GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Ihre E-Mail wurde erfolgreich gesendet. Bitte prüfen Sie Ihren Maileingang.

Leider ist ein Fehler beim E-Mail-Versand aufgetreten. Bitte versuchen Sie es erneut.

Vorgang fortführen?

Exportieren
  • 1
    In: Fish and Fisheries, Wiley, Vol. 16, No. 4 ( 2015-12), p. 668-683
    Kurzfassung: Aquaculture is currently the fastest expanding global animal food production sector and is a key future contributor to food security. An increase in food security will be dependent upon the development and improvement of sustainable practices. A prioritization exercise was undertaken, focusing on the future knowledge needs to underpin UK sustainable aquaculture (both domestic and imported products) using a ‘task force’ group of 36 ‘practitioners’ and 12 ‘research scientists’ who have an active interest in sustainable aquaculture. A long list of 264 knowledge needs related to sustainable aquaculture was developed in conjunction with the task force. The long list was further refined through a three stage process of voting and scoring, including discussions of each knowledge need. The top 25 knowledge needs are presented, as scored separately by ‘practitioners’ or ‘research scientists’. There was similar agreement in priorities identified by these two groups. The priority knowledge needs will provide guidance to structure ongoing work to make science accessible to practitioners and help to prioritize future science policy needs and funding. The process of knowledge exchange, and the mechanisms by which this can be achieved, effectively emerged as the top priority for sustainable aquaculture. Viable alternatives to wild fish‐based aquaculture feeds, resource constraints that will potentially limit expansion of aquaculture, sustainable offshore aquaculture and the treatment of sea lice also emerged as strong priorities. Although the exercise was focused on UK needs for sustainable aquaculture, many of the emergent issues are considered to have global application.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 1467-2960 , 1467-2979
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2015
    ZDB Id: 2024569-5
    SSG: 21,3
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Applied Ecology, Wiley, Vol. 57, No. 4 ( 2020-04), p. 681-694
    Kurzfassung: A intensificação agrícola e a perda associada de habitats de elevada qualidade são os principais factores que impulsionam o declínio dos insetos polinizadores. A fim de mitigar o impacto ambiental da agricultura, a Política Agrícola Comum (PAC) da UE, de 2014, definiu um conjunto de atributos ou estruturas do habitat e da paisagem, designadas de Áreas Foco Ecológico (AFEs) que devem ser mantidas pelos agricultores como requisito para obter as ajudas económicas previstas nas medidas agroambientais. No presente trabalho realizamos uma avaliação à escala europeia das diferentes opções destas estruturas, a fim de munir a PAC pós‐2020, com informação sobre a importância das AFEs. Estas variam muito quanto ao seu potencial no apoio às populações de polinizadores, de acordo com a extensão da sua aceitação pelos agricultores e das práticas adoptadas por estes na sua gestão, que podem consistir em práticas padrão ou práticas mais amigáveis para os polinizadores. Um processo estruturado, com base na técnica de elicitação de Delphi foi desenvolvido, envolvendo 22 especialistas de 18 países europeus, com o objectivo de avaliar as opções de AFEs previstas na PAC. Esta avaliação levou em consideração os requisitos do ciclo de vida dos taxa dos principais polinizadores, ou seja, as abelhas, as abelhas solitárias e os sirfídeos ou moscas‐das‐flores. Cada AFE foi avaliada quanto ao seu potencial para fornecer alimento, locais de nidificação, e recursos para as larvas dos sirfídeos. A percepção quanto à eficácia das AFEs como fonte de recursos (alimento) para os polinizadores variou substancialmente, do ponto de vista quer geográfico, quer temporal (época do ano). Por exemplo, a AFE, faixas verdes nas margens do campo são consideradas uma boa fonte de alimento, no sul e leste da Europa, durante todo ano, mas ineficazes, no norte e oeste da Europa, no início do ano. Nenhuma EFA alcançou pontuações elevadas na categoria de recursos (fonte de alimento), quando submetida ao maneio padrão, sendo consideradas ineficientes, na segunda metade do ano. Os especialistas envolvidos identificaram oportunidades de melhoria substancial na qualidade do habitat, através da adopção de práticas de maneio das EFAs mais “amigáveis” para com os polinizadores. No entanto, a melhoria das práticas de maneio das EFAs por si só, dificilmente garantirá todos os requisitos necessários para a manutenção das populações de polinizadores. A nossa avaliação sugere que a combinação de práticas de má gestão (maneio), diferenças inerentes à qualidade do habitat dos polinizadores e o aumento do bias que resulta da utilização de espécies de crescimento rápido ou fixadoras de azoto limitam severamente o papel e potencial destas estruturas na manutenção das populações de polinizadores nas paisagens agrícolas europeias. Implicações políticas . A conservação dos polinizadores ajuda a proteger os serviços de polinização providenciados por estes. O nosso estudo destaca a necessidade de criar uma variedade de habitats interconectados e geridos de forma que se complementem na oferta de recursos (alimento, locais de nidificação e recursos para as larvas) aos polinizadores. Para atingir este objectivo, a PAC pós‐2020 deve adoptar uma visão holística na implementação das EFAs, que integre os diferentes programas destinados a protecção da biodiversidade (por exemplo, maior condicionalidade, esquemas ecológicos, e medidas agroambientais e de adaptação climática). Para melhorar a qualidade do habitat, recomendamos uma estrutura de monitorização eficaz suportada por indicadores quantitativos e qualitativos orientados para metas, que permitam facilitar a tomada de decisões direcionadas especificamente para as EFAs, e que a colaboração entre os gestores da terra (agricultores) seja incentivada.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0021-8901 , 1365-2664
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2020
    ZDB Id: 2020408-5
    ZDB Id: 410405-5
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 3
    Online-Ressource
    Online-Ressource
    Wiley ; 2018
    In:  Methods in Ecology and Evolution Vol. 9, No. 1 ( 2018-01), p. 7-9
    In: Methods in Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 9, No. 1 ( 2018-01), p. 7-9
    Kurzfassung: Conservation of biodiversity involves dealing with problems caused by humans, by applying solutions that comprise actions by humans. Understanding human attitudes, knowledge and behaviour are thus central to conservation research and practice. The special feature brings together authors from a range of disciplines (ecology, human geography, political science, land economy, management) to examine a set of qualitative techniques used in conservation research: Interviews, Focus group discussion, The Nominal Group Technique and multi‐criteria decision analysis. These techniques can be used for a range of purposes—most notably to understand people's perspectives, values and attitudes and to gather information about approaches to management of species, ecosystems or natural resources. Incorporating human values, perceptions, judgements and knowledge into conservation decision making is an important role for qualitative techniques; they provide robust means for submitting this information or knowledge as evidence. The articles in this special feature highlight a worrying extent of poor justification and inadequate reporting of qualitative methods in the conservation literature. To improve and encourage greater use of these techniques in conservation science, we urge improved reporting of rationales and methods, along with innovation, adaptation and further testing of the methods themselves.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 2041-210X , 2041-210X
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2018
    ZDB Id: 2528492-7
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 4
    In: Methods in Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 10, No. 10 ( 2019-10), p. 1690-1701
    Kurzfassung: The ability to identify and quantify the constituent plant species that make up a mixed‐species sample of pollen has important applications in ecology, conservation, and agriculture. Recently, metabarcoding protocols have been developed for pollen that can identify constituent plant species, but there are strong reasons to doubt that metabarcoding can accurately quantify their relative abundances. A PCR‐free, shotgun metagenomics approach has greater potential for accurately quantifying species relative abundances, but applying metagenomics to eukaryotes is challenging due to low numbers of reference genomes. We have developed a pipeline, RevMet (Reverse Metagenomics) that allows reliable and semi‐quantitative characterization of the species composition of mixed‐species eukaryote samples, such as bee‐collected pollen, without requiring reference genomes. Instead, reference species are represented only by ‘genome skims’: low‐cost, low‐coverage, short‐read sequence datasets. The skims are mapped to individual long reads sequenced from mixed‐species samples using the MinION, a portable nanopore sequencing device, and each long read is uniquely assigned to a plant species. We genome‐skimmed 49 wild UK plant species, validated our pipeline with mock DNA mixtures of known composition, and then applied RevMet to pollen loads collected from wild bees. We demonstrate that RevMet can identify plant species present in mixed‐species samples at proportions of DNA ≥ 1%, with few false positives and false negatives, and reliably differentiate species represented by high versus low amounts of DNA in a sample. RevMet could readily be adapted to generate semi‐quantitative datasets for a wide range of mixed eukaryote samples. Our per‐sample costs were £90 per genome skim and £60 per pollen sample, and new versions of sequencers available now will further reduce these costs.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 2041-210X , 2041-210X
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2019
    ZDB Id: 2528492-7
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 5
    In: Ecological Entomology, Wiley, Vol. 40, No. S1 ( 2015-09), p. 22-35
    Kurzfassung: In 2013, an opportunity arose in E ngland to develop an agri‐environment package for wild pollinators, as part of the new C ountryside S tewardship scheme launched in 2015. It can be understood as a ‘policy window’, a rare and time‐limited opportunity to change policy, supported by a narrative about pollinator decline and widely supported mitigating actions. An agri‐environment package is a bundle of management options that together supply sufficient resources to support a target group of species. This paper documents information that was available at the time to develop such a package for wild pollinators. Four questions needed answering: (1) Which pollinator species should be targeted? (2) Which resources limit these species in farmland? (3) Which management options provide these resources? (4) What area of each option is needed to support populations of the target species? Focussing on wild bees, we provide tentative answers that were used to inform development of the package. There is strong evidence that floral resources can limit wild bee populations, and several sources of evidence identify a set of agri‐environment options that provide flowers and other resources for pollinators. The final question could only be answered for floral resources, with a wide range of uncertainty. We show that the areas of some floral resource options in the basic W ild P ollinator and F armland W ildlife P ackage (2% flower‐rich habitat and 1 km flowering hedgerow), are sufficient to supply a set of six common pollinator species with enough pollen to feed their larvae at lowest estimates, using minimum values for estimated parameters where a range was available. We identify key sources of uncertainty, and stress the importance of keeping the Package flexible, so it can be revised as new evidence emerges about how to achieve the policy aim of supporting pollinators on farmland.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0307-6946 , 1365-2311
    URL: Issue
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2015
    ZDB Id: 2020189-8
    ZDB Id: 196048-9
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 6
    In: Diversity and Distributions, Wiley, Vol. 21, No. 6 ( 2015-06), p. 722-730
    Kurzfassung: A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low‐intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species‐rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under‐representation of the low‐intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence‐based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low‐intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species‐rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 1366-9516 , 1472-4642
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2015
    ZDB Id: 2020139-4
    ZDB Id: 1443181-6
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 7
    In: Insect Conservation and Diversity, Wiley, Vol. 6, No. 3 ( 2013-05), p. 435-446
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 1752-458X
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2013
    ZDB Id: 2404613-9
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 8
    In: Soil Use and Management, Wiley
    Kurzfassung: Sustainable soil management is essential to prevent agricultural soil degradation and maintain food production and core soil‐based ecosystem services. Regenerative agriculture, one approach to sustainable soil management, is rapidly gaining traction in UK farming and policy. However, it is unclear what farmers themselves consider to be sustainable soil management practices, and how these relate to the principles of regenerative agriculture. Further, there is little insight into how sustainable soil management is currently promoted in agricultural knowledge and innovation services (AKIS). To address these knowledge gaps, we undertook the first national‐scale survey of sustainable soil management practices in the United Kingdom and complemented it with targeted interviews. We found high levels of awareness ( 〉 60%) and uptake ( 〉 30%) of most sustainable soil management practices among mixed and arable farmers. Importantly, 92% of respondents considered themselves to be practising sustainable soil management. However, our analysis shows that farmers combine practices in different ways. Not all these combinations correspond to the full set of regenerative agriculture principles of reduced soil disturbance, soil cover and crop diversity. To better understand the relationship between existing sustainable soil management practices in the United Kingdom and regenerative agriculture principles, we derive a “regenerative agriculture score” by allocating individual practices among the principles of regenerative agriculture. Farmers who self‐report that they are managing soil sustainably tend to score more highly across all five principles. We further find that sustainable soil management messaging is fragmented and that few AKIS networks have sustainable soil management as their primary concern. Overall, our study finds that there are multiple understandings of sustainable soil management among UK farmers and land managers and that they do not correspond to regenerative agriculture principles in a straightforward way. This diversity and variety in sustainable soil management needs to be taken into account in future policy and research.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0266-0032 , 1475-2743
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2023
    ZDB Id: 742151-5
    ZDB Id: 2020513-2
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 9
    In: Ecology Letters, Wiley, Vol. 20, No. 5 ( 2017-05), p. 673-689
    Kurzfassung: Worldwide, human appropriation of ecosystems is disrupting plant–pollinator communities and pollination function through habitat conversion and landscape homogenisation. Conversion to agriculture is destroying and degrading semi‐natural ecosystems while conventional land‐use intensification (e.g. industrial management of large‐scale monocultures with high chemical inputs) homogenises landscape structure and quality. Together, these anthropogenic processes reduce the connectivity of populations and erode floral and nesting resources to undermine pollinator abundance and diversity, and ultimately pollination services. Ecological intensification of agriculture represents a strategic alternative to ameliorate these drivers of pollinator decline while supporting sustainable food production, by promoting biodiversity beneficial to agricultural production through management practices such as intercropping, crop rotations, farm‐level diversification and reduced agrochemical use. We critically evaluate its potential to address and reverse the land use and management trends currently degrading pollinator communities and potentially causing widespread pollination deficits. We find that many of the practices that constitute ecological intensification can contribute to mitigating the drivers of pollinator decline. Our findings support ecological intensification as a solution to pollinator declines, and we discuss ways to promote it in agricultural policy and practice.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 1461-023X , 1461-0248
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2017
    ZDB Id: 2020195-3
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 10
    In: Conservation Biology, Wiley, Vol. 36, No. 4 ( 2022-08)
    Kurzfassung: Article impact statement : Insect pollination services can be assessed rapidly under varying budgets with desk‐based methods, field surveys, and exclusion experiments.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0888-8892 , 1523-1739
    URL: Issue
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Wiley
    Publikationsdatum: 2022
    ZDB Id: 2020041-9
    SSG: 12
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
Schließen ⊗
Diese Webseite nutzt Cookies und das Analyse-Tool Matomo. Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier...