196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25753513)
1. Targeted agri-environment schemes significantly improve the population size of common farmland bumblebee species.
Wood TJ; Holland JM; Hughes WO; Goulson D
Mol Ecol; 2015 Apr; 24(8):1668-80. PubMed ID: 25753513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An interspecific comparison of foraging range and nest density of four bumblebee (Bombus) species.
Knight ME; Martin AP; Bishop S; Osborne JL; Hale RJ; Sanderson RA; Goulson D
Mol Ecol; 2005 May; 14(6):1811-20. PubMed ID: 15836652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comparison of techniques for assessing farmland bumblebee populations.
Wood TJ; Holland JM; Goulson D
Oecologia; 2015 Apr; 177(4):1093-102. PubMed ID: 25676106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Colony growth of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, in improved and conventional agricultural and suburban habitats.
Goulson D; Hughes W; Derwent L; Stout J
Oecologia; 2002 Jan; 130(2):267-273. PubMed ID: 28547150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of habitat composition and landscape structure on worker foraging distances of five bumble bee species.
Redhead JW; Dreier S; Bourke AF; Heard MS; Jordan WC; Sumner S; Wang J; Carvell C
Ecol Appl; 2016 Apr; 26(3):726-39. PubMed ID: 27411246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Bumblebees experience landscapes at different spatial scales: possible implications for coexistence.
Westphal C; Steffan-Dewenter I; Tscharntke T
Oecologia; 2006 Aug; 149(2):289-300. PubMed ID: 16758219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Conservation genetics, foraging distance and nest density of the scarce Great Yellow Bumblebee (Bombus distinguendus).
Charman TG; Sears J; Green RE; Bourke AF
Mol Ecol; 2010 Jul; 19(13):2661-74. PubMed ID: 20561194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Bumble bee nest abundance, foraging distance, and host-plant reproduction: implications for management and conservation.
Geib JC; Strange JP; Galenj C
Ecol Appl; 2015 Apr; 25(3):768-78. PubMed ID: 26214921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Supporting local diversity of habitats and species on farmland: a comparison of three wildlife-friendly schemes.
Hardman CJ; Harrison DP; Shaw PJ; Nevard TD; Hughes B; Potts SG; Norris K
J Appl Ecol; 2016 Feb; 53(1):171-180. PubMed ID: 27570258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Winter active bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) achieve high foraging rates in urban Britain.
Stelzer RJ; Chittka L; Carlton M; Ings TC
PLoS One; 2010 Mar; 5(3):e9559. PubMed ID: 20221445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Going native? Flower use by bumblebees in English urban gardens.
Hanley ME; Awbi AJ; Franco M
Ann Bot; 2014 Apr; 113(5):799-806. PubMed ID: 24647914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Fine-scale spatial genetic structure of common and declining bumble bees across an agricultural landscape.
Dreier S; Redhead JW; Warren IA; Bourke AF; Heard MS; Jordan WC; Sumner S; Wang J; Carvell C
Mol Ecol; 2014 Jul; 23(14):3384-95. PubMed ID: 24980963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries.
Kleijn D; Baquero RA; Clough Y; Díaz M; De Esteban J; Fernández F; Gabriel D; Herzog F; Holzschuh A; Jöhl R; Knop E; Kruess A; Marshall EJ; Steffan-Dewenter I; Tscharntke T; Verhulst J; West TM; Yela JL
Ecol Lett; 2006 Mar; 9(3):243-54; discussion 254-7. PubMed ID: 16958888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Bumble bee species' responses to a targeted conservation measure depend on landscape context and habitat quality.
Carvell C; Osborne JL; Bourke AF; Freeman SN; Pywell RF; Heard MS
Ecol Appl; 2011 Jul; 21(5):1760-71. PubMed ID: 21830716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Non-target effects of agri-environmental schemes on solitary bees and fungi in the United Kingdom.
Lunn K; Frøslev T; Rhodes M; Taylor L; Oliveira HFM; Gresty CEA; Clare EL
Bull Entomol Res; 2022 Dec; 112(6):734-744. PubMed ID: 36082699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes.
Kleijn D; Berendse F; Smit R; Gilissen N
Nature; 2001 Oct; 413(6857):723-5. PubMed ID: 11607029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Flower preferences and pollen transport networks for cavity-nesting solitary bees: Implications for the design of agri-environment schemes.
Gresty CEA; Clare E; Devey DS; Cowan RS; Csiba L; Malakasi P; Lewis OT; Willis KJ
Ecol Evol; 2018 Aug; 8(15):7574-7587. PubMed ID: 30151172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Genetic diversity and mass resources promote colony size and forager densities of a social bee (Bombus pascuorum) in agricultural landscapes.
Herrmann F; Westphal C; Moritz RF; Steffan-Dewenter I
Mol Ecol; 2007 Mar; 16(6):1167-78. PubMed ID: 17391404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Habitat and forage associations of a naturally colonising insect pollinator, the tree bumblebee Bombus hypnorum.
Crowther LP; Hein PL; Bourke AF
PLoS One; 2014; 9(9):e107568. PubMed ID: 25259579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Bumblebee family lineage survival is enhanced in high-quality landscapes.
Carvell C; Bourke AF; Dreier S; Freeman SN; Hulmes S; Jordan WC; Redhead JW; Sumner S; Wang J; Heard MS
Nature; 2017 Mar; 543(7646):547-549. PubMed ID: 28297711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
