more can be done, such as evidence-based policies, targets and management focused more on the effectiveness, rather than just the coverage of protected areas. The research team is optimistic that this signals an opportunity to strengthen protected areas and better conserve biodiversity.



---



By <a href="mailto:katherinebucko@gmail.com">Katherine Bucko</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Protected areas are failing to safeguard biodiversity

Protected natural areas in the UK are struggling to halt...

Recent studies have shown that the loss of species from plant communities can reduce ecosystem functions such as productivity, soil health, and carbon storage. This reduced functioning can destabilize ecosystems in the long term, disrupting their ability to provide essential services to our planet. However, according to a new study led by the <a href="https://www.uzh.ch/en.html">University of Zurich</a>, assessing such processes is only possible if experiments can be conducted for a sufficient length of time.



The scientists investigated the stability of plant biomass production over two decades in one of the longest grassland <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/biodiversity-loss-weakens-ecosystem-functioning/">biodiversity</a> experiments in the world, the <a href="http://the-jena-experiment.de/">Jena Experiment</a> in Germany. The analysis revealed that, after more than a decade, plant species in more diverse communities complemented each other in producing stable biomass.&nbsp;



By contrast, if plant diversity was low, community biomass varied more dramatically from year to year. Moreover, due to large fluctuations in species populations, species-rich communities had not yet stabilized during the first decade of the experiment.



“We now realize that the mechanisms by which diverse species communities maintain ecosystem functioning in the long term are continually developing even after two decades,” said study lead author Cameron Wagg, an expert in agroecology, biodiversity, and ecosystem functioning at the University of Zurich.



“These novel results fit with other recent findings of our research group, suggesting that over time evolutionary processes in diverse plant communities select the most ‘collaborative’ plant genotypes among the different species, thus increasing division of labor, community productivity and ecosystem stability,” added study senior author Bernhard Schmid, a biologist at the same university.&nbsp;



These findings suggest that, since ecosystem stability is crucial in the face of environmental perturbations, older and more diverse ecosystems should be valued and safeguarded in a rapidly changing world such as ours.



The study is published in the journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35189-2">Nature Communications</a>.



—



By <a href="mailto:andrei.ionescu5891@gmail.com">Andrei Ionescu</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Grassland ecosystem stability is driven by biodiversity

Recent studies have shown that the loss of species from...

Forest,Of,Seaweed

In a study led by the <a href="https://www.uaf.edu/">University of Alaska Fairbanks</a>, experts have concluded that kelp farms could help reduce coastal marine pollution. While this type of seaweed is known for its ability to take up large amounts of carbon dioxide, the new research suggests that kelp is even better at removing <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/reducing-nitrogen-oxide-pollution-could-boost-crop-yields/">nitrogen</a> pollution.&nbsp;



The researchers monitored carbon and nitrogen levels at two mixed-species kelp farms in Alaska, where tissue and seawater samples were collected for analysis. The results showed that some seaweed species are better than others at removing nitrogen from the surrounding water.&nbsp;



Study lead author Schery Umanzor is an assistant professor at UAF’s College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences.



“Some seaweeds are literally like sponges - they suck and suck and never saturate,” said Professor Umanzor.&nbsp;



“Although carbon and carbon sequestration by kelp receive most of the attention, kelp is actually much better at mitigating excessive amounts of nitrogen than carbon. I think that’s a story that’s really underlooked.”



Coastal nitrogen pollution has many sources, including agricultural runoff and urban sewage. This pollutant poses some major threats to ocean ecosystems such as harmful algal blooms and depleted oxygen levels that compromise the health of marine life.&nbsp;



In the UAF study, the kelp tissue samples revealed that ribbon kelp was more effective than sugar kelp at absorbing both nitrogen and carbon.&nbsp;



Kelp farming is also emerging as a promising way to improve food security. The researchers noted that kelp grown in polluted waters should not be used for food, but could still be a promising tool for helping to clean up the coastline.



Professor Umanzor cautioned that the study was limited to two sites during a single growing season, and is currently processing a larger collection of samples for further research.



The study is published in the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/aquaculture">Aquaculture Journal</a>.



---



By <a href="mailto:csexton@earth.com">Chrissy Sexton</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Editor



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Kelp farms could help clean up coastal nitrogen pollution

In a study led by the University of Alaska Fairbanks,...

It only takes one degree of warming to change a species, according to a new study led by the <a href="https://www.ntnu.edu/">Norwegian University of Science and Technology</a>. The researchers looked at the climate responses of individual species by analyzing natural history collections, which they say are an underexploited resource for long-term ecological research.



“Natural history collections can provide unique insight into a wide range of ecological responses over a period of time that is much greater than what most ecological monitoring programs manage. So the collections are an essential and invaluable source for ecological research over time," said study lead author Professor James D. M. Speed.



All of life on Earth is affected by the surrounding environment, so it is clear that climate change has an impact on species around the world. What is not as clear, however, is how each individual species will respond to specific changes in temperature.



“The climate affects the life cycle of species, the number of individuals of a species, the overall number of species and the composition and distribution of species in an area,” said Professor Speed.



To investigate how the climate affects individual species, the team set out to examine how plants and animals have been affected by temperature changes in Norway over a long period of time.



“We used museum collections that have been built up over 250 years to measure the ecological response to climate change in central Norway,” said Professor Speed. “We looked at a number of species, including vertebrates, invertebrates, plants and fungi."



Animal and plant specimens preserved in museum collections hold valuable insight into how we can expect climate change to progressively affect our world today.&nbsp;



“What these data and the objects in the museum collections have in common is that studying climate change was not one of their purposes when they were collected. Only now are we seeing that the collections are relevant and that we can use them for such a purpose,” said study co-author Tommy Prestø “It’s really interesting to be able to show that we can use the museum collections in new and innovative ways."



The results of the analysis clearly indicate that even a single degree of warming can induce major changes. The researchers found that:



<ul><li>The number of zooplankton decreases by almost 7,700 individuals per cubic meter of water per degree warmer in Jonsvatnet, a lake in Trondheim.</li><li>The number of nesting birds is decreasing by two fewer breeding territories per square kilometre per degree warmer in Budalen in Trøndelag county.</li><li>Flowering plants bloom earlier throughout Trøndelag, on average two days earlier per degree warmer.</li></ul>



The researchers also determined that when some species change, the life cycle of other species can change as well. “We can see a clear, regional connection with the climate,” said Professor Speed.



“For certain plant species, we’ve found that they’re flowering on average nine days earlier per century," said Presto. "This means that some of our plant species bloom three weeks earlier now than they did 250 years ago."



“But not everything changes with the climate. Some aspects of nature are more resilient. Overall, the distribution of species and species diversity stays stable over time. That surprised us,” said Professor Speed.



Fluctuations in the number of animals and species composition do not directly follow fluctuations in temperature, noted the researchers. A time period of 250 years can have both periods of warming and a stable climate, which means that species could have delayed responses to climate change.&nbsp;



The greatest immediate threat to plants and animals may be land-use changes such as deforestation. The International Nature Panel IPBES reports that land-use changes have had the largest relative negative impact on nature since 1970.



The study is published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9471">Ecology and Evolution</a>.



---



By <a href="mailto:csexton@earth.com">Chrissy Sexton</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Editor



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Just one degree of warming can change a species

It only takes one degree of warming to change a...

Fissidens filicicola

Taxonomic tree: