Philippa Kaur

1.Watson, J. E. M. et al. The exceptional value of intact forest ecosystems. Nat. Eco. Evo. 2, 599–610 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.European Commission. in COM(2020) 380 final (Brussels, 2020).3.Vandekerkhove, K. et al. Reappearance of Old-Growth Elements in Lowland Woodlands in Northern Belgium: Do the Associated Species Follow? Silva Fenn. 45, 909–935 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Di Marco, M., Ferrier, S., Harwood, T. D., Hoskins, A. J. & Watson, J. E. Wilderness areas halve the extinction risk of terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 573, 582–585 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Frey, S. J. K. et al. Spatial models reveal the microclimatic buffering capacity of old-growth forests. Sci. Adv. 2, e1501392 (2016).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Zhou, G. Y. et al. Old-growth forests can accumulate carbon in soils. Science 314, 1417–1417 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
7.Burrascano, S., Keeton, W. S., Sabatini, F. M. & Blasi, C. Commonality and variability in the structural attributes of moist temperate old-growth forests: A global review. For. Ecol. Manag. 291, 458–479 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Bauhus, J., Puettmann, K. & Messier, C. Silviculture for old-growth attributes. For. Ecol. Manag. 258, 525–537 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Moore, K. D. In the shadow of the cedars: the spiritual values of old-growth forests. Conserv. Biol. 21, 1120–1123 (2007).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
10.FOREST EUROPE. State of Europe’s Forests 2015. (Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Madrid, 2015).11.Ceccherini, G. et al. Abrupt increase in harvested forest area over Europe after 2015. Nature 583, 72–77 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
12.Levers, C. et al. Drivers of forest harvesting intensity patterns in Europe. For. Ecol. Manag. 315, 160–172 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Potapov, P. et al. The last frontiers of wilderness: Tracking loss of intact forest landscapes from 2000 to 2013. Sci. Adv. 3 (2017).14.Schickhofer, M. & Schwarz, U. Inventory of Potential Primary and Old-Growth Forest Areas in Romania (PRIMOFARO). Identifying the largest intact forests in the temperate zone of the European Union. (Euronatur Foundation, 2019).15.Knorn, J. et al. Continued loss of temperate old-growth forests in the Romanian Carpathians despite an increasing protected area network. Environ. Conserv. 40, 182–193 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Court of Justice of the European Union. C-441/17 – Commission v Poland (Forêt de Białowieża) Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 April 2018 (2018).17.Chylarecki, P. & Selva, N. Ancient forest: spare it from clearance. Nature 530, 419–419 (2016).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
18.Earthsight. Complicit in corruption. How billion-dollar firms and EU governments are failing Ukraine’s forests. (Earthsight, 2018).19.Mikoláš, M. et al. Primary forest distribution and representation in a Central European landscape: Results of a large-scale field-based census. For. Ecol. Manag. 449, 117466 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Hance, J. IKEA Logging Old-growth Forest for Low-price Furniture in Russia. https://news.mongabay.com/2012/05/ikea-logging-old-growth-forest-for-low-price-furniture-in-russia/ (2012).21.Sabatini, F. M. et al. Protection gaps and restoration opportunities for primary forests in Europe. Divers. Distrib. 26, 1646–1662 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Barredo Cano, J. I. et al. Mapping and assessment of primary and old-growth forests in Europe. (EUR 30661 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, 2021).23.Adam, D. & Vrška, T. Important localities of old-growth forests in Landscape Atlas of the Czech Republic (eds T Hrnčiarová, P Mackovčin, & I Zvara) (Ministry of Environment and Silva Tarouca Research Institute, Prague–Silva Tarouca Research Institute for Landscape and Ornamental Gardening, 2009).24.Diaci, J. Virgin forests and forest reserves in Central and East European countries-History, present status and future development. Proceedings of the invited lecturers’ reports presented at the COST E4 management committee and working groups meeting in Ljubljana, Slovenia (1999).25.Kirchmeir, H. & Kovarovics, A. Nomination Dossier “Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe“ as extension to the existing Natural World Heritage Site “Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and the Ancient Beech Forests of Germany” (1133bis). (2016).26.García Feced, C., Berglund, H. & Strnad, M. Scoping document: information related to European old growth forests. (ETC/BD report to the EEA, 2015).27.Veen, P. et al. Virgin forests in Romania and Bulgaria: results of two national inventory projects and their implications for protection. Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 1805–1819 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Ibisch, P. L. & Ursu, A. Potential primary forests of Romania. (Greenpeace CEE Romania; Centre for Econics and Ecosystem Management, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development; Geography Department, A. I. Cuza University of Iași, 2017).29.Spracklen, B. D. & Spracklen, D. V. Identifying European Old-Growth Forests using Remote Sensing: A Study in the Ukrainian Carpathians. Forests 10, 127 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Frank, G. et al. COST Action E27. Protected Forest Areas in Europe-analysis and harmonisation (PROFOR): results, conclusions and recommendations. (Federal Research and Training Centre for Forests, Natural Hazards and Landscape (BFW), 2007).31.Sabatini, F. M. et al. Where are Europe’s last primary forests? Divers. Distrib. 24, 1426–1439 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.McRoberts, R. E., Susanne, W., Gherardo, C. & Elizabeth, L. Assessing Forest Naturalness. For. Sci. 58, 294–309 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Sabatini, F. M. et al. European Primary Forest Database. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13194095.v1 (2020).34.FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Terms and definitions. (FAO, 2015).35.Buchwald, E. A hierarchical terminology for more or less natural forests in relation to sustainable management and biodiversity conservation in Proceedings: Third expert meeting on harmonizing forest-related definitions for use by various stakeholders (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2005).36.Blasi, C., Burrascano, S., Maturani, A. & Sabatini, F. M. Old-growth forests in Italy. (Palombi Editori, 2010).37.Cateau, E. et al. Le patrimoine forestier des réserves naturelles. Focus sur les forêts à caractère naturel. Cahier n°7. (Réserves Naturelles de France, 2017).38.Svoboda, M. et al. Landscape-level variability in historical disturbance in primary Picea abies mountain forests of the Eastern Carpathians, Romania. J. Veg. Sci. 25, 386–401 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Potapov, P. et al. Mapping the world’s intact forest landscapes by remote sensing. Ecol. Soc. 13 (2008).40.Britz, H. et al. Nomination of the “Ancient Beech Forests of Germany” as Extension to the World Natural heritage “Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians”. Nationale Naturlandschaften, Federal Republic of Germany. Nieden-stein: Specialised editing Cognitio Kommunikation & Planung (2009).41.UNEP-WCMC & IUCN. Protected Area Profile for Ancient and Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe from the World Database of Protected Areas https://www.protectedplanet.net/903141 (2019).42.EEA. Biogeographical regions of Europe https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/biogeographical-regions-europe-3 (2016).43.EEA. European forest types. Categories and types for sustainable forest management reporting and policy. (EEA Technical Report No 9/2006. EEA, Copenhagen, 2006).44.Bohn, U. et al. Map of the natural vegetation of Europe. Explanatory text with CD-ROM, (German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany, 2003).45.Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing v. 3.6.1. R Foundation for Statistical Computing http://www.R-project.org/ (2019).47.Miljødirektoratet. (2016).48.FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Desk reference. 245 (FAO, Rome, 2015).49.FOREST EUROPE. Quantitative Indicators Country reports 2015 https://foresteurope.org/state-europes-forests-2015-report/#1476295965372-d3bb1dd0-e9a0 (2015).50.Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E. & Gorelick, N. A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. Remote Sens. Environ. 205, 131–140 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Kennedy, E. R. et al. Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. Remote Sensing 10 (2018).52.Gorelick, N. et al. Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. Remote Sens. Environ. 202, 18–27 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z. & Cohen, W. B. Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr—Temporal segmentation algorithms. Remote Sens. Environ. 114, 2897–2910 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Griffiths, P., Van Der Linden, S., Kuemmerle, T. & Hostert, P. A pixel-based landsat compositing algorithm for large area land cover mapping IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 6, 2088–2101 (2013).55.Cohen, W. B. & Spies, T. A. Estimating structural attributes of Douglas-fir/western hemlock forest stands from Landsat and SPOT imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 41, 1–17 (1992).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Czerwinski, C. J., King, D. J. & Mitchell, S. W. Mapping forest growth and decline in a temperate mixed forest using temporal trend analysis of Landsat imagery, 1987–2010. Remote Sens. Environ. 141, 188–200 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z. & Kennedy, R. Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync—Tools for calibration and validation. Remote Sens. Environ. 114, 2911–2924 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Grogan, K., Pflugmacher, D., Hostert, P., Kennedy, R. & Fensholt, R. Cross-border forest disturbance and the role of natural rubber in mainland Southeast Asia using annual Landsat time series. Remote Sens. Environ. 169, 438–453 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
59.De Marzo, T. et al. Characterizing forest disturbances across the Argentine Dry Chaco based on Landsat time series. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 98, 102310 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Frank, A. Inventering av nyckelbiotoper: resultat till och med 2003. (Skogsstyr., 2004).61.Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten. LstAC Skogar med höga naturvärden ovan gränsen för fjällnära skog 2003–2015 https://ext-geodatakatalog.lansstyrelsen.se/GeodataKatalogen/ (2019).62.Naturvårdsverket. Skyddsvärda statliga skogar http://mdp.vic-metria.nu/miljodataportalen/GetMetaDataById?UUID=3919E66E-2E09-440D-9171-B5074DF0C0ED (2017).63.Naturvårdsverket. Skogliga värdekärnor http://gpt.vic-metria.nu/data/land/skogliga_vardekarnor_2016.zip (2016).64.Naturvårdsverket. Preciserad kartering av kontinuitetsskog i Jämtlands län http://gpt.vic-metria.nu/data/land/Preciserad_kskog_jamtland.zip (2019).65.Ahlkrona, E., Giljam, C. & Wennberg, S. Kartering av kontinuitetsskogi boreal region. Metria AB på uppdrag av Naturvårdsverket (2017).66.Naturvårdsverket. Skyddad fjallbarrskog https://gpt.vic-metria.nu/data/land/NMD/Skyddad_Fjallbarrskog.zip (2019).67.Trotsiuk, V. et al. A mixed severity disturbance regime in the primary Picea abies (L.) Karst. forests of the Ukrainian Carpathians. For. Ecol. Manag. 334, 144–153 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Kozák, D. et al. Profile of tree-related microhabitats in European primary beech-dominated forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 429, 363–374 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Garbarino, M. et al. Gap disturbances and regeneration patterns in a Bosnian old-growth forest: a multispectral remote sensing and ground-based approach. Ann. For. Sci. 69, 617–625 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Keren, S. et al. Comparative Structural Dynamics of the Janj Mixed Old-Growth Mountain Forest in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Are Conifers in a Long-Term Decline? Forests 5, 1243–1266 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Motta, R. et al. Structure, spatio-temporal dynamics and disturbance regime of the mixed beech–silver fir–Norway spruce old-growth forest of Biogradska Gora (Montenegro). Plant Biosyst. 149, 966–975 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
72.Motta, R. et al. Development of old-growth characteristics in uneven-aged forests of the Italian Alps. Eur. J. For. Res. 134, 19–31 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Panayotov, M. et al. Mountain coniferous forests in Bulgaria – structure and natural dynamics. (University of Forestry and Geosoft, 2016).74.Lõhmus, A. & Kraut, A. Stand structure of hemiboreal old-growth forests: Characteristic features, variation among site types, and a comparison with FSC-certified mature stands in Estonia. For. Ecol. Manag. 260, 155–165 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
75.EEA. Developing a forest naturalness indicator for Europe. Concept and methodology for a high nature value (HNV) forest indicator. (EEA Technical report No 13/2014, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014).76.Rossi, M., Bardin, P., Cateau, E. & Vallauri, D. Forêts anciennes de Méditerrané e et des montagnes limitrophes: références pour la naturalité régionale. WWF France, Marseille, France, 144 (2013).77.Myhre, T. Skogkur 2020. redningsplan for Norges unike skoger. WWF Verdens villmarksfond, Norges naturvernforbund, SABIMA (2012).78.Ruete, A., Snäll, T. & Jönsson, M. Dynamic anthropogenic edge effects on the distribution and diversity of fungi in fragmented old-growth forests. Ecol. Appl. 26, 1475–1485 (2016).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
79.Heiri, C., Wolf, A., Rohrer, L., Brang, P. & Bugmann, H. Successional pathways in Swiss mountain forest reserves. Eur. J. For. Res. 131, 503–518 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
80.Brang, P., Heiri, C. & Bugmann, H. Waldreservate: 50 Jahre natürliche Waldentwicklung in der Schweiz. (Haupt, 2011).81.Pantić, D. et al. Structural, production and dynamic characteristics of the strict forest reserve’Račanska šljivovica’on Mt. Tara. Glasnik Šumarskog fakulteta, 93–114 (2011).82.Savoie, J. M. et al. Vieilles forêts pyrénéennes de Midi-Pyrénées. Deuxième phase. Evaluation et cartographie des sites. Recommandations. Rapport final. (Ecole d’Ingénieurs de PURPAN/DREAL Midi-Pyrénées, 2015).83.Savoie, J. M. et al. Forêts pyrénéennes anciennes de Midi-Pyrénées. Rapport d’Etude de projet FEDER 2008–2011. 320 (Ecole d’Ingénieurs de PURPAN/DREAL Midi-Pyrénées, 2011).84.WWF Finland. Kansallisomaisuus turvaan – valtion omistamia suojelun arvoisia metsä- ja suoalueita, (WWF Suomen raportteja, 2012).85.Kitenberga, M. et al. A mixture of human and climatic effects shapes the 250-year long fire history of a semi-natural pine dominated landscape of Northern Latvia. For. Ecol. Manag. 441, 192–201 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
86.Baders, E., Senhofa, S., Purina, L. & Jansons, A. Natural succession of Norway spruce stands in hemiboreal forests: case study in Slitere national park, Latvia. Baltic Forestry 23, 522–528 (2017).
Google Scholar 
87.Kokarēviča, I. et al. Vegetation changes in boreo–nemoral forest stands depending on soil factors and past land use during an 80 year period of no human impact. Can. J. For. Res. 46, 376–386 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
88.Fernandez López, A. B. Parque Nacional de Garajonay, Patrimonio Mundial. (Organismo Autonomo Parques Nacionales, 2009).89.TRAGSATEC. Segundo inventario ecológico del Parque Nacional de Garajonay. (Parque Nacional de Garajonay, 2006).90.Fernández, A. B. & Gómez, L. Qué son los bosques antiguos de laurisilva. Su valor y situación en Canarias. La Gomera, entre bosques y taparuchas, 177–236 (2016).91.Matović, B. et al. Comparison of stand structure in managed and virgin european beech forests in Serbia. Šumarski list 142, 47–57 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
92.Kiš, A., Stojšić, V., & Dinić, A. In 2nd International Symposium on Nature Conservation. Proceedings 373–382 (Institute for Nature Conservation of Vojvodina Province, Novi Sad, 2016).93.Kobyakov, K. & Jakolev, J. Atlas of high conservation value areas, and analysis of gaps and representativeness of the protected area network in northwest Russia. (Finnish Environment Institute, 2013).94.Diku, A. & Shuka, L. Pyjet e vjetër të ahut në shqipëri (Old Beech forests in Albania). (PSEDA – ILIRIA, 2017).95.Burrascano, S. et al. It’s a long way to the top: Plant species diversity in the transition from managed to old-growth forests. J. Veg. Sci. 29, 98–109 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Zarzycki, K. Paprotniki i rośliny kwiatowe (rośliny naczyniowe). In: Flora i Fauna Pienin. (ed. Razowski J). Monogr. Pienińskie 1, 75–79 (2000).
Google Scholar 
2.Środoń, W. Pieniny w historii szaty roślinnej Podhala [Pieniny in the history of plant cover in Podhale region]. In : K. Zarzycki (ed.). Przyroda Pienin w obliczu zmian [The nature of the Pieniny Mts (West Carpathians) in face of the coming changes]. Stud. Nat. 30B, 115–126 (1982).
Google Scholar 
3.Deptuła, C. Nad rekonstrukcją dziejów regionu czartoryskiego w XIII I XIV wieku [On the reconstruction of the history of the Czorsztyn region from the 13th to 16th centuries]. Pieniny—Człowiek Przyroda 5, 21–35 (1997) (in Polish with English summary).
Google Scholar 
4.Kierś, M. (ed.) Wołosi: Nomadzi Bałkanów (Uniwersytet Jagielloński, 2013).
Google Scholar 
5.Oravcová, M. & Krupa, E. Pedigree analysis of the former Valachian sheep. Slovak. J. Anim. Sci. 44, 6–12 (2011).
Google Scholar 
6.Wace, A.J.B. & Thompson, M.S. The Nomads of the Balkans. Vol. 6 (Methuen & Co., 1914). https://archive.org/stream/nomadsofbalkansa00wace#page/n9/mode/2up. Accessed 28 June 2021.7.Stachurska-Swakoń, A. Phytogeographical aspects of grasses occuring in tall-herb vegetation in the Carpathians. in Grasses in Poland and Elsewhere (ed. Frey, L.). 39–47. (W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, 2009).8.Stachurska-Swakoń, A. Syntaxonomical revision of the communities with Rumex alpinus L. in the Carpathians. Phytocoenologia 39, 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1127/0340-269X/2009/0039-0217 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Ralska-Jasiewiczowa, M., Nalepka, D. & Goslar, T. Some problems of forest transformation at the transition to the oligocratic/Homo sapiens phase of the Holocene interglacial in northern lowlands of central Europe. Veg. Hist. Archaeobot. 12, 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-003-0021-8 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Pawłowski, B., Pawłowska, S. & Zarzycki, K. Zespoły roślinne kośnych łąk północnej części Tatr i Podtatrza. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. Pol. 6(2), 95–222 (1960).
Google Scholar 
11.Korzeniak, J. 6520* Mountain Yellow Trisetum and Bent-Grass Hay Meadows 55–67 (Methodological guide. GIOŚ, 2013).
Google Scholar 
12.Wróbel, I. Pasterstwo w regionie pienińskim [Sheep farming in the Pieniny region]. Pieniny Człowiek Przyroda 5, 43–52 (1997) (in Polish with English summary).
Google Scholar 
13.Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K., Palic, C. C., Stachurska-Swakoń, A., Nedeff, V. & Sandu, I. The causes of disappearance of sward lily Gladiolus imbricatus L from natural stands—Synthesis of current state of knowledge. Int. J. Conserv. Sci. 9, 821–834 (2018).
Google Scholar 
14.Wróbel, I. Szata roślinna Pienińskiego Parku Narodowego – podsumowanie Planu Ochrony na lata 2001–2020 [Plant cover of the Pieniny National Park – summing up the Protection Plan for the years 2001–2020]. Pieniny Człowiek Przyroda 8, 63–69 (2003).
Google Scholar 
15.Kubíková, P. & Zeidler, M. Habitat demands and population characteristics of the rare plant species Gladiolus imbricatus L. in the Frenštát region (NE Moravia, the Czech Republic). Čas. Slez. Muz. Opava 60(A), 154–164 (2011).
Google Scholar 
16.Mirek, Z., Piękoś-Mirkowa, H., Zając, A. & Zając, M. Flowering Plants and Pteridophytes of Poland, a Checklist (W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, 2002).
Google Scholar 
17.Hamilton, A. P. The European Gladioli. Quart. Bull. Alp. Gard. Soc. 44, 140–146 (1976).
Google Scholar 
18.Kornaś, J. M. & Medwecka-Kornaś, A. Zespoły roślinne Gorców. I. Naturalne i na wpół naturalne zespoły nieleśne. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. Polon. 13(2), 167–316 (1967).
Google Scholar 
19.Ascherson, P. & Engler, A. Beiträge zur Flora Westgaliziens und der Central-Karpaten. Osterr. Bot. Z. 15, 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01623075 (1865).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Wołoszczak, E. Zapiski botaniczne z Karpat Sądeckich. Spraw. Komis. Fizjogr. AU 30, 174–206 (1895).
Google Scholar 
21.Zapałowicz, H. Conspectus Florae Galiciae Criticus Vol. 1 (Nakł. Akad. Umiej., 1906).
Google Scholar 
22.Piękoś-Mirkowa, H. & Mirek, Z. Flora Polski. Rośliny Chronione (Oficyna Wydawnicza Multico, 2006).
Google Scholar 
23.Dembicz, I. et al. New locality of Trollius europaeus L. and Gladiolus imbricatus L. near Sochocin by Płońsk (Central Poland). Opole Sci. Soc. Nat. J. 44, 36–46 (2011).
Google Scholar 
24.Kropač, Z. & Mochnacký, S. Contribution to the segetal communities of Slovakia, Thaiszia. J. Bot. 19, 145–211 (2009).
Google Scholar 
25.Mirek, Z., Nikel, A. & Wilk, Ł. Ozdoba łąk reglowych. Tatry 4(50), 50–51 (2014).
Google Scholar 
26.Kołos, A. A new locality of Gladiolus imbricatus (Iridaceae) in the North Podlasie Lowland. Fragm. Florist. Geobot. Polon. 22(2), 390–395 (2015).
Google Scholar 
27.Falkowski, M. Nowe stanowisko Gladiolus imbricatus (Iridaceae) w dolinie środkowej Wisły. Fragm. Florist. Geobot. Polon. 9, 369–370 (2002).
Google Scholar 
28.Nowak, A. & Antonin, A. Interesujące stanowiska Gladiolus imbricatus (Iridaceae) w Bramie Morawskiej. Fragm. Florist. Geobot. Polon. 13(1), 17–22 (2006).
Google Scholar 
29.Stepansky, A., Kovalski, I. & Perl-Treves, R. Interspecific classification of melons (Cucumis melo L.) in view of their phenotypic and molecular variation. Plant Syst. Evol. 271, 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984373 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Gupta, M., Chyi, Y.-S., Romero-Sverson, J. & Owen. J.L. Amplification of DNA markers from evolutionarily diverse genomes using single primers of simple-sequence repeats. Theor. Appl. Genet. 89, 998–1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00224530 (1994).31.Sutkowska, A., Pasierbiński, A., Warzecha, T., Mandal, A. & Mitka, J. Refugial pattern of Bromus erectus in Central Europe based on ISSR fingerprinting. Acta Biol. Cracov. Ser. Bot. 55(2), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.2478/abcsb-2013-0026 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Bonin, A. et al. How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetic studies. Mol. Ecol. 3, 3261–3273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02346.x (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Vekemans, X. AFLP-surv 1.0: A Program for Genetic Diversity Analysis with AFLP (and RAPD) Population Data. https://ebe.ulb.ac.be/ebe/AFLP-SURV.html (Laboratoire de Génétique et d’Ecologie Végétales, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2002).34.Yeh, F., Yang, R. & Boyle, T. POPGENE Version 1.32. Microsoft-Based Freeware for Population Genetic Analysis. https://www.softpedia.com/get/Science-CAD/Popgene-Population-Genetic-Analysis.shtml (Molecular Biology and Biotechnology Center, University of Alberta, 1999).35.Schönswetter, P. & Tribsch, A. Vicariance and dispersal in the Alpine perennial Bupleurum stellatum L (Apiaceae). Taxon 54, 725–732. https://doi.org/10.2307/25065429 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Ehrich, D. AFLPdat: A collection of r functions for convenient handling of AFLP data. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6, 603–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01380.x. https://mybiosoftware.com/tag/aflpdat (2006).37.Paun, O., Schönswetter, P. & Winkler, M., Intrabiodiv Consortium & Tribsch, A. Historical divergence versus contemporary gene flow: Evolutionary history of the calcicole Ranunculus alpestris group (Ranunculaceae) in the European Alps and the Carpathians. Mol. Ecol. 17, 4263–4275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2008.03908.x (2008).38.Excoffier, L., Smouse, P. E. & Quattro, J. M. Analysis of molecular variance inferred from metric distances among DNA haplotypes: Application to human mitochondrial DNA restriction data. Genetics 131, 479–491. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/131.2.479 (1992).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
39.Excoffier, L., Laval, G. & Schneider, S. Arlequin (version 3.0): An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol. Biol. 1, 47–50. http://cmpg.unibe.ch/software/arlequin3/. https://doi.org/10.1177/117693430500100003 (2005).40.Lynch, M. & Milligan, B. Analysis of population-genetic structure using RAPD markers. Mol. Ecol. 3, 91–99. http://cmpg.unibe.ch/software/arlequin3/. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.1994.tb00109.x (1994).41.Saitou, N. & Nei, M. The neighbour-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4, 406–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040454 (1987).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
42.Makarenkov, V. T-Rex: Reconstructing and visualizing phylogenetic trees and reticulation networks. Bioinformatics 17, 664–668. http://www.fas.umontreal.ca/biol/casgrain/en/labo/t-rex. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/17.7.664 (2001).43.Makarenkov, V. & Legendre, P. The fitting of a tree metric to a given dissimilarity with the weighted least squares criterion. J. Classif. 16, 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003579900040 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Felsenstein, J. Phylip (Phylogeny Inference Package) Version 3.6. https://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip.html (University of Washington, 2005).45.Nei, M. & Li, W. H. Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 76, 5269–5273. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.76.10.5269 (1979).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
46.Kruskal, J. B. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A new numerical method. Psychometrika 29, 115–129 (1964).MathSciNet 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Rohlf, F. J. NTSYS-pc. Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis, Version 2.1. https://ntsyspc.software.informer.com/ (Exeter Software, 2002).48.Pritchard, J. K, Stephens, M. & Donelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959. http://web.stanford.edu/group/pritchardlab/structure.html (2000).49.Falush, D., Stephens, M. & Pritchard, J. K. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: Dominant markers and null alleles. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 574–578. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01758.x (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
50.Evanno, G., Regnaut, S. & Goudet, J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: A simulation study. Mol. Ecol. 14, 2611–2620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02553.x (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Nordborg, M., Hu, T. T., Ishino, Y., Jhaveri, J. & Toomajian, C. The pattern of polymorphism in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLOS Biol. 3(7), e196. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030196 (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
52.Dybova-Jachowicz, S. & Sadowska, A. (eds) Palinologia (Inst. Botaniki im. W. Szafera, Polska Akademia Nauk, 2003).
Google Scholar 
53.Cieślak, E., Szczepaniak, M., Kamiński, R. & Heine, W. Stan zachowania krytycznie zagrożonego gatunku Gladiolus paluster (Iridaceae) w Polsce – Analiza zmienności genetycznej osobników w uprawie Ogrodu Botanicznego Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego w kontekście prowadzonych działań ochronnych. Fragm. Florist. Geobot. Polon. 21(1), 49–66 (2014).
Google Scholar 
54.Kutlunina, N., Permyakova, M. & Belyaev, A. Genetic diversity and reproductive traits in triploid and tetraploid populations of Gladiolus tenuis (Iridaceae). Plant Syst. Evol. 303, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-016-1347-x (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Sutkowska, A., Pasierbiński, A., Warzecha, T. & Mitka, J. Multiple cryptic refugia of forest grass Bromus benekenii in Europe as revealed by ISSR fingerprinting and species distribution modelling. Plant Syst. Evol. 300, 1437–1452. https://doi.org/10.2478/abcsb-2013-0026 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Gajewski, Z, Boroń, P, Lenart-Boroń, A, Nowak, B., Sitek, E. & Mitka, J. Conservation of Primula farinosa in Poland with respect to the genetic structure of populations. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 87(2), 3577 (2018). https://doi.org/10.5586/asbp.3577.Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Stojak, J., McDevitt, A. D., Herman, J. S., Searle, J. B. & Wójcik, J. M. Post-glacial colonization of eastern Europe from the Carpathian refugium: evidence from mitochondrial DNA of the common vole Microtus arvalis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 115, 927–939. https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.1253541 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Szczepaniak, M. & Cieślak, E. Low level of genetic variation within Melica transsilvanica populations from the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland and the Pieniny Mts revealed by AFLPs analysis. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 76(4), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.5586/asbp.2007.036 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Bennett, K. D. & Provan, J. What do we mean by ‘refugia’?. Quatern. Sci. Rev. 27, 27–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2008.08.019 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Petit, R. J. et al. Glacial refugia: Hotspots but not melting pots of genetic diversity. Science 300(5625), 1563–1565. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1083264 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Brus, R. Growing evidence for the existence of glacial refugia of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) in the south-eastern Alps and north-western Dinaric Alps. Periodicum Biol. 112, 239–246 (2010).
Google Scholar 
62.Jŏgar, Ü. & Moora, M. Reintroduction of a rare plant (Gladiolus imbricatus) population to a river floodplain—How important is meadow management?. Restor. Ecol. 16, 382–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00435.x (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Mitka, J., Boroń, P., Wróblewska, A. & Bąba, W. AFLP analysis reveals intraspecific phylogenetic relationships and population genetic structure of two species of Aconitum in Central Europe. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 84(2), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.5586/asbp.2015.012 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Biernacka, M. Dawne oraz współczesne formy organizacji pasterstwa w Bieszczadach. Etnogr. Polska 6, 41–61. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JDjzqMdApxIJ:cyfrowaetnografia.pl/Content/454+&cd=1&hl=pl&ct=clnk&gl=pl (1962).65.Stachurska-Swakoń, A., Cieślak, E. & Ronikier, M. Phylogeography of subalpine tall-herb species in Central Europe: the case of Cicerbita alpina. Preslia 84, 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2012.01323.x (2012).Article 

Google Scholar  More

When introducing ARs as a fisheries management tool to Senegal, the Japanese management had the mindset of Japanese stakeholders, i.e., introducing fishing rights. However, after discussions with Senegalese stakeholders, it was decided that no-take areas would be delineated around ARs because the establishment of a strong fishing rights regime was not socially acceptable to the Senegalese fishing community. Japanese governance is based on the acceptance and respect of fishers towards individual, private AR concessions. In contrast, fishers in Senegal, and more widely in West Africa, are characterized by high mobility, particularly in the context of climate change and overexploitation18,19. Consequently, respect for local management regulations is lower, with open access being generally assumed. The basic concept of implementing a no-take area on the AR was not easily accepted by fishers. The immersion of AR concrete blocks was set as a top priority by managers at the expense of more complex socio-economic considerations, such as consciousness-raising activities and self-sustaining participative monitoring of the AR.The clear contradiction between the ecological knowledge of fishers and their behavior was explained by the well-known effects of open access resources on individual behavior. This phenomenon was also observed in our mathematical model. The processes in the mathematical model are in accordance with those perceived by the fishers, so that the results are also those expected by fisher’s local ecological knowledge. It is interesting to notice that the theoretical results presented here are the mathematical solutions of the model at equilibrium between fishing effort and fish population growth, i.e. after an oscillation period. It is obvious that short-term effect of fishing on the AR is always to increase the catch, but many fishers did perceive the longer-term effect of decreasing catches. The potential negative effect of the AR on catch when there is high fish attraction combined with high fishing pressure on the AR might explain the reluctance of a part of the fishers community to AR deployment (Fig. 2). In particular, the model illustrates that the AR attraction effect strongly determines the impact of the management. In general, fish attraction is the most immediate effect perceived after AR deployment11, as was true for our study16. Though the AR volume was relatively small (70 m3), the empty space between the higher blocks also contributes approximately 280 to 570 m3 of good habitat/refuge for schooling fish; therefore, it is actually difficult to accurately describe the volume that affects fish. Thus, it is difficult to say whether this AR is below or above the forecasted optimal volume in absence of fishing (120m3 with model parameters). The existence of an optimal volume for AR was also suggested by field studies as a trade off between food supply and refuge20, in line with our results. For management purposes, it is interesting to determine whether the AR is above or below this optimal level because if the volume is too small, the model predicted that any level of fishing on the AR would, in the long term, decrease the catch in the considered area. On the other hand, if the volume is above the optimal level, a small fishing effort on the AR could be authorized and would increase the total catch in the area.Field observation showed that the fish attraction effect was strong16 but precise estimation of this parameter cannot be inferred, as this would need, ideally, individual fish trajectories. Future field research on the attraction effect may permit estimating the AR attraction parameters. The model sensitivity test showed that the stronger the attraction parameter, the better the impact of the AR for the fisheries in case of no or small fishing effort on the AR (Fig. 3). But at the same time, the attraction is a strong incentive for fishers to fish on the AR, and the predicted benefit for fisheries in the fishing area rapidly vanishes when fishing effort on AR increases. This in turn provides further incentive for fishers to fish the AR, challenging the surveillance capacity. If fish attractiveness is strong and too many fishers fish on the AR, catch in the area will be concentrated on the AR, while the adjacent fishing area will be depleted, with catch levels lower than those prior to AR deployment.Specifically, in the context of generalized overfishing in Senegal21, deciding not to fish on the AR represents significant individual loss, despite being recognized as beneficial, globally22. It has been argued that this situation would rarely occur in small-scale fisheries, due to existing arrangements between individuals23. However, in the context of the highly mobile Senegalese artisanal fishing fleet and its overcapacity, as soon as the AR in Yenne was no longer subject to surveillance, it rapidly attracted fishers from other villages. Also, pre-existing arrangements between fishers might be overruled when new ARs are created, changing the structure of existing fishing grounds.At the time of the survey, the surveillance system set up by the co-management entities was not operational in our case study, because it was dependent on temporally limited external financing. These limitations are typical of short-term projects that focus on a single restricted area for a pre-determined duration, usually up to two years (e.g., NGOs, World Bank). Local fishers perceptions were globally in line with the model prediction that this AR fails to improve fisheries yield when surveillance is not in place to ensure AR regulations are observed, despite effective fish attraction and production existing in the AR.The model predicted that enhanced production on ARs could not keep pace with unrestricted access, which might be particularly true in Senegal where fishing effort rapidly reorganizes itself according to local yields24. Enhanced production due to the AR largely increases the catch if the fishing pressure on the AR remains null or very low, but it has no effect on the catch for higher fishing pressures on the AR (Fig. 3). These results were stable even if fish population growth, fish catchability, mobility and economic parameters could modulate the predicted amplitude of the catch and AR optimal volume. These results are consistent with existing theoretical studies of the impact of fisher movement to high production areas in and around MPAs25. Taking into account several species and their interactions (predation, competition) would lead to a very complex ecosystem model specific to the area (e.g. 26), with necessarily more assumptions. This model would necessarily be more difficult to share with fishers and other stakeholders. Both to simplify model structure and facilitate communication of results to stakeholders, we assumed in our model that the balance of entries exits and is in equilibrium, so that the migratory species did not affect the long-term equilibrium between fishing effort and fish abundance.The design of ARs could be adjusted to reduce the effect of illegal fishing by passively preventing both industrial and artisanal fishing activity. Complex structures are more effective for fish production and attraction27. We showed that, although production might have a limited effect on total catch, attraction can largely increase AR efficiency (total catch) if the rate of illegal fishing rate is very low or absent. Complex structures protect fish more effectively from small scale fishing gear28, including divers (Pers. Comm., Mamadou Sarr, Ouakam fishers committee). Thus, ARs should be appropriately designed to help mitigate potential issues28. Such designs might be more costly, and do not exclude the need for surveillance, but would enhance fisheries management, especially when surveillance cannot capture low levels of illegal fishing.Finally, if socio-economic and governance conditions are not met, well-intentioned AR projects will likely disturb the existing equilibrium among fishers that have different levels of access to the AR. Poor governance of marine resources has previously been described in West Africa, particularly in Senegal29, as has the failure of AR projects in a number of other developing countries9, which further deteriorate fishers trust and management plans efficiency30. In order to avoid that, NGO and governmental agencies driving ARs projects must consider that AR management induces collective costs before providing potentially collective gains. Thus, co-management that involves governmental institutions and fisher communities is required. Future management and adaptation plans for fishers, particularly in developing countries, should, therefore, focus efforts on raising long-term awareness of actors in both government institutions and fishing communities. At the level of institutional or development partners, long-term management costs should be included in the set-up of AR projects. For example, the local fishers committee of Yenne recently reported the establishment of a collective ship chandler whose profits are used to finance AR surveillance during the daytime. Subsequently, fishers noted an improvement in catches around the AR, even though illegal fishing likely continues on the AR at night (Pers. Comm. chair of local fishers committee). These observations support model predictions that low levels of illegal fishing might not disturb the positive impact of the AR. Alternatively surveillance effort could be supported by the community if benefits were managed according to ancestral traditions. Indeed, “no take area” regime on the AR would be in line with some past West African tribal laws, applied before the colonization era, which set marine area where fishing activities were restricted for occasional community celebrations. Collective processes where fishers and other stakeholders can design temporary no-take zones around the AR could increase fishers trust and compliance to the rules, fostering a positive socio-ecological feedback loop30.Hybridization of local and scientific knowledge, through the integration of natural sciences and social sciences, is key point for governance setting31,32,33. Indeed, the communication of the resulting hybrid knowledge in specific events gathering local stakeholders helps strengthen fisheries co-management for the establishment of surveillance and regulatory frameworks. This phenomenon was experienced during the public restitution of the present study with the community, fishers, children’s from local schools and governmental stakeholders. Science popularization of the study results was in French and local language (Wolof) retransmitted on national news (available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQqFU2P4XZU). Posters were exposed during the event, including pictures of local fishers interviewed and statements reflecting their own perception of how the artificial reef interacts with ecological processes and fisheries dynamics. Straightaway, stakeholders and local promoters of AR publicly expressed their concern and willingness to prioritize the setting up an efficient AR surveillance independent from external resources prior to increase AR deployments. Knowledge hybridization could produce more specific models that could be used for warning and advice, for example by considering potential impacts of ARs on species compositions3,34,35, environmental parameters36, and cascade effects on the trophic food web37. However this approach would need to be adapted to local social-ecological governance, which might require dedicated political-anthropological studies (see concept of adaptive co-management32).In summary, best practices should involve all stakeholders, consider local specificities, such as site configuration, governance, ecosystem, availability of ad hoc human and financial resources for AR surveillance, and define AR volume and design accordingly to these parameters. Thus, if plans exist to deploy ARs at large scales we recommend that legislation is strengthened, with detailed Environmental and social Impact Assessments38 to implement ARs, including considerations of long-term governance. More

Bagworm walking method using a ladder-like silk footholdWhen bagworms are reared in a plastic or glass cage, they walk not only on the floor but also on the walls or ceiling using only their three pairs of thoracic legs. The method by which they achieve this was clarified by placing a bagworm on black paper. Where the bagworm had walked, a ladder-like silk trace was observed on the black paper (Fig. 2a). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observation of one of the steps (or rungs) of the ladder-like trace revealed that each step was made up of a zigzag pattern of silk threads (Fig. 2b). Further magnified SEM observations revealed that the folded parts of the zigzag-spun thread were glued selectively to the substrate with adhesive whereas the remaining straight parts (hereafter, termed ‘bridges’ or ‘bridge threads’) were unglued (Fig. 2c–e).Figure 2Architecture of the ladder-like foothold. (a) A typical ladder-like foothold constructed by a bagworm on black paper, (b) an enlarged image showing one of the steps in the foothold and (c) a scanning electron microscopy image of the step shown in (b). The unglued bridge threads and a glued turn in the step shown in (c) are magnified in (d) and (e), respectively. (f) An enlarged image of four continuous steps in the foothold shown in (a). The neighbouring steps are connected via a single thread indicated by the arrows. (g) A schematic depiction of the basic architecture of the foothold; blue lines and green circles correspond to the silk thread and glued parts, respectively. (h) A photograph of a bagworm constructing a foothold on a transparent plastic board.Full size imageNotably, the steps of the foothold were not independent but rather always connected with neighbouring steps via a single thread (Fig. 2f). The overall basic construction of the foothold is schematically depicted in Fig. 2g. We found that the foothold was constructed in one continuous movement and always made of a single thread regardless of walking distance or time; therefore, a continuous thread exceeding a length of 100 m could be collected from one foothold14. We also observed bagworm climbing behaviour on a transparent plastic board, which clarified the important role of the silk trace as a foothold (Fig. 2h). During this behaviour, the bagworm used its sickle claws (Fig. 1e) to hook its second and third pairs of thoracic legs onto the first and second newest steps, respectively, and constructed the next step by spinning silk with a zigzag motion of the head and the skilful use of the first pair of thoracic legs. When the bagworm advanced one step, it always first shifted its third pair of thoracic legs to the next step before then shifting its second pair of thoracic legs to the newest step to avoid overloading this step, which may not yet be fully adhered to the surface (see Supplementary Movie S1). Because of this construction method, the interval distance between neighbouring steps is automatically determined by the interval between the thoracic legs. By repeating this process, the bagworm can advance forward slowly but steadily. This walking method was commonly observed on a horizontal floor surface, vertical wall, or horizontal ceiling. Although we have mainly described and shown observations from E. variegate here, with the exception of Supplementary Fig. S4 and Movie S1, we also observed instances of walking behaviour in other species, namely Eumeta minuscula, Mahasena aurea, Nipponopsyche fuscescens and Bambalina sp. (for a movie on E. minuscula walking behaviour, wherein it climbs a vertical wall, see Supplementary Movie S2). For at least 100 individuals of these bagworm species, we observed essentially identical walking behaviour to that described in the present study without exceptions for locomotion on substrates with slippery surfaces.Based on our observations, we asked the following question: how do bagworms selectively glue the folded parts of the foothold onto the substrate? Real-time observation of the tip of the spinneret (i.e. the spigot) through a transparent plastic board during the construction of the foothold revealed that adhesive was selectively discharged to attach the folded parts to the substrate; this process could be distinguished from the continuous spinning of the silk thread (for a movie showing construction behaviour, see Supplementary Movie S3). Figure 3a–g shows a time-sequence of foothold construction with enlarged images in the vicinity of the spinneret provided, whereas Fig. 3h depicts a schematic trace of the construction process. It was clearly noted that the bagworm discharged the adhesive only at the folded parts (shown in Fig. 3a–c,e,f; termed the ‘glued turn’) and not at the straight bridge parts (shown in Fig. 3d,g; termed the ‘unglued bridge thread’). From these time-sequence observations, we concluded that the bagworm controls the discharge of adhesive in an ‘on and off’ manner as necessary (essentially the same construction behaviours were confirmed for at least 20 individuals).Figure 3Foothold construction. (a–g) (left side) Time-sequence images taken during foothold construction and (right side) enlarged images of the vicinity of the spinneret (corresponding to the yellow rectangular area in each left-side image). The time-sequence images correspond to the parts of the schematic trace of foothold construction depicted by the red line in (h). In each right-side image and the schematic trace, the part of silk thread at which the adhesive was discharged is traced with a light-blue line. Green arrows in the right-side images show the direction of travel of the spinneret.Full size imagePassages of fibroin brins and adhesiveWe next investigated the spinning mechanism that enables continuous spinning of silk thread together with the selective discharge of adhesive via a single spigot. To this end, we observed the morphology of the bagworm from the silk gland to the spigot. Figure 4a shows the area in the vicinity of the spinneret, dissected and isolated from an E. variegata bagworm, which included a pair of silk glands and plural adhesive glands. As we previously reported21, the exterior shape of the silk gland in E. variegata (see Supplementary Fig. S1) is almost the same shape as that in the silkworm Bombyx mori and it is subdivided into three parts: the anterior (ASG), middle (MSG) and posterior (PSG) silk glands. We also previously confirmed that fibroin heavy chain (h-fib), fibroin light chain (l-fib) and fiboinhexamerin genes are expressed dominantly in the PSG, while sericin is expressed in the MSG, which strongly suggests that division-selective production of each protein exists in E. variegata (as has been shown in B. mori22). Figure 4b shows a magnified image of the spinneret including the end of the ASG. Beyond the pair of ASGs, which are merged into a common tube, a silk press and spinning tube appear before the spigot. This basic passage of silk fibroin from the ASG to the spigot is essentially the same as the passage observed in B. mori23. However, more detailed morphological observations of the inner structure of the passage revealed several obvious differences between E. variegata and B. mori.Figure 4Structural examination of the passages of fibroin brins and adhesive. (a) An optical microscope image of the area in the vicinity of a spinneret isolated from a female bagworm in the final instar stage. Indicated by arrows is a pair of silk glands (SG), one of the adhesive glands (ADG) and the spinneret (SP). (b) An optical microscope image of the passage including the (1) end of the anterior SGs (ASGs), (2) common tube, (3) silk press, (4) spinning tube and (5) spigot. (c–j) Optical microscope images showing cross-sections of the passage of fibroin brins obtained from the corresponding positions (c–j) in image (b). To focus on the fibroin brins and its passage, the surrounding outer part was removed so that a pair of fibroin brins was revealed in each image (except for image (c), which shows only one side of the ASG). Unmagnified images of (f–j), including the outer part, are shown in Supplementary Fig. S2. (k–n) 3D X-ray CT images of the spinneret: (k) overview, (l) cross-sectional top view, (m) cross-sectional side view and (n) passage of the fibroin brins and corresponding cross-sectional images at various positions. In the cross-sectional side view (m), the sheath and core parts are coloured blue and pink, respectively. (o) Image of the tip of a spigot from which adhesive is overflowing and a silk thread is emerging.Full size imageCross-sectional images along the spinneret are shown in Fig. 4c–j; these focus on the silk brins and their passage (unmagnified versions of the images in Fig. 4f–j are shown in Supplementary Fig. S2). The fibroin brins have an approximately round cross-sectional shape at the end of the ASG (Fig. 4c) and are merged at a common tube, which deforms their round shape slightly (Fig. 4d). The fibroin brins seem to be coated with a thin layer of sericin after the MSG, similar to B. mori; however, we omit the presence of the sericin layer here for convenience. The paired brins are gradually pressed between the ventral and dorsal hard cuticle plates at the silk press, and a gradual diameter decrease and shape deformation follows (Fig. 4e,f). At the exit of the silk press, each brin becomes elliptic and the diameter in the major axis decreases. Interestingly, the elliptical shape and 1.7-axial ratio for the major and minor axes of the fibroin brin cross-section in bagworm silk, which we previously reported14, are already determined at this stage in the silk press; afterwards, the diameter decreases without any change in the axial ratio of the elliptical cross-section. Notably, the two elliptical fibroin brins are aligned side-by-side so that their major axes are in line horizontally (to resemble a figure of ‘∞’) at the spinning press, and these are followed by the spinning tube (Fig. 4e–h). However, the alignment is twisted by 90° in one direction (to resemble a figure of ‘8’) before the brins are spun from the spigot (Fig. 4i,j).We found that the spinning tube was surrounded by a hard exoskeleton. Using 3D-X-ray CT observations, we produced clear images of the exterior and interior morphologies of the spinning tube enveloped by exoskeleton (Fig. 4k–m; the exterior shape observed from the dorsal-, ventral- and lateral-sides by optical microscopy is provided in Supplementary Fig. S3). The spigot was not cut perpendicularly to the spinning tube but rather with a slope of around 20°; consequently, it was elliptic. X-ray CT clearly showed the core-sheath structure of the spinneret and a wide expanse of sheath parts (Fig. 4m) between the exterior shell and interior spinning tube (Fig. 4l,m). Using optical microscope observations of the cross-sections, we found that at least three pairs of adhesive ducts were running in the sheath space (Supplementary Fig. S2E). Therefore, while the silk brins pass through the central narrow spinning tube, the plural adhesive ducts pass through the outer space independently of the silk thread. Finally, the adhesive enters a ladle-like reservoir located at the spigot and is released together with the silk thread (Fig. 4o). The presence of definitive routes connecting the adhesive passage and the spigot were not clearly observed in our X-ray CT images, probably due to the small structural scale relative to the space resolution used in our analysis (i.e. 0.31 μm). We speculate that the adhesive merges into the spigot via a fine, porous sponge-like structure, and we indicate assumed routes in Fig. 4l,m. X-ray CT observations also revealed a sophisticated structural design involving gradual twists in the silk brins by 90° from ‘∞’ to ‘8’ (Fig. 4n and Supplementary Movie S4). Essentially identical spinneret structures were observed by X-ray CT images for all of eight observed individuals from the third to final instars of E. variegata. More

NEWS
17 August 2021

Brazilian road proposal threatens famed biodiversity hotspot

Scientists and environmentalists say the road, slated to pass through Iguaçu National Park, could harm research projects and precious ecosystems.

Meghie Rodrigues

Meghie Rodrigues

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Share on Twitter
Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook
Share on Facebook

Share via E-Mail
Share via E-Mail

Protesters oppose the Caminho do Colono at Iguaçu Falls.Credit: Marcos Labanca

Brazil’s National Congress could soon vote on a bill proposing to construct a road through the country’s Iguaçu National Park. If the proposal moves ahead, researchers fear that it will threaten the park’s lush forest, a biodiversity hotspot that is home to almost 1,600 animal species, including endangered animals such as the purple-winged ground dove.Environmentalists and researchers have fought off construction of the 17.5-kilometre road for years, arguing that it will not only bring pollution to the park, but also poachers, who would threaten animals such as jaguars and tapirs. Even research in the park could be affected. In a portion of the park that dips into Argentina, for example, “poachers often steal our cameras”, says Julia Pardo, a mammal conservation and ecology researcher at the Subtropical Biology Institute in Misiones, Argentina.
‘Apocalyptic’ fires are ravaging the world’s largest tropical wetland
Under the leadership of President Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s government has weakened protection of the country’s forests in favour of industries such as mining, logging and ranching. The lower house of Brazil’s Congress, the Chamber of Deputies, put the bill on a fast track in June, allowing it to skip regular debate among its committees and head straight for a vote — a move that has researchers worried.If passed, the legislation would establish a dangerous precedent that could weaken environmental law in Brazil, says Sylvia Torrecilha, a biologist at the Secretariat of Environment, Economic Development, Production and Family Agriculture in Mato Grosso do Sul. In addition to cutting Iguaçu Park in two with a road that will connect towns to its north and south (see ‘Contested route’), the bill seeks to create a new type of protected area — the estrada-parque, or park road — within Brazil’s System of Natural Conservation Units, which regulates environmentally protected areas. Approving the construction of the ‘Caminho do Colono’ (the Settler’s Road) in Iguaçu could literally pave the way for creating through-ways in other parks and conservation areas in Brazil, says Torrecilha.Normally, the idea of a park road is to preserve the green areas along an already-existing scenic route, she says, not to bring commercial or economic advancement to a state — the argument lawmakers have made in favour of the road. The proposal, from its very beginning, is “inappropriate”, she adds.A historical routeEstablished in 1939, Iguaçu National Park is famous for the waterfall — one of the world’s largest — on the border with Argentina along its southwestern tip. But it is also notable because it contains the largest remaining patch of Atlantic Forest in southern Brazil. Although less well-known than the Amazon rainforest, the Atlantic Forest is rich in plant and animal species, and originally stretched along the coast of southeastern Brazil and down to Argentina and Paraguay. However, the forest is rapidly disappearing: it has lost almost 90% of its tree cover, accelerated by deforestation from urbanization, and agricultural and industrial activities in the twentieth century. Because of these attributes, the park was designated as a World Heritage site by the United Nations cultural organization UNESCO in 1986.

If the legislation is successful, it would actually enable the creation of the Caminho do Colono for the second time. The government of Paraná, the state where Iguaçu National Park is located, transformed an existing walking path into an unpaved version of the road during the 1950s. “Nobody cared much at the time because there wasn’t much difference between the inside and the outside of the park, as the Atlantic Forest stretched all over the place,” says former park chief Ivan Baptiston. “With all the deforestation of the last decades, nowadays, the scenario is a lot different.”In 1986 — the same year the park received its UNESCO World Heritage Site designation — Brazil’s Federal Prosecutor’s Office filed a civil suit to close the road, and the following year, a federal judge officially closed it. Since then, vegetation has overtaken the route, and some local residents have tried and failed to force it back open, claiming economic hardships associated with not being able to travel efficiently through the area.
‘We are being ignored’: Brazil’s researchers blame anti-science government for devastating COVID surge
The new bill states that re-establishing the road would offer a “solution to a logistical problem in Paraná state”. Sponsored by Nelsi Coguetto Maria, a member of the Chamber of Deputies, the proposal also says it “answers a decades-old outcry of Paraná inhabitants, salvaging the region’s history and its socioeconomic, environmental and tourism relations.”Environmentalists have criticized Coguetto Maria for backing the bill. And local media outlets have reported that his family stands to potentially gain from the Caminho do Colono; two of his sons are partners in construction companies that could pave the road. Coguetto Maria’s office did not respond to Nature’s queries about this, or about researchers’ concerns over the road. When the Chamber of Deputies approved fast-tracking of the bill, he argued that the Brazil of today is “responsible”, and has the “competence and capacity to build an ecologically correct road”, pointing out that the road existed as a walking path before the park was even created.Research interruptedFor many conservationists and researchers, the economic argument to open the road doesn’t hold water. The damage caused to the park’s highly valued Atlantic Forest would far outweigh the potential economic gains for the surrounding towns1, they say. Furthermore, the species protected by the park are irreplaceable, they add. Iguaçu is the only location in the world where the jaguar population is increasing instead of declining. If the road opens, says Pardo, pressure on the animals will skyrocket. “Easy access is the main enabler for poachers,” she says.

Iguaçu Falls is located along the border of Argentina and Brazil, on the Iguaçu River.Credit: Thiago Trevisan/Alamy

Cars using the road will also cause air, soil, water and even sound pollution, says Victor Prasniewski, a conservation biologist at the Federal University of Mato Grosso in Brazil. Sound pollution, in particular, changes communication patterns among a number of species. “Birds that attract females by singing will be forced to sing louder or longer to get noticed,” says Prasniewski, who published a paper last year2 listing the potential negative impacts of the Caminho do Colono.“These changes can affect the reproduction and even the evolution of some birds,” says Carlos Araújo, a bioacoustics ecologist at Argentina’s Subtropical Biology Institute. “The building of a road would be catastrophic to research in my field,” he says.He works on a large-scale monitoring project looking for the purple-winged ground-dove, the last confirmed sighting of which was more than three decades ago. “It’s a rare animal, and we leave recorders spread over the forest to try and catch her singing. We often capture helicopter noise, which disturbs our work.” Cars and trucks on the road would create similar low-frequency noise, he says. “It will be a lot harder to find birds like this dove.”
Brazil’s lawmakers renew push to weaken environmental rules
For some, the argument that the road will enhance tourism in Paraná doesn’t make sense either. Reopening the road, says Carmel Croukamp Davies, chief executive of Parque das Aves, a private bird sanctuary and shelter near the park, could threaten Iguaçu’s UNESCO World Heritage title if it damages the park’s biodiversity and severs the Atlantic Forest. Visitors come because they want to experience nature, she adds: “Whoever doesn’t understand the impact of a proposal like this doesn’t understand an inch of tourism nor biodiversity.”With Brazil’s Congress having returned from holiday earlier this month, the bill could soon be put to a vote. And when it is, environmentalists worry it will be passed, given how many representatives within the Chamber of Deputies currently align with Bolsonaro. Then it would face the Senate, and finally, Bolsonaro, who is expected to ultimately approve it.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02199-x

References1.Ortiz, R. A. Ambientalia 1, 141–160 (2009).
Google Scholar 
2.Prasniewski, V. M. et al. Ambio 49, 2061–2067 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Download references

Related Articles

‘We are being ignored’: Brazil’s researchers blame anti-science government for devastating COVID surge

‘Apocalyptic’ fires are ravaging the world’s largest tropical wetland

Deforestation spikes in Brazilian Amazon

Brazil’s lawmakers renew push to weaken environmental rules

‘Tropical Trump’ victory in Brazil stuns scientists

Subjects

Policy

Government

Environmental sciences

Conservation biology

Biodiversity

Latest on:

Policy

The WHO is right to call a temporary halt to COVID vaccine boosters
Editorial 17 AUG 21

Has COVID taught us anything about pandemic preparedness?
News Feature 13 AUG 21

What costs half a year’s pay for African scholars? Open access
Correspondence 10 AUG 21

Government

The world must cooperate to avoid a catastrophic space collision
Editorial 11 AUG 21

From the archive
News & Views 10 AUG 21

Call to update US re-entry rules for international researchers
Correspondence 09 AUG 21

Environmental sciences

‘Polluter pays’ policy could speed up emission reductions and removal of atmospheric CO2
News & Views 16 AUG 21

The world’s species are playing musical chairs: how will it end?
News Feature 04 AUG 21

The fraction of the global population at risk of floods is growing
News & Views 04 AUG 21

Jobs

Head of Chemical Biology STP

Francis Crick Institute
London, United Kingdom

Postdoc (f/m/d) – High-throughput RNAi-screening in planarian flatworms –

Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry (MPIBPC)
Göttingen, Germany

Assistenz (m/w/d) der Institutsleitung

Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht – Centre for Materials and Coastal Research (HZG)
Geesthacht, Germany

Postdoctoral Position (f/m/x) “Eukaryotic proteomics of model systems”

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ)
Leipzig, Germany

Nature Briefing
An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Email address

Yes! Sign me up to receive the daily Nature Briefing email. I agree my information will be processed in accordance with the Nature and Springer Nature Limited Privacy Policy.

Sign up More

1.Adams, W. M. et al. Science 306, 1146–1149 (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Klein, A. M. et al. Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 303–313 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Potts, S. G. et al. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 345–353 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Aizen, M. A. et al. Global Change Biol. 25, 3516–3527 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Dicks, L. V. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01534-9 (2021).6.Mazor, T. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1071–1074 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Brittain, C. A., Vighi, M., Bommarco, R., Settele, J. & Potts, S. G. Basic Appl. Ecol. 11, 106–115 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Roubik, D. W. Pollinator Safety in Agriculture (Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, 2014).9.Ecobichon, D. J. Toxicology 160, 27–33 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Ravindranath, N. H. & Sathaye, J. A. In Climate Change and Developing Countries 247–265 (Springer, 2002).11.The Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production (eds Potts, S. G. et al.) (IPBES, 2016).12.Summary for Policymakers of the Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform On Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production (eds Potts, S. G. et al.) (IPBES, 2016). More

1.The Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production (IPBES, 2016).2.Potts, S. G. et al. Safeguarding pollinators and their values to human well-being. Nature 540, 220–229 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Global malnutrition overlaps with pollinator-dependent micronutrient production. Proc. R. Soc. B https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1799 (2014).4.Powney, G. D. et al. Widespread losses of pollinating insects in Britain. Nat. Commun. 10, 1018 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Koh, I. et al. Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 140–145 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Reilly, J. R. et al. Crop production in the USA is frequently limited by a lack of pollinators. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20200922 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Aizen, M. A. et al. Global agricultural productivity is threatened by increasing pollinator dependence without a parallel increase in crop diversification. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 3516–3527 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Global modeling of nature’s contributions to people. Science 366, 255–258 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Moritz, R. F. A. & Erler, S. Lost colonies found in a data mine: global honey trade but not pests or pesticides as a major cause of regional honeybee colony declines. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 216, 44–50 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Senapathi, D., Goddard, M. A., Kunin, W. E. & Baldock, K. C. R. Landscape impacts on pollinator communities in temperate systems: evidence and knowledge gaps. Funct. Ecol. 31, 26–37 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Soroye, P., Newbold, T. & Kerr, J. Climate change contributes to widespread declines among bumble bees across continents. Science 367, 685 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Woodcock, B. A. et al. Country-specific effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on honey bees and wild bees. Science 356, 1393–1395 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Carvell, C. et al. Bumblebee family lineage survival is enhanced in high-quality landscapes. Nature 543, 547 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Tonietto Rebecca, K. & Larkin Daniel, J. Habitat restoration benefits wild bees: a meta‐analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 55, 582–590 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Wintermantel, D., Odoux, J.-F., Chadœuf, J. & Bretagnolle, V. Organic farming positively affects honeybee colonies in a flower-poor period in agricultural landscapes. J. Appl. Ecol. 56, 1960–1969 (2019).
Google Scholar 
16.Dicks, L. V. et al. Ten policies for pollinators. Science 354, 975–976 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.FAO’s Global Action on Pollination Services for Sustainable Agriculture: National Initiatives (FAO, 2020); http://www.fao.org/pollination/major-initiatives/national-initiatives/en/18.Conservation and Sustainable Use of Pollinators CBD/COP/DEC/14/6 30 November 2018 (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2018).19.Teichroew, J. L. et al. Is China’s unparalleled and understudied bee diversity at risk? Biol. Conserv. 210, 19–28 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Breeze, T. D., Gallai, N., Garibaldi, L. A. & Li, X. S. Economic measures of pollination services: shortcomings and future directions. TREE 31, 927–939 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
21.Díaz, S. et al. Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019).22.Hall, D. M. & Steiner, R. Insect pollinator conservation policy innovations at subnational levels: lessons for lawmakers. Environ. Sci. Policy 93, 118–128 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Díaz, S. et al. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100 (2019).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Mukherjee, N. et al. The Delphi technique in ecology and biological conservation: applications and guidelines. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 1097–1109 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Kovács-Hostyánszki, A. et al. Ecological intensification to mitigate impacts of conventional intensive land use on pollinators and pollination. Ecol. Lett. 20, 673–689 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Kennedy, C. M. et al. A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 16, 584–599 (2013).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Basu, P. et al. Scale dependent drivers of wild bee diversity in tropical heterogeneous agricultural landscapes. Ecol. Evol. 6, 6983–6992 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Marques, A. et al. Increasing impacts of land use on biodiversity and carbon sequestration driven by population and economic growth. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 628–637 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Jayne, T. S., Snapp, S., Place, F. & Sitko, N. Sustainable agricultural intensification in an era of rural transformation in Africa. Glob. Food Security 20, 105–113 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Mitchell, E. A. D. et al. A worldwide survey of neonicotinoids in honey. Science 358, 109–111 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Woodcock, B. A. et al. Impacts of neonicotinoid use on long-term population changes in wild bees in England. Nat. Commun. 7, 12459 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Rundlof, M. et al. Seed coating with a neonicotinoid insecticide negatively affects wild bees. Nature 521, 77–80 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
33.Schreinemachers, P. & Tipraqsa, P. Agricultural pesticides and land use intensification in high, middle and low income countries. Food Policy 37, 616–626 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Neonicotinoid Insecticides: Use and Effects in African Agriculture: a Review and Recommendations to Policymakers (NASAC, 2019); https://nasaconline.org/en/index.php/2020/05/26/neonicotinoid-insecticides-use-and-effects-in-african-agriculture-a-review-and-recommendations-to-policy-makers/35.Herrando, S. et al. Contrasting impacts of precipitation on Mediterranean birds and butterflies. Sci. Rep. 9, 5680 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Brookes, G. & Barfoot, P. GM Crops: Global Socio-economic and Environmental Impacts 1996-2018 (PG Economics Ltd, 2020); https://pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/globalimpactfinalreportJuly2020.pdf37.Farina, W. M., Balbuena, M. S., Herbert, L. T., Gonalons, C. M. & Vazquez, D. E. Effects of the herbicide glyphosate on honey bee sensory and cognitive abilities: individual impairments with implications for the hive. Insects 10, 354 (2019).PubMed Central 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
38.Zattara, E. E. & Aizen, M. A. Worldwide occurrence records suggest a global decline in bee species richness. One Earth 4, 114–123 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Regan, E. C. et al. Global trends in the status of bird and mammal pollinators. Conserv. Lett. 8, 397–403 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Garibaldi, L. A. et al. Wild pollinators enhance fruit set of crops regardless of honey bee abundance. Science 339, 1608–1611 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Samnegård, U., Hambäck, P. A., Lemessa, D., Nemomissa, S. & Hylander, K. A heterogeneous landscape does not guarantee high crop pollination. Proc. Biol. Sci. 283, 20161472 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
42.Groeneveld, J. H., Tscharntke, T., Moser, G. & Clough, Y. Experimental evidence for stronger cacao yield limitation by pollination than by plant resources. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 12, 183–191 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Lautenbach, S., Seppelt, R., Liebscher, J. & Dormann, C. F. Spatial and temporal trends of global pollination benefit. PLoS ONE 7, e35954 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Garibaldi, L. A., Aizen, M. A., Klein, A. M., Cunningham, S. A. & Harder, L. D. Global growth and stability of agricultural yield decrease with pollinator dependence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 5909–5914 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Ritchie, H. & Roser, M. Urbanization (Our World in Data, 2018); https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization46.Hipolito, J., Boscolo, D. & Viana, B. F. Landscape and crop management strategies to conserve pollination services and increase yields in tropical coffee farms. Agriculture Ecosyst. Environ. 256, 218–225 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Begotti, R. A. & Peres, C. A. Rapidly escalating threats to the biodiversity and ethnocultural capital of Brazilian Indigenous Lands. Land Use Policy 96, 10 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Pirk, C. W. W., Strauss, U., Yusuf, A. A., Démares, F. & Human, H. Honeybee health in Africa—a review. Apidologie 47, 276–300 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Gebremedhn, H., Amssalu, B., Smet, L. D. & de Graaf, D. C. Factors restraining the population growth of Varroa destructor in Ethiopian honey bees (Apis mellifera simensis). PLoS ONE 14, e0223236 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Junge, X., Lindemann-Matthies, P., Hunziker, M. & Schüpbach, B. Aesthetic preferences of non-farmers and farmers for different land-use types and proportions of ecological compensation areas in the Swiss lowlands. Biol. Conserv. 144, 1430–1440 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Lee, H., Sumner, D. A. & Champetier, A. Pollination markets and the coupled futures of almonds and honey bees: simulating impacts of shifts in demands and costs. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 101, 230–249 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Rucker, R. R., Thurman, W. N. & Burgett, M. Colony collapse and the consequences of bee disease: market adaptation to environmental change. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 6, 927–960 (2019).
Google Scholar 
53.Breeze, T. D. et al. Linking farmer and beekeeper preferences with ecological knowledge to improve crop pollination. People Nat. 1, 562–572 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Hall, D. M. & Martins, D. J. Human dimensions of insect pollinator conservation. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 38, 107–114 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Zommers, Z. et al. Burning embers: towards more transparent and robust climate-change risk assessments. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 516–529 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Duijm, N. J. Recommendations on the use and design of risk matrices. Saf. Sci. 76, 21–31 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Peace, C. The risk matrix: uncertain results? Policy Pract. Health Saf. 15, 131–144 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Morgan, M. G. Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7176–7184 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Regan, H. M., Colyvan, M. & Burgman, M. A. A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecol. Appl. 12, 618–628 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.FAOStat (FAO, 2017); http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data61.Regional Report for Africa on Pollinators and Pollination and Food Production UNEP/CBD/COP/13/INF/36 (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2016).62.Sutherland, W. J., Fleishman, E., Mascia, M. B., Pretty, J. & Rudd, M. A. Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and emerging issues in science and policy. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2, 238–247 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Wickham, H. ggplot2. R v.4.0.0 https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/ (2016).64.Christensen, R. H. B. ordinal. R v.4.0.3 http://www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal/ (2018).65.Menard, S. Applied Logistic Regression Analysis (SAGE Publications, 2002).66.Hill, R. et al. Biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation. Nat. Sustain. 2, 214–222 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES Secretariat, 2019).2.Measuring Progress: Towards Achieving the Environmental Dimension of the SDGs (UNEP, 2019).3.Blicharska, M. et al. Biodiversity’s contributions to sustainable development. Nat. Sustain 2, 1083–1093 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.The Global Risks Report 2020 (World Economic Forum, 2020).5.Díaz, S. et al. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Dasgupta, P. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review (HM Treasury, 2021).7.Pascual, U. et al. Biodiversity and the challenge of pluralism. Nat. Sustain. 4, 567–572 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.The Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration (IPBES Secretariat, 2018).9.UNEP Frontiers 2016 Report: Emerging Issues of Environment Concern (UNEP, 2016).10.Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Pandemics of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES Secretariat, 2020).11.Tittensor, D. P. et al. A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346, 241–244 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Global Biodiversity Outlook Vol. 25 (Secretariat of the CBD, 2014).13.Newbold, T. et al. Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment. Science 353, 288–291 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Butchart, S. H. M. et al. Improvements to the Red List Index. PLoS ONE 2, e140 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.McRae, L., Deinet, S. & Freeman, R. The diversity-weighted living planet index: controlling for taxonomic bias in a global biodiversity indicator. PLoS ONE 12, e0169156 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Pascual, U. et al. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 26–27, 7–16 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Human Development Report 2020: The Next Frontier—Human Development and the Anthropocene (UNDP, 2020).18.Global Multidimensional Poverty Index 2020—Charting Pathways out of Multidimensional Poverty (UNDP & OPHI, 2020).19.Becker, F. G. et al. Global Slavery Index 2018 (Walk Free Foundation, 2018).20.2020 ITUC Global Rights Index: The World’s Worst Countries for Workers (ITUC, 2020).21.Corruption Perceptions Index 2020 (Transparency International, 2020).22.Soto-Navarro, C. A. et al. Building a Multidimensional Biodiversity Index—A Scorecard for Biodiversity Health (UNEP-WCMC, 2020); https://www.unep-wcmc.org/resources-and-data/building-a-multidimensional-biodiversity-index23.Stiglitz, J. E., Fitoussi, J.-P. & Durand, M. Beyond GDP: Measuring What Counts for Economic and Social Performance (OECD, 2018).24.Van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. The GDP paradox. J. Econ. Psychol. 30, 117–135 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.UNDP Strategic Plan, 2018-2021 (UNDP, 2017).26.Dasgupta, P. Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment (Oxford Univ. Press, 2001).Book 

Google Scholar 
27.Costanza, R. et al. Time to leave GDP behind. Nature 505, 283–285 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Raworth, K. Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist (Random House, 2017).29.Mazzucato, M. The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy (Penguin, 2019).30.Perrings, C. et al. Biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: saving natural capital without losing interest. Conserv. Biol. 20, 263–264 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Primmer, E. & Paavola, J. Insurance value of ecosystems: an introduction. Ecol. Econ. 184, 107001 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Jørgensen, S. L., Termansen, M. & Pascual, U. Natural insurance as condition for market insurance: climate change adaptation in agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 169, 106489 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011-2020) and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (CBD, 2010).34.Hansen, M. H., Li, H. & Svarverud, R. Ecological civilization: interpreting the Chinese past, projecting the global future. Glob. Environ. Change 53, 195–203 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Gruetzmacher, K. et al. The Berlin principles on one health—bridging global health and conservation. Sci. Total Environ. 764, 142919 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.IPCC: Summary for Policymakers. In Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).37.2019—Global Report on Food Crises: Joint Analysis for Better Decisions (Food Security Information Network, 2019).38.CBD/WG2020/2/4 29 Report of the Open-Ended Working Group on the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework on its Second Meeting (CBD, 2020).39.Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59–67 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Chan, K. M. A. et al. Opinion: why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 1462–1465 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Chan, K. M. A., Gould, R. K. & Pascual, U. Editorial overview: relational values: what are they, and what’s the fuss about? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 35, A1–A7 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Díaz, S. et al. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science 359, 270–272 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Convention on Biological Diversity (United Nations, 1992).44.Mace, G. M. et al. Aiming higher to bend the curve of biodiversity loss. Nat. Sustain 1, 448–451 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Pereira, H. M. et al. Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339, 277–278 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Global modeling of nature’s contributions to people. Science 366, 255–258 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M. & Torrisi, G. On the methodological framework of composite indices: a review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Soc. Indic. Res. 141, 61–94 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators—Methodology and User Guide (OECD, 2008).49.Kumar, P. (ed.) The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations (Earthscan, 2010).50.Folke, C., Biggs, R., Norström, A. V., Reyers, B. & Rockström, J. Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecol. Soc. 21, 41 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.The Global Goals for Sustainable Development (Global Goals); http://www.globalgoals.org/resources52.Zenghelis, D. et al. Valuing Wealth, Building Prosperity: Wealth Economy Project First Year Report to LetterOne (Bennett Institute for Public Policy, 2020).53.Halpern, B. S. et al. An index to assess the health and benefits of the global ocean. Nature 488, 615–620 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Wendling, Z. A. et al. 2020 Environmental Performance Index (Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, 2020).55.Borucke, M. et al. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the national footprint accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol. Indic. 24, 518–533 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Sachs, J. et al. The Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19: Sustainable Development Report 2020 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020).57.Usubiago-Liano, A. & Ekins, P. Developing a Novel Index of Strong Environmental Sustainability: Preliminary Results (Institute for Sustainable Resources, University College London, 2019).58.Acosta, L. A. et al. Green Growth Index 2020—Measuring Performance in Achieving SDG Targets Technical Report No. 16 (GGGI, 2020).59.Agrobiodiversity Index Report 2019: Risk and Resilience (Biodiversity International, 2019).60.Angulo, R., Díaz, Y. & Pardo, R. The Colombian multidimensional poverty index: measuring poverty in a public policy context. Soc. Indic. Res. 127, 1–38 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Watts, K. et al. Ecological time lags and the journey towards conservation success. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 304–311 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar  More