scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Colleen L. Seymour

Other affiliations: University of Cape Town
Bio: Colleen L. Seymour is an academic researcher from Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology. The author has contributed to research in topics: Biodiversity & Species richness. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 70 publications receiving 4185 citations. Previous affiliations of Colleen L. Seymour include University of Cape Town.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
29 Mar 2013-Science
TL;DR: Overall, wild insects pollinated crops more effectively; an increase in wild insect visitation enhanced fruit set by twice as much as an equivalent increase in honey bee visitation.
Abstract: The diversity and abundance of wild insect pollinators have declined in many agricultural landscapes. Whether such declines reduce crop yields, or are mitigated by managed pollinators such as honey bees, is unclear. We found universally positive associations of fruit set with flower visitation by wild insects in 41 crop systems worldwide. In contrast, fruit set increased significantly with flower visitation by honey bees in only 14% of the systems surveyed. Overall, wild insects pollinated crops more effectively; an increase in wild insect visitation enhanced fruit set by twice as much as an equivalent increase in honey bee visitation. Visitation by wild insects and honey bees promoted fruit set independently, so pollination by managed honey bees supplemented, rather than substituted for, pollination by wild insects. Our results suggest that new practices for integrated management of both honey bees and diverse wild insect assemblages will enhance global crop yields.

1,881 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Jens Kattge1, Gerhard Bönisch2, Sandra Díaz3, Sandra Lavorel  +751 moreInstitutions (314)
TL;DR: The extent of the trait data compiled in TRY is evaluated and emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness are analyzed to conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements.
Abstract: Plant traits-the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants-determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits-almost complete coverage for 'plant growth form'. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait-environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives.

882 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Matteo Dainese1, Emily A. Martin1, Marcelo A. Aizen2, Matthias Albrecht, Ignasi Bartomeus3, Riccardo Bommarco4, Luísa G. Carvalheiro5, Luísa G. Carvalheiro6, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer7, Vesna Gagic8, Lucas Alejandro Garibaldi9, Jaboury Ghazoul10, Heather Grab11, Mattias Jonsson4, Daniel S. Karp12, Christina M. Kennedy13, David Kleijn14, Claire Kremen15, Douglas A. Landis16, Deborah K. Letourneau17, Lorenzo Marini18, Katja Poveda11, Romina Rader19, Henrik G. Smith20, Teja Tscharntke21, Georg K.S. Andersson20, Isabelle Badenhausser22, Isabelle Badenhausser23, Svenja Baensch21, Antonio Diego M. Bezerra24, Felix J.J.A. Bianchi14, Virginie Boreux10, Virginie Boreux25, Vincent Bretagnolle22, Berta Caballero-López, Pablo Cavigliasso26, Aleksandar Ćetković27, Natacha P. Chacoff28, Alice Classen1, Sarah Cusser29, Felipe D. da Silva e Silva30, G. Arjen de Groot14, Jan H. Dudenhöffer31, Johan Ekroos20, Thijs P.M. Fijen14, Pierre Franck23, Breno Magalhães Freitas24, Michael P.D. Garratt32, Claudio Gratton33, Juliana Hipólito9, Juliana Hipólito34, Andrea Holzschuh1, Lauren Hunt35, Aaron L. Iverson11, Shalene Jha36, Tamar Keasar37, Tania N. Kim38, Miriam Kishinevsky37, Björn K. Klatt21, Björn K. Klatt20, Alexandra-Maria Klein25, Kristin M. Krewenka39, Smitha Krishnan10, Smitha Krishnan40, Ashley E. Larsen41, Claire Lavigne23, Heidi Liere42, Bea Maas43, Rachel E. Mallinger44, Eliana Martinez Pachon, Alejandra Martínez-Salinas45, Timothy D. Meehan46, Matthew G. E. Mitchell15, Gonzalo Alberto Roman Molina47, Maike Nesper10, Lovisa Nilsson20, Megan E. O'Rourke48, Marcell K. Peters1, Milan Plećaš27, Simon G. Potts33, Davi de L. Ramos, Jay A. Rosenheim12, Maj Rundlöf20, Adrien Rusch49, Agustín Sáez2, Jeroen Scheper14, Matthias Schleuning, Julia Schmack50, Amber R. Sciligo51, Colleen L. Seymour, Dara A. Stanley52, Rebecca Stewart20, Jane C. Stout53, Louis Sutter, Mayura B. Takada54, Hisatomo Taki, Giovanni Tamburini25, Matthias Tschumi, Blandina Felipe Viana55, Catrin Westphal21, Bryony K. Willcox19, Stephen D. Wratten56, Akira Yoshioka57, Carlos Zaragoza-Trello3, Wei Zhang58, Yi Zou59, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter1 
University of Würzburg1, National University of Comahue2, Spanish National Research Council3, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences4, Universidade Federal de Goiás5, University of Lisbon6, Stanford University7, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation8, National University of Río Negro9, ETH Zurich10, Cornell University11, University of California, Davis12, The Nature Conservancy13, Wageningen University and Research Centre14, University of British Columbia15, Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center16, University of California, Santa Cruz17, University of Padua18, University of New England (Australia)19, Lund University20, University of Göttingen21, University of La Rochelle22, Institut national de la recherche agronomique23, Federal University of Ceará24, University of Freiburg25, Concordia University Wisconsin26, University of Belgrade27, National University of Tucumán28, Michigan State University29, University of Brasília30, University of Greenwich31, University of Reading32, University of Wisconsin-Madison33, National Institute of Amazonian Research34, Boise State University35, University of Texas at Austin36, University of Haifa37, Kansas State University38, University of Hamburg39, Bioversity International40, University of California, Santa Barbara41, Seattle University42, University of Vienna43, University of Florida44, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza45, National Audubon Society46, University of Buenos Aires47, Virginia Tech48, University of Bordeaux49, University of Auckland50, University of California, Berkeley51, University College Dublin52, Trinity College, Dublin53, University of Tokyo54, Federal University of Bahia55, Lincoln University (New Zealand)56, National Institute for Environmental Studies57, International Food Policy Research Institute58, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University59
TL;DR: Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change is partitioned.
Abstract: Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield-related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.

434 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study provides one of the first examples of marked pollination limitation in farms surrounded by well-protected natural habitat and contributes to a growing body of studies that reveal that making farmland more suitable for pollinators benefits both agriculture and nature conservation.
Abstract: Summary 1. There is considerable evidence for the negative impacts of habitat alteration on pollinators in highly disturbed regions of the world. However, it remains unclear whether these findings reflect a global crisis for crop pollination. Understanding the extent to which world agriculture is endangered by pollinator decline is essential if the economic valuation of nature is to be used to promote conservation. 2. We assess the susceptibility to pollinator limitation of one of the most important tropical and subtropical fruit crops, mango Mangifera indica L., commonly planted in a region of South Africa located between two large biodiversity-rich protected natural areas. We conducted flower visitor surveys, exclusion experiments and spatial analysis of flower visitation and fruit production patterns. 3. Our results show that both ants and flower visitors were effective pollinators of mango, the latter significantly declining (in abundance and species richness) with distance to natural habitat while ants were not affected. Neither the absence of pesticides nor the supplementation of flower visitors by using managed honeybees served to offset these negative impacts. Food-web data suggest that maintaining diversity of flower resources within farmland can help maintain pollinator communities. 4. Moreover, models based exclusively on pollinator abundance underestimated the negative effect of distance from natural habitat on production (42% less at 500 m from natural habitat). As soil nutrient levels and water content are regularly measured and corrected in all study sites, these results suggest that pollinator diversity may also be important. 5. Synthesis and applications. This study provides one of the first examples of marked pollination limitation in farms surrounded by well-protected natural habitat. For mango farming to be sustainable, it is essential to limit contiguous growth of farmland and consider practices that restore the complexity of plant-pollinator networks within farms, for example through the creation and maintenance of pollinator-friendly areas. By highlighting the economic gains of adopting pollinator-friendly practices in agriculture, this work contributes to a growing body of studies that reveal that making farmland more suitable for pollinators benefits both agriculture and nature conservation.

247 citations

Posted ContentDOI
Matteo Dainese1, Emily A. Martin1, Marcelo A. Aizen2, Matthias Albrecht, Ignasi Bartomeus3, Riccardo Bommarco4, Luísa G. Carvalheiro5, Luísa G. Carvalheiro6, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer7, Vesna Gagic8, Lucas Alejandro Garibaldi9, Jaboury Ghazoul10, Heather Grab11, Mattias Jonsson4, Daniel S. Karp12, Christina M. Kennedy13, David Kleijn14, Claire Kremen15, Douglas A. Landis16, Deborah K. Letourneau17, Lorenzo Marini18, Katja Poveda11, Romina Rader19, Henrik G. Smith20, Teja Tscharntke21, Georg K.S. Andersson20, Isabelle Badenhausser22, Isabelle Badenhausser23, Svenja Baensch21, Antonio Diego M. Bezerra24, Felix J.J.A. Bianchi14, Virginie Boreux10, Vincent Bretagnolle22, Berta Caballero-López, Pablo Cavigliasso25, Aleksandar Ćetković26, Natacha P. Chacoff27, Alice Classen1, Sarah Cusser28, Felipe D. da Silva e Silva29, G. Arjen de Groot14, Jan H. Dudenhöffer30, Johan Ekroos20, Thijs P.M. Fijen14, Pierre Franck23, Breno Magalhães Freitas24, Michael P.D. Garratt31, Claudio Gratton32, Juliana Hipólito9, Andrea Holzschuh1, Lauren Hunt33, Aaron L. Iverson11, Shalene Jha34, Tamar Keasar35, Tania N. Kim36, Miriam Kishinevsky35, Björn K. Klatt21, Björn K. Klatt20, Alexandra-Maria Klein37, Kristin M. Krewenka38, Smitha Krishnan10, Ashley E. Larsen39, Claire Lavigne23, Heidi Liere40, Bea Maas41, Rachel E. Mallinger42, Eliana Martinez Pachon, Alejandra Martínez-Salinas43, Timothy D. Meehan44, Matthew G. E. Mitchell15, Gonzalo Alberto Roman Molina45, Maike Nesper10, Lovisa Nilsson20, Megan E. O'Rourke46, Marcell K. Peters1, Milan Plećaš26, Simon G. Potts31, Davi de L. Ramos29, Jay A. Rosenheim17, Maj Rundlöf20, Adrien Rusch47, Agustín Sáez2, Jeroen Scheper14, Matthias Schleuning, Julia Schmack48, Amber R. Sciligo17, Colleen L. Seymour, Dara A. Stanley49, Rebecca Stewart20, Jane C. Stout50, Louis Sutter, Mayura B. Takada51, Hisatomo Taki, Giovanni Tamburini4, Matthias Tschumi, Blandina Felipe Viana52, Catrin Westphal21, Bryony K. Willcox19, Stephen D. Wratten53, Akira Yoshioka54, Carlos Zaragoza-Trello3, Wei Zhang55, Yi Zou56, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter1 
University of Würzburg1, National University of Comahue2, Spanish National Research Council3, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences4, University of Lisbon5, Universidade Federal de Goiás6, Stanford University7, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation8, National University of Río Negro9, ETH Zurich10, Cornell University11, University of California, Davis12, The Nature Conservancy13, Wageningen University and Research Centre14, University of British Columbia15, Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center16, University of California, Berkeley17, University of Padua18, University of New England (United States)19, Lund University20, University of Göttingen21, University of La Rochelle22, Institut national de la recherche agronomique23, Federal University of Ceará24, Concordia University Wisconsin25, University of Belgrade26, National University of Tucumán27, Michigan State University28, University of Brasília29, University of Greenwich30, University of Reading31, University of Wisconsin-Madison32, Boise State University33, University of Texas at Austin34, University of Haifa35, Kansas State University36, University of Freiburg37, University of Hamburg38, University of California, Santa Barbara39, Seattle University40, University of Vienna41, University of Florida42, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza43, National Audubon Society44, University of Buenos Aires45, Virginia Tech46, University of Bordeaux47, University of Auckland48, University College Dublin49, Trinity College, Dublin50, University of Tokyo51, Federal University of Bahia52, Lincoln University (Pennsylvania)53, National Institute for Environmental Studies54, International Food Policy Research Institute55, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University56
20 Feb 2019-bioRxiv
TL;DR: Using a global database from 89 crop systems, the relative importance of abundance and species richness for pollination, biological pest control and final yields in the context of on-going land-use change is partitioned.
Abstract: Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield-related ecosystem services can be maintained by few abundant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 crop systems, we partition the relative importance of abundance and species richness for pollination, biological pest control and final yields in the context of on-going land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services independent of abundance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.

237 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Preface to the Princeton Landmarks in Biology Edition vii Preface xi Symbols used xiii 1.
Abstract: Preface to the Princeton Landmarks in Biology Edition vii Preface xi Symbols Used xiii 1. The Importance of Islands 3 2. Area and Number of Speicies 8 3. Further Explanations of the Area-Diversity Pattern 19 4. The Strategy of Colonization 68 5. Invasibility and the Variable Niche 94 6. Stepping Stones and Biotic Exchange 123 7. Evolutionary Changes Following Colonization 145 8. Prospect 181 Glossary 185 References 193 Index 201

14,171 citations

01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: The modern applied statistics with s is universally compatible with any devices to read, and is available in the digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly.
Abstract: Thank you very much for downloading modern applied statistics with s. As you may know, people have search hundreds times for their favorite readings like this modern applied statistics with s, but end up in harmful downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of coffee in the afternoon, instead they cope with some harmful virus inside their laptop. modern applied statistics with s is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our digital library saves in multiple countries, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Kindly say, the modern applied statistics with s is universally compatible with any devices to read.

5,249 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
27 Mar 2015-Science
TL;DR: The stresses bees are experiencing from climate change, infectious diseases, and insecticides are reviewed, with concern that the authors may be nearing a “pollination crisis” in which crop yields begin to fall.
Abstract: Bees are subject to numerous pressures in the modern world. The abundance and diversity of flowers has declined, bees are chronically exposed to cocktails of agrochemicals, and they are simultaneously exposed to novel parasites accidentally spread by humans. Climate change is likely to exacerbate these problems in the future. Stressors do not act in isolation; for example pesticide exposure can impair both detoxification mechanisms and immune responses, rendering bees more susceptible to parasites. It seems certain that chronic exposure to multiple, interacting stressors is driving honey bee colony losses and declines of wild pollinators, but such interactions are not addressed by current regulatory procedures and studying these interactions experimentally poses a major challenge. In the meantime, taking steps to reduce stress on bees would seem prudent; incorporating flower-rich habitat into farmland, reducing pesticide use through adopting more sustainable farming methods, and enforcing effective quarantine measures on bee movements are all practical measures that should be adopted. Effective monitoring of wild pollinator populations is urgently needed to inform management strategies into the future.

2,526 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
29 Mar 2013-Science
TL;DR: Overall, wild insects pollinated crops more effectively; an increase in wild insect visitation enhanced fruit set by twice as much as an equivalent increase in honey bee visitation.
Abstract: The diversity and abundance of wild insect pollinators have declined in many agricultural landscapes. Whether such declines reduce crop yields, or are mitigated by managed pollinators such as honey bees, is unclear. We found universally positive associations of fruit set with flower visitation by wild insects in 41 crop systems worldwide. In contrast, fruit set increased significantly with flower visitation by honey bees in only 14% of the systems surveyed. Overall, wild insects pollinated crops more effectively; an increase in wild insect visitation enhanced fruit set by twice as much as an equivalent increase in honey bee visitation. Visitation by wild insects and honey bees promoted fruit set independently, so pollination by managed honey bees supplemented, rather than substituted for, pollination by wild insects. Our results suggest that new practices for integrated management of both honey bees and diverse wild insect assemblages will enhance global crop yields.

1,881 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work provides the first quantitative support for the generality of positive heterogeneity-richness relationships across heterogeneity components, habitat types, taxa and spatial scales from landscape to global extents, and identifies specific needs for future comparative heterogeneity- richness research.
Abstract: Environmental heterogeneity is regarded as one of the most important factors governing species richness gradients. An increase in available niche space, provision of refuges and opportunities for isolation and divergent adaptation are thought to enhance species coexistence, persistence and diversification. However, the extent and generality of positive heterogeneity–richness relationships are still debated. Apart from widespread evidence supporting positive relationships, negative and hump-shaped relationships have also been reported. In a meta-analysis of 1148 data points from 192 studies worldwide, we examine the strength and direction of the relationship between spatial environmental heterogeneity and species richness of terrestrial plants and animals. We find that separate effects of heterogeneity in land cover, vegetation, climate, soil and topography are significantly positive, with vegetation and topographic heterogeneity showing particularly strong associations with species richness. The use of equal-area study units, spatial grain and spatial extent emerge as key factors influencing the strength of heterogeneity–richness relationships, highlighting the pervasive influence of spatial scale in heterogeneity–richness studies. We provide the first quantitative support for the generality of positive heterogeneity–richness relationships across heterogeneity components, habitat types, taxa and spatial scales from landscape to global extents, and identify specific needs for future comparative heterogeneity–richness research.

1,161 citations