Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33433964›Full record

ArticleGlobal change biology2021

Wild bees as winners and losers: Relative impacts of landscape composition, quality, and climate.

Melanie Kammerer, Sarah C Goslee, Margaret R Douglas, John F Tooker, Christina M Grozinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global change biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Intensive arable farming calls for resilient wild bee restoration amid severe abundance fluctuations.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Carbon dioxide drives oviposition inNational science review · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Melanie KammererIntercollege Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0678-9087
Sarah C GosleeUSDA-ARS Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit, University Park, PA, USA.
Margaret R DouglasDepartment of Environmental Studies & Environmental Science, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, USA.
John F TookerIntercollege Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Christina M GrozingerIntercollege Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.

Funding

Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research 54903Pennsylvania State University Intercollege Graduate Degree Program in EcologyUnited States Department of Agriculture National Institute for Food and Agriculture 1009362United States Department of Agriculture National Institute for Food and Agriculture PEN04606United States Department of Agriculture National Institute for Food and Agriculture PENW-2017-07007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wild bees, like many other taxa, are threatened by land-use and climate change, which, in turn, jeopardizes pollination of crops and wild plants. Understanding how land-use and climate factors interact is critical to predicting and managing pollinator populations and ensuring adequate pollination services, but most studies have evaluated either land-use or climate effects, not both. Furthermore, bee species are incredibly variable, spanning an array of behavioral, physiological, and life-history traits that can increase or decrease resilience to land-use or climate change. Thus, there are likely bee species that benefit, while others suffer, from changing climate and land use, but few studies have documented taxon-specific trends. To address these critical knowledge gaps, we analyzed a long-term dataset of wild bee occurrences from Maryland, Delaware, and Washington DC, USA, examining how different bee genera and functional groups respond to landscape composition, quality, and climate factors. Despite a large body of literature documenting land-use effects on wild bees, in this study, climate factors emerged as the main drivers of wild-bee abundance and richness. For wild-bee communities in spring and summer/fall, temperature and precipitation were more important predictors than landscape composition, landscape quality, or topography. However, relationships varied substantially between wild-bee genera and functional groups. In the Northeast USA, past trends and future predictions show a changing climate with warmer winters, more intense precipitation in winter and spring, and longer growing seasons with higher maximum temperatures. In almost all of our analyses, these conditions were associated with lower abundance of wild bees. Wild-bee richness results were more mixed, including neutral and positive relationships with predicted temperature and precipitation patterns. Thus, in this region and undoubtedly more broadly, changing climate poses a significant threat to wild-bee communities.

Indexed as

Crops, AgriculturalPollinationAnimalsBeesMarylandSeasonsTemperatureApoideaclimate changeexotic speciesland useprecipitationtemperatureurbanizationwild bees

Identifiers

PMID33433964
PMCPMC7986353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.