Tag Archives: Conservation

The SYMBIOSIS project kicks off in Paris!

Last week I had the pleasure of travelling to Paris via Eurostar for the launch meeting of the EU Agency for Railways-funded SYMBIOSIS project, held at the headquarters of UIC – the International Union of Railways. This is my second project working with UIC on questions concerning how the European rail network both impacts and supports biodiversity – see this blog post from June 2022. And once again I’ll be working closely with the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, and principally Richard Pywell and Reto Schmucki, to deliver the work.

What is SYMBIOSIS about? Well, it’s not a research project as such, it’s actually a Coordination and Support Action (CSA) project designed to:

“improve cooperation between legal entities from the EU and associated countries to strengthen the European Research Area including, for example, standardisation, dissemination, awareness-raising, communication and networking activities, policy dialogues, mutual learning or studies”

SYMBIOSIS involves a series of work packages with some ambitious objectives that are aiming to mainstream biodiversity across a wide range of rail-related activities including infrastructure development, transport policy, environmental impact assessments, sustainability reporting, and procurement processes. It will also develop some practical tools for sustainable land management that can both enhance biodiversity and increase infrastructure resilience, mainly through the use of nature-based solutions to rail issues such as flooding and landslides.

The work package in which I am involved will assess what biodiversity monitoring rail operators are currently undertaking, and develop a standardised framework for recording and reporting such data. No small task! But we’re looking at some very hi-tech options including the use of real-time, AI-based monitoring.

The two day kick-off meeting was very successful, with over 40 representatives from a wide range of organisations attending both in person and remotely. There was a lot of energy in the room, as befits the Olympics host city, and a great willingness to work collaboratively on making SYMBIOSIS a success.

SYMBIOSIS has a three year programme of activities and as the project progresses, you can be sure that I’ll report back.

Speaking at Oxford Ornithological Society – 11th September

Leave a reply

Later this month I’ve been invited by the Oxford Ornithological Society to give a talk about my new book Birds & Flowers: An Intimate 50 Million Year Relationship. The talk will summarise the main themes from the book, particularly the sheer diversity of birds that can act as pollinators, what it means for the ecology and evolution of flowers, why the conservation of such interactions matters, and the cultural significance of bird-flower interactions. I’ll also deal with the question of why Europe is so odd when it comes to the question of birds as pollinators.

The talk is on Wednesday 11th September at Exeter Hall, Kidlington, starting at 7.45 pm; it’s free to society members, and non-members are invited to make a donation. Do come along if you’re in the area!

More details here: https://www.oos.org.uk/programme.php

I’ll bring a few copies of Birds & Flowers and Pollinators & Pollination: Nature and Society if anyone wants to buy a signed book.

Also in the diary are talks at South Leicester Birdwatchers (13th November) and Northamptonshire Bird Club (5th March).

If you represent a birding club or natural history society and wish to book me for a talk, please get in touch via my Contact page.

Urban bees are often early bees says a new study

1 Reply

The latest paper from Muzafar Sirohi‘s PhD work on urban solitary bees has just been published in the journal Zoodiversity, a publication of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. In this paper we looked at how the flight periods of urban populations of bees differ from those in surrounding nature reserves and other “natural” settings. One of the most interesting findings is that urban bees tend to emerge earlier, and be active longer, than their rural counterparts. The quote the study:

“We observed a substantial effect of urban microclimate on bee flight periods. A total of 153 individuals of nine bee species were recorded one to nine weeks before or after their expected flight periods. In contrast, only 14 individuals of four species were seen at unusual flight periods in nature sites.”

In my book Pollinators & Pollination: Nature and Society I discussed the importance of towns and cities for supporting pollinator populations, and conversely how important those populations are for urban food production. Likewise, in Birds and Flowers: An Intimate 50 Million Year Relationship I have a chapter entitled “Urban flowers for urban birds”. The relationship between our built environment and pollinators is a fascinating topic, but there’s still much we don’t understand about how these insects and vertebrates respond behaviorally to urbanisation. Are they adapting in an evolutionary sense, or simply responding flexibly to the different conditions that cities impose on their biologies? Will future climate change make towns and cities uninhabitable for these animals? Hopefully our paper will stimulate further work on these and other topics.

Here’s the full reference with a link to the paper (which is open access):

Sirohi, M. H., Jackson, J., & Ollerton, J. (2024). Comparison of Flight Periods of Solitary and Primitively Eusocial Bees in Urban Environments and Nature Conservation Areas: a Preliminary Report. Zoodiversity 58: 317-334

Here’s the abstract:

Solitary and primitively eusocial bees, an important group of pollinators, have declined in the past few decades. In view of the recent focus on safeguarding pollinating insects, it is vital to understand the basic ecology of species for their conservation, for example their phenologies. We observed the flight periods of solitary and primitively eusocial bees in both the urban core of a large British town and nearby nature conservation areas. The bee surveys were conducted with standardised methods, on warm sunny days from the first appearance of bees in March 2012 and continued until October 2012. This study confirmed that a high number of species are active in the spring season. The emergence dates of species in urban areas and nature sites varied; about 26 of the 35 species were recorded at least one week earlier in urban areas; in contrast, only four species were seen earlier in nature conservation sites. When comparing this with the expected flight periods recorded (largely in nature sites) in the literature, many species were recorded at their expected time. However, a few individuals were recorded after their usual flight activity time, suggesting that the populations were possibly affected by the microclimate in urban areas. More urban phenological data are needed to understand the phenological trends in bees in urban habitats.

If osiers are all you know – China Diary 6

1 Reply

It’s very easy to get a fixed idea of what you think a particular group of plants ‘ought’ to look like, based on those that are most familiar to you from where you live. But exploring a good botanic garden always reveals surprises, as far as plant families are concerned. Willows (or osiers) provided me with a great example recently. Based on those that I am familiar with, I thought I had a pretty good idea of what to expect from the family Salicaceae, which includes not just willows (Salix spp.) but also aspens and poplars.

Then you encounter the trunk of a large tree that’s covered in vicious thorns that remind you of the rose family (Rosaceae) and particularly some species of cherries and plums, such as Blackthorn (Prunus spinosa). But it’s a big tree, larger than expected for that group, and the bark in particular doesn’t look right:

Fortunately, being a botanic garden, there’s a helpful label:

Lo and behold, it’s a member of the willow family! A species of Xylosma, quite a large genus of about 100 species, but not one with which I am familiar.

I encountered another example in the Chinese medicinal garden – a species of milkwort (Polygala). The milkworts that are native to Britain are low-growing, herbaceous species, not tall woody shrubs like this P. arillata. The rather legume-like flowers are familiar, but not displayed in these pendant inflorescences, laburnum style:

This wasn’t the biggest surprise of my China trip so far, however – how about these clusters of yellow-ish white, highly fragrant flowers, on a large (15 metre) tree? What family could it belong to?

Again, Rosaceae comes to mind, but it turns out that it’s in the borage or forget-me-not family (Boraginaceae):

Those last two species are a nice example of a general trends in plant families and genera, which often contain smaller, herbaceous species in cooler, more temperate parts of the world and larger, woody species at lower latitudes in the tropics and subtropics. Bamboos (which are of course woody grasses) are a good example – and we have encountered some spectacular specimens in the garden:

Of course there’s also some familiar species, including birds: how many Little Egrets can you spot in this picture?

Exploring botanic gardens are one of my favourite pastimes, it’s always worthwhile and, in the words of an old blog post of mine, Je ne egret rien.

A new review of ‘Birds & Flowers’ in the Journal of Pollination Ecology

Leave a reply

The reviews of Birds & Flowers: An Intimate 50 Million Year Relationship are starting to appear in blogs, magazines and journals. The latest, by Diane Campbell, has just been published in the Journal of Pollination Ecology and I’m so pleased that it was positive! I’ve only met Diane a couple of times at conferences but I have a lot of respect for her work. The review is fair and balanced, and gratifyingly enthusiastic, for example:

In this delightful book, [Ollerton] describes the ways that birds and flowers interact. As in his previous book, Pollinators & Pollination: Nature and Society, [he] takes a deeply personal approach to the subject. He combines anecdotes from his research travels around the world, to mountains of Kenya and Tanzania, the Andes of Peru, Brazil, and Nepal, among other places, with his contributions to, and masterful knowledge of, the recent literature…

The review is free to read and download from Journal of Pollination Ecology. I’m so glad that people are enjoying the book – if you’ve bought or borrowed a copy, please do leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Reusing Plant-Pollinator Datasets – a free WorldFAIR webinar on 18th April

Leave a reply

A message from Dr Debora Drucker, WorldFAIR Agricultural Biodiversity Case Study Lead:

Registration is open to our contribution to the WorldFAIR webinar series – “Reusing Plant-Pollinator Datasets: a Global Perspective with Guidelines and Recommendations inspired by Pilot Studies from Africa, the Americas and Europe”.

It will be held on April 18 at 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm (Times in UTC) – https://worldfair-project.eu/event/the-worldfair-webinar-series-reusing-plant-pollinator-datasets-a-global-perspective-with-guidelines-and-recommendations-inspired-by-pilot-studies-from-africa-the-americas-and-europe/

We will present results from Deliverables 10.2 & 10.3, with focus on our pilot studies:

Drucker, D., Salim, J. A., Poelen, J., Soares, F. M., Gonzalez-Vaquero, R. A., Ollerton, J., Devoto, M., Rünzel, M., Robinson, D., Kasina, M., Taliga, C., Parr, C., Cox-Foster, D., Hill, E., Maues, M. M., Saraiva, A. M., Agostini, K., Carvalheiro, L. G., Bergamo, P., Varassin, I.; Alves, D. A., Marques, B., Tinoco, F. C., Rech, A. R., Cardona-Duque, J., Idárraga, M., Agudelo-Zapata, M. C., Marentes Herrera, E. Trekels, M. (2024). WorldFAIR (D10.2) Agricultural Biodiversity Standards, Best Practices and Guidelines Recommendations (Version 1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10666593

Drucker, D. P., Salim, J. A., Poelen, J., Soares, F. M., Gonzalez-Vaquero, R. A., Devoto, M., Ollerton, J., Kasina, M., Carvalheiro, L. G., Bergamo, P. J., Alves, D. A., Varassin, I., Tinoco, F. C., Rünzel, M., Robinson, D., Cardona-Duque, J., Idárraga, M., Agudelo-Zapata, M. C., Marentes Herrera, E., Taliga, C., Parr, C.S., Cox-Foster, D., Hill, E., Maués, M.M. Agostini, K. Rech, A.R., Saraiva, A. (2024). WorldFAIR (D10.3) Agricultural biodiversity FAIR data assessment rubrics (Version 1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10719265

We reserved a good amount of time for Q&A – I hope to see you there and have a nice discussion!

The flower that’s pollinated by birds, bees….and the wind!

Leave a reply

In my new book Birds & Flowers: An Intimate 50 Million Year Relationship I spend a bit of time discussing the idea of the bird pollination syndrome that we refer to as ‘ornithophily’, its limitations, and the fact that it has two distinct meanings that are often conflated. One of the problems with ornithophily, and indeed all of the syndromes, is that historically it’s sometimes blinkered scientists to the extent that they only look at the flower visitors that are “right” for the syndrome, ignoring the rest or dismissing them as “secondary pollinators”, a term I dislike.

Why do I dislike that term? Because it fails to capture the complexity of flower-pollinator interactions and relegates an important component of plant reproduction to a subsidiary role. I could go on about this at some length, but if you’re interested in discovering more, look at pages 62-65 of Birds & Flowers. There I contrast the classical Most Effective Pollinator Principle with the equally valid (but much less well studied) Least Effective Pollinator Principle, with a segue into one of my favourite tracks from Led Zeppelin’s second album: What is and What Should Never Be.

But back to the real subject of this post – a flower that corresponds to the classical bird pollination syndrome BUT is also pollinated by bees and (very surprisingly) wind! It’s such an interesting paper by Brazilian ecologists Amanda Pacheco, Pedro Bergamo & Leandro Freitas – here’s the reference and a link to the study:

Pacheco, A., Bergamo, P.J. & Freitas, L. (2024) An unexpected case of wind pollination: ambophily in an ornithophilous tropical mountaintop Orobanchaceae. Plant Systematics and Evolution 310, 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-024-01890-6

For over 100 years the classical pollination syndromes have acted as a framework for understanding the ecology and evolution of plant-pollinator interactions. But we’ve long known that while they can be a useful shorthand, they do not fully reflect the complexity of how pollination systems evolve. That shouldn’t surprise us because, as I point out in my two recent books, we have data (of any quality) on no more than 10% of the 350,000 or so species of flowering plants!

In addition, those plants for which we do have good data are NOT a random subset of the flowering plants: they have been specifically chosen by researchers because they look to be good systems with which to address particular ecological or evolutionary questions.

Which is fine, but we MUST recognise that this imposes significant restrictions on our understanding of the biodiversity of plant-pollinator interactions. The authors of this paper expressed it very well when they wrote that assumptions about:

“predictability may cause researchers to take for granted that only birds pollinate ornithophilous flowers, hindering research on the contribution of other vectors.”

To which I’d add: it also hinders our understanding of how these interactions evolve over long time scales and across multiple populations.

An obvious question is: how frequent are these sorts of complex pollination systems, involving different pollen vectors of an apparently specialised flower? The answer is that we simply don’t know, because most researchers would have not gone into this level of detail. So a huge congratulations to the authors for a great study – I hope it stimulates others to look beyond the ‘expected’ pollinators of flowers.

Photos: Nathália Susin Streher from the original paper.

More from the WorldFAIR Project: Agricultural biodiversity FAIR data assessment rubrics for plant-pollinator interactions

Leave a reply

The final deliverable from the WorldFAIR Project with which I’m involved has recently been published and can be freely downloaded from Zenodo by following the link below. The report is called “Agricultural biodiversity FAIR data assessment rubrics” and in it we present the results from a series of six pilot studies that adopted the FAIR* standards and our recommendations from the previous report.

This document complements the previous one by giving examples and setting out guidelines that allow researchers and practitioners to ensure FAIRness in their plant-pollinator interaction data.

Here’s the full reference:

Although this is the last formal deliverable from our WorldFAIR work package, it’s not the final output that we have planned. I’ll report back on the journal paper(s) that we are writing as and when they are published.

*Findable, Accessible, Interoperable & Reusable (or sometimes Reproducible)

Leveraging Biodiversity Net Gain to address invertebrate declines in England – a new pre-print is available

Leave a reply

Back in October I posted about a report I’d written that considered Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) and what it could mean for pollinators. The report generated some interest and has helped to inform a study by University of Oxford PhD researcher Natalie (Nat) Duffus that has just been posted as a pre-print entitled “Leveraging Biodiversity Net Gain to address invertebrate declines in England” – here’s the link to it: https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/6667/

In this work, Nat has asked a group of us who are interested in this topic to assess the limitations of the current BNG system and how it might be improved to better support invertebrate populations. Please do read the study and comment either on the blog or directly on the pre-print. We’re interested in people’s views on this and whether we have missed anything important.

Here’s the abstract:

Meeting ambitions such as the Global Biodiversity Framework 2030 targets will require multiple conservation mechanisms that benefit the widest possible range of habitats and species. Using England as a case study, here we evaluate the likely impact of a novel and ambitious ecological compensation policy, Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), on terrestrial insects, spiders, and other arthropods (‘invertebrates’), a functionally important but rapidly declining component of biodiversity. Current implementation of BNG in England sets out to provide a 10% uplift in biodiversity when infrastructure development (such as housebuilding) occurs. However, BNG is a habitat-driven approach, which risks overlooking important considerations relevant to invertebrate conservation, threatens to further reduce the size and quality of their habitats, and may increase habitat fragmentation. BNG – as currently implemented – therefore represents a missed opportunity to use a universally applied policy to benefit invertebrates and other functionally important components of biodiversity. We suggest ways forward to realign BNG with what we know to be crucial for successful invertebrate conservation, and with other policy mechanisms such as the National Pollinator Strategy. This will ensure that appropriate habitats and conditions for invertebrates are retained, enhanced, and created at a landscape scale, and that BNG is optimised to contribute to broader national conservation targets. As biodiversity accounting and offsetting schemes such as BNG are increasingly adopted around the world, the experience of BNG in England provides valuable insights into how ecological compensation programmes could be better designed, implemented, and monitored to ensure that benefits for a wide variety of taxa are achieved.

Key tropical crops at risk from pollinator loss due to climate change and land use – a new study just published

Leave a reply

PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) is one of the most important sources of data for large-scale modelling of how changes in land use is impacting biodiversity. Marry that with future climate models and you have a powerful tool for understanding how these two major factors in global change will shape both biodiversity and human society over the coming decades.

In recent years it’s been a privilege to be part of a project led by Joe Millard and Tim Newbold that’s using PREDICTS to model how pollinators and pollination services are likely to be impacted by human activities. The first paper from that work (which was Joe’s PhD) was entitled ‘Global effects of land-use intensity on local pollinator biodiversity’ and came out in 2021, as I documented on my blog at the time.

Yesterday a second paper was published, this time focused on how land use and anthropogenic climate change interact to potentially affect insect-pollinated crops across the world.

Our main finding is that it’s tropical crops, especially cocoa, mango, watermelon, and coffee, that in the future will suffer the greatest negative impacts from loss of pollinators. Although we can have perfectly healthy diets without consuming any of those, they currently support tens of millions of farmers across the tropics and are part of global supply chains worth billions of dollars per year.

Here’s the full reference with a link to the paper, which is open access:

Millard, J., Outhwaite, C.L., Ceaușu, S., Luísa G. Carvalheiro, da Silva e Silva, F.D., Dicks, L.V., Ollerton, J. & Newbold, T. (2023) Key tropical crops at risk from pollinator loss due to climate change and land use. Science Advances 9, eadh0756

Here’s the abstract:

Insect pollinator biodiversity is changing rapidly, with potential consequences for the provision of crop pollination. However, the role of land use–climate interactions in pollinator biodiversity changes, as well as consequent economic effects via changes in crop pollination, remains poorly understood. We present a global assessment of the interactive effects of climate change and land use on pollinator abundance and richness and predictions of the risk to crop pollination from the inferred changes. Using a dataset containing 2673 sites and 3080 insect pollinator species, we show that the interactive combination of agriculture and climate change is associated with large reductions in insect pollinators. As a result, it is expected that the tropics will experience the greatest risk to crop production from pollinator losses. Localized risk is highest and predicted to increase most rapidly, in regions of sub-Saharan Africa, northern South America, and Southeast Asia. Via pollinator loss alone, climate change and agricultural land use could be a risk to human well-being.