Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39288815›Full record

ReviewBiology letters2024

Are agricultural commodity production systems at risk from local biodiversity loss?

Calum Maney, Marieke Sassen, Ken E Giller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Calum ManeyPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 430, Wageningen 6700, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6907-8178
Marieke SassenPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 430, Wageningen 6700, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8844-7437
Ken E GillerPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 430, Wageningen 6700, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5998-4652

Funding

Direktoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidEconomic and Social Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compelling evidence for feedbacks between commodity crop production systems and local ecosystems has led to predictions that biodiversity loss could threaten food security. However, for this to happen agricultural production systems must both impact and depend on the same components of biodiversity. Here, we review the evidence for and against the simultaneous impacts and dependencies of eight important commodity crops on biodiversity. We evaluate the risk that pollination, pest control or biodiversity-mediated soil health maintenance services are at risk from local biodiversity loss. We find that for key species groups such as ants, bees and birds, the production of commodities including coffee, cocoa and soya bean is indeed likely to be at risk from local biodiversity loss. However, we also identify several combinations of commodity, ecosystem service and component of biodiversity that are unlikely to lead to reinforcing feedbacks and lose-lose outcomes for biodiversity and agriculture. Furthermore, there are significant gaps in the evidence both for and against a mutualism between biodiversity and agricultural commodity production, highlighting the need for more evaluation of the importance of specific biodiversity groups to agricultural systems globally.

Indexed as

AgricultureBiodiversityCrops, AgriculturalAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesPest ControlPollinationagricultural biodiversityagricultural commoditiesecosystem servicespest controlpollinationsoil health

Identifiers

PMID39288815
PMCPMC11407868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.