Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41058594›Full record

ArticleGlobal change biology2025

Solar Farms as Potential Future Refuges for Bumblebees.

Hollie Blaydes, Emma Gardner, J Duncan Whyatt, Simon G Potts, Robert Dunford-Brown, John W Redhead, Alona Armstrong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global change biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Hollie BlaydesLancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7753-4938
Emma GardnerUK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
J Duncan WhyattLancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Simon G PottsCentre for Agri-Environmental Research, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, Reading, UK.
Robert Dunford-BrownUK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
John W RedheadUK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
Alona ArmstrongLancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilNatural Environment Research Council NE/R010226/1Natural Environment Research Council NE/V006878/1Natural Environment Research Council NE/V007831/1Natural Environment Research Council NE/W005050/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Solar farms offer an opportunity for habitat creation for wildlife, including insect pollinators, potentially simultaneously contributing to both low-carbon energy and nature recovery. However, it is unknown whether cobenefits would persist under future land-use change given that habitat value is context dependent. For the 1042 operational solar farms in Great Britain, we predict their ability to support bumblebee populations (both inside and outside the solar farm) under three different socioeconomic futures. These futures represent alternative 1 km scale landcover projections for the year 2050 with accompanying narratives. We downscale these to 10 m resolution, spatially allocating crop rotations, agri-environment interventions and other habitat features consistent with the scenario narratives, to realistically represent fine-scale landscape elements of relevance to bumblebee populations. We then input these detailed maps into a sophisticated process-based model that simulates bumblebee foraging and population dynamics, enabling us to predict bumblebee density in and around Great Britain's solar farms, accounting for the effects of their changed habitat context and configuration in these different future scenarios. We isolate the drivers of bumblebee density change across scenarios and scales and show that solar farm management was the main driver of bumblebee density within solar farms, with ~120% higher densities inside florally enhanced compared to turf grass solar farms, although the exact figure was influenced by wider landcover changes. In foraging zones immediately surrounding solar farms, landscape changes had a greater impact on bumblebee densities, suggesting a single solar farm in isolation generally did not counteract the influence of wider land-use changes expected under future scenarios. In addition to providing insights into the potential future value of pollinator habitat on solar farms, our methodology demonstrates how combining process-based modelling with landcover projections that are downscaled to ecologically relevant resolutions can be used to better assess future effectiveness of habitat interventions. This represents a step change in our ability to account for species' interactions with socioeconomically driven futures, which can be extended and applied to other taxa and land-use interventions.

Indexed as

AgricultureConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemSolar EnergyAnimalsBeesFarmsPopulation DynamicsUnited Kingdomhabitat managementland‐use changepollinatorsrenewable energysolar farm

Identifiers

PMID41058594
PMCPMC12505205

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.