Tayloria froelichiana is a species of moss described by Mitten and Brotherus hadton 1903. The Tayloria froelichiana genus Tayloria andfamily Splachnaceae all species like this.

Froelich'S Dung Moss (Tayloria froelichiana)

Party,Table,Setting,With,Various,Veggie,Snacks,,Top,Down,View

In order to produce <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/food-production-affects-earths-natural-processes/">food</a> for humanity, we have appropriated roughly 50 percent of all habitable land and 70 percent of the available fresh water. We harvest aquatic food from nearly every river, lake and ocean, pollute watersheds and coastal seas with excess nutrients and generate around 30 percent of all anthropogenic greenhouse gases. Like it or not, feeding humans puts enormous environmental pressure on our planet.&nbsp;



In past studies, researchers have attempted to calculate the environmental impact of producing various different types of foods. By considering such factors as greenhouse gasses emitted during production, or the extent of water pollution, they have made some headway in quantifying the environmental consequences of food production per pound or kilogram. However, with industrialized farming and complex supply chains, it is difficult to assess the true environmental pressures of our global food system.&nbsp;



“Everyone eats food, and more and more people are paying attention to the planetary consequences of what they eat,” said <a href="https://www.ucsb.edu/">UC Santa Barbara</a> marine ecologist&nbsp;<a href="https://bren.ucsb.edu/people/ben-halpern">Ben Halpern</a>. However, as the world’s population increases decisions will need to be made about how to reduce the environmental footprint of food production in order to keep it sustainable, and this will necessitate a more comprehensive understanding of the various types of impacts. This proves to be a gargantuan task as there are so many different types of foods, produced in various ways and leading to a range of environmental pressures depending on the location of production.&nbsp;



“The individual choice of eight billion people adds up,” said Halpern, “and we need to know the overall impact of&nbsp;total&nbsp;food production – not just per pound – especially when setting food policy.”



In a new study, Halpern and colleagues at UC Santa Barbara’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/">National Center for Ecological Analysis &amp; Synthesis (NCEAS)</a>&nbsp;have analyzed the greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, habitat disturbance and nutrient pollution (e.g., fertilizer runoff) generated by the production of 99 percent of all foods on Earth, including both aquatic and terrestrial foods. In addition, they combine these four pressures to map the estimated cumulative pressure, or ‘footprint,’ of food production globally, as well as in individual countries. Their research is published in the journal Nature Sustainability.



For Halpern, executive director at NCEAS and a professor at UCSB’s Bren School of Environmental Science &amp; Management, understanding the impacts of food production along with the local context of these impacts has been a longstanding interest. By taking detailed data about greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, habitat disturbance and nutrient pollution generated by 99 percent of total reported production of aquatic and terrestrial foods in 2017, and mapping those impacts at high resolution, the researchers were able to create a more nuanced geospatial picture of the pressures – the inputs, processes and outputs – of global food production.



It turns out that the impacts of food production vary between countries, depending on the farming methods used and on environmental conditions prevalent at each locality. This leads to the unexpected situation that five countries contribute almost half of all environmental pressures arising from food production; these are India, China, the United States, Brazil and Pakistan.



In addition, the large proportion of the environmental footprint arising from terrestrial food production is generated from agricultural activities that take place over only 10 percent of the Earth’s surface. This means that, when looking at the cumulative pressure per unit of food production (efficiency), there are enormous variations between countries and it is not correct to assume, as has been the case previously, that the environmental footprint of production for any one food is the same in all locations.&nbsp;



For example, thanks to technology that reduces greenhouse gases and increases yields, the United States – the world’s number one producer of soy – is more than twice as efficient as India (the fifth largest producer) at producing the crop, making American soy the more environmentally friendly choice.



“The environmental efficiency of producing a particular food type varies spatially, such that rankings of foods by efficiency differ sharply among countries, and this matters for guiding which foods we eat and from where,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eemb.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/froehlich">Halley Froehlich</a>, assistant professor in environmental studies at UCSB and a co-author of the study.



The research also uncovers connections between land and sea that get missed when looking only at one or the other, and that result in significant environmental impacts. In some countries, raising pigs and chicken gives rise to an ocean footprint because they are fed meal made from marine fish such as herrings, anchovies and sardines. The converse is true for mariculture farms that make use of crop-based feeds and thus extend the environmental pressure caused by fish farms onto the land.



Assessing cumulative pressures can bring to light results that could not have been predicted by examining individual pressures alone. For instance, while raising cattle uses by far the most land for grazing, farming pigs produces a lot of pollution and uses more water. When comparing the two types of food production, the cumulative environmental pressures end up being slightly greater when raising pigs than when raising cattle. Measured by cumulative pressures, the five foods with the most severe environmental impacts are pigs, cows, rice, wheat and oil crops.



It is crucial to consider the cumulative effects on the environment of producing food to feed a growing global population. If we wish to reduce environmental degradation while still ensuring food security, we may need to rethink the way in which we produce food in general, say the researchers. In some cases, farming might need to improve efficiency; in other cases, consumers might need to change their food choices. Understanding the different environmental costs of food production in different countries will help to steer consumption towards lower-impact foods and ultimately to restructuring the food system such that we will be able to feed humanity in a sustainable manner.&nbsp;



“We need this comprehensive information to make more accurate decisions about what we eat,” said Halpern, who modified his own food choices based on the results of this study.



“I became a pescatarian years ago because of wanting to reduce the environmental footprint of what I eat,” he said. “But then I thought, I’m a scientist, I should really use science to inform my decisions about what I eat. That’s actually why I started this research project. And now that we have the results, I see that from an environmental perspective, chicken is actually better than some seafood. And so I’ve shifted my diet to start including chicken again, while eliminating some high-pressure seafoods like bottom-trawl caught cod and haddock. I am actually eating my words.”



---



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.

Our dietary choices have enormous environmental impacts

In order to produce food for humanity, we have appropriated...

Plants in the mint family are rich in chemical molecules that give distinctive scents and flavors to their leaves. The mint family (Lamiaceae) is the sixth largest family of flowering plants and includes many familiar species, apart from mint itself, such as basil, rosemary, peppermint, lavender, sage and coleus. The aromatic and flavorful compounds produced by these plants function to attract <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/gardeners-can-make-small-changes-to-benefit-pollinators/">pollinators</a> and to deter herbivores, and they have been essential in driving the diversification of this large group of plants.



Researchers from <a href="https://msu.edu/">Michigan State University</a> have been studying the great variety of metabolites found in mint plants for many years, and have recently focused on a group of molecules called terpenoids. These compounds are essential in protecting the plants from predators and pathogens, and are also common ingredients in green and sustainable agrochemicals, antioxidants, cosmetics and fragrances.&nbsp;



“People easily recognize members of the mint family for their specialized metabolites,” said Dr. James K. Billman, Jr. and Professor&nbsp;<a href="https://biomolecular.natsci.msu.edu/faculty/alphabetical-directory/bjoern-hamberger/">Björn Hamberger</a>. “Metabolites are an efficient way for plants to defend themselves because they can’t run away.”



Professor Hamberger worked previously with Robin Buell, a former MSU genomics researcher, who sequenced the genomes from several different species in the mint family. This collaboration with Buell’s team led graduate students Abigail Bryson and Emily Lanier to discover how several genomes of the mint family have evolved over the past 60 million to 70 million years and how their chemistries have emerged.&nbsp;



“Over millions of years, plants have adapted and evolved for their particular niches where they thrive, and that means that these chemistries are diverse and have clearly adjusted to their environment,” said Professor Hamberger. “So, we try to identify and discover pathways to these specialized metabolites that plants make.”



According to the researchers, this family of plants have diversified the natural characteristics of their metabolites throughout their evolution, leading to the great variety of different chemical compounds found in today’s members of the group. In order to understand the mechanisms by which such diversity has evolved, the researchers took an interdisciplinary approach and analyzed the genetic and chemical pathways involved in terpenoid biosynthesis in different species in the mint family.



Bryson identified the genomic framework of terpenoid biosynthesis, and Lanier analyzed the chemical pathways. Together, Lanier and Bryson discovered something highly unusual in the beautyberry (Callicarpa americana) genome from the mint family. It has a large biosynthetic gene cluster (BGC), which is a group of genes, located close together in the genome, that are involved in the same metabolic pathways. Additionally, Bryson and Lanier found variants of this BGC in six other species in the mint family.



“We are learning that the physical location of genes within the genome is important,” Bryson said. “It can drive evolution of specialized metabolic pathways in the plant, leading to a vast diversity of interesting natural plant compounds.”&nbsp;



The BGC cluster of the beautyberry plant contains genes that encode two distinct terpenoid pathways. The team found these terpenoids accumulate in various parts of the plant, such as the leaves and roots, and may play distinct roles in helping the plant to adapt to its environment.&nbsp;



“It’s the same base molecule, but each species is making its own version and modifying it in different ways to fit their survival needs,” Lanier said.&nbsp;



Professor Hamberger describes it like a recipe that everyone has a copy of and changes to suit their requirements and preferences.&nbsp;



The researchers hope that a better understanding of the ways in which these compounds have been modified by different plant species will lead to potential future applications that could include new medicines and pesticides. We already use some of the compounds as flavor additives, fragrances, and anti-herbivory agents.



Previous research has led to unique medical uses for mint plants. For example, Indian Coleus can be used as a natural treatment for glaucoma and Texas sage is a natural antimicrobial that is effective against tuberculosis. The new molecular adaptations that have been found in the current study open the door for future applications of natural plant products from the mint family.



“Our team has been excited about the opportunities within the mint family,” said Professor Hamberger. “Those mint enzymes, as in the American beautyberry plant, give us the ability to make plant-natural products in the lab, including – hopefully in the future – natural good-smelling mosquito repellants.”



---



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.

Plants in the mint family may help produce new medicines

Plants in the mint family are rich in chemical molecules...

Expanding global seaweed farming could address food security, biodiversity loss and climate change challenges. A new study from the <a href="https://www.uq.edu.au/">University of Queensland</a> finds that seaweed offers a sustainable alternative to meet the world’s growing need for food and materials.



“Seaweed has great commercial and environmental potential as a nutritious food and a building block for commercial products including animal feed, plastics, fibres, diesel and ethanol,” said study lead author Scott Spillias.



“Our study found that expanding seaweed farming could help reduce demand for terrestrial crops and reduce global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by up to 2.6 billion tons of CO2-equivalent per year.”



The study mapped the potential of farming 34 commercially important seaweed species using the Global Biosphere Management Model. Environmental benefits of a range of scenarios were estimated based on land-use changes, GHG emissions, water and fertilizer use, and projected changes in species presence by 2050.



One scenario that substituted 10 percent of human diets with seaweed products could prevent the development of 110 million hectares of land for farming.&nbsp;



The researchers also identified the availability of millions of hectares of ocean where farming could be developed. These were mostly found within global exclusive economic zones - EEZ’s. EEZ’s are an area of the sea in which a sovereign state has rights regarding the exploration and use of marine resources.



The largest share of suitable ocean for seaweed farming was found in the Indonesian EEZ, and the Australian EEZ showed the greatest potential and species diversity.&nbsp;



“The way I like to look at this is to think about ancestral versions of everyday crops - like corn and wheat - which were uninspiring, weedy things,” said Spillias.



“Through thousands of years of breeding we have developed the staple crops that underpin modern societies and seaweed could very well hold similar potential in the future.”



To avoid displacing agriculture problems from land to ocean, Professor Eve McDonald-Madden said farming seawood would have to be carried out with care.



“Our study points out what could be done to address some of the mounting problems of global sustainability facing us, but it can’t be implemented without exercising extreme caution."



This research is published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-01043-y">Nature Sustainability</a>.



---



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.

Seaweed farming could boost food security, yet preserve nature

Expanding global seaweed farming could address food security, biodiversity loss...

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...

Froelich'S Dung Moss

Description

Taxonomic tree: