| |
|
|
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Amazônia Ocidental; Embrapa Amazônia Oriental; Embrapa Meio-Norte; Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia; Embrapa Semiárido. |
|
Data corrente: |
07/10/2021 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
06/12/2021 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Autoria: |
GARIBALDI, L. A; PÉREZ-MÉNDEZ, N.; CORDEIRO, G. D.; HUGHES, A.; ORR, M.; SANTOS, I. A. dos; FREITAS, B. M.; OLIVEIRA, F. F. de; LEBUHN, G.; BARTOMEUS, I.; AIZEN, M. A.; ANDRADE, P. B.; BLOCHTEIN, B.; BOSCOLO, D.; DRUMOND, P. M.; GAGLIANONE, M. C.; HERREN, B. G.; HALINSKI, R.; KRUG, C.; MAUES, M. M.; KIILL, L. H. P.; PINHEIRO, M.; PIRES, C. S. S.; VIANA, B. F. |
|
Afiliação: |
LUCAS A. GARIBALDI, Universidad Nacional de Río Negro, Argentina; NÉSTOR PÉREZ-MÉNDEZ, IRTA, Spain; GUARACI D. CORDEIRO, University of Salzburg, Austria; ALICE HUGHES, Center for Integrative Conservation, China; MICHAEL ORR, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China; ISABEL ALVES DOS SANTOS, USP; BRENO M. FREITAS, UFC; FAVÍZIA FREITAS DE OLIVEIRA, UFBA; GRETCHEN LEBUHN, San Francisco State University, USA; IGNASI BARTOMEUS, Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD-CSIC), Spain; MARCELO A. AIZEN, Universidad Nacional del Comahue-CONICET, Argentina; PATRICIA B. ANDRADE, UFC; BETINA BLOCHTEIN, PUCRS; DANILO BOSCOLO, USP; PATRICIA MARIA DRUMOND, CPAMN; MARIA CRISTINA GAGLIANONE, UENF; BARBARA GEMMILL HERREN, World Agroforestry Centre, Kenya; ROSANA HALINSKI, PUCRS; CRISTIANE KRUG, CPAA; MARCIA MOTTA MAUES, CPATU; LUCIA HELENA PIEDADE KIILL, CPATSA; MARDIORE PINHEIRO, UFFS; CARMEN SILVIA SOARES PIRES, Cenargen; BLANDINA FELIPE VIANA, UFBA. |
|
Título: |
Negative impacts of dominance on bee communities: Does the influence of invasive honey bees differ from native bees? |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2021 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Ecology, v. 102, n. 12, e03526, Aug. 2021. |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Invasive species can reach high abundances and dominate native environments. One of the most impressive examples of ecological invasions is the spread of the African sub-species of the honey bee throughout the Americas, starting from its introduction in a single locality in Brazil. The invasive honey bee is expected to more negatively impact bee community abundance and diversity than native dominant species, but this has not been tested previously. We developed a comprehensive and systematic bee sampling scheme, using a protocol deploying 11,520 pan traps across regions and crops for three years in Brazil. We found that invasive honey bees are now the ingle most dominant bee species. Such dominance has not only negative consequences for abundance and species richness of native bees but also for overall bee abundance (i.e., strong ?numerical? effects of honey bees). Contrary to expectations, honey bees did not have stronger negative impacts than other native bees achieving similar levels of dominance (i.e., lack of negative ?identity? effects of honey bees). These effects were remarkably consistent across crop species, seasons and years, and were independent from land-use effects. Dominance could be a proxy of bee community degradation and more generally of the severity of ecological invasions. Keywords: Apis mellifera, dominance, exotic species, invasion, pollinators. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Comunidade das abelhas; Dominância; Domínio das abelhas; Espécies exóticas. |
|
Thesagro: |
Abelha; Apis Mellifera; Polinização. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Dominance (genetics); Ecological invasion; Invasive species; Pollinators. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
P Recursos Naturais, Ciências Ambientais e da Terra |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/228509/1/ecy.3526.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02848naa a2200529 a 4500
001 2135312
005 2021-12-06
008 2021 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
100 1 $aGARIBALDI, L. A
245 $aNegative impacts of dominance on bee communities$bDoes the influence of invasive honey bees differ from native bees?$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2021
520 $aInvasive species can reach high abundances and dominate native environments. One of the most impressive examples of ecological invasions is the spread of the African sub-species of the honey bee throughout the Americas, starting from its introduction in a single locality in Brazil. The invasive honey bee is expected to more negatively impact bee community abundance and diversity than native dominant species, but this has not been tested previously. We developed a comprehensive and systematic bee sampling scheme, using a protocol deploying 11,520 pan traps across regions and crops for three years in Brazil. We found that invasive honey bees are now the ingle most dominant bee species. Such dominance has not only negative consequences for abundance and species richness of native bees but also for overall bee abundance (i.e., strong ?numerical? effects of honey bees). Contrary to expectations, honey bees did not have stronger negative impacts than other native bees achieving similar levels of dominance (i.e., lack of negative ?identity? effects of honey bees). These effects were remarkably consistent across crop species, seasons and years, and were independent from land-use effects. Dominance could be a proxy of bee community degradation and more generally of the severity of ecological invasions. Keywords: Apis mellifera, dominance, exotic species, invasion, pollinators.
650 $aDominance (genetics)
650 $aEcological invasion
650 $aInvasive species
650 $aPollinators
650 $aAbelha
650 $aApis Mellifera
650 $aPolinização
653 $aComunidade das abelhas
653 $aDominância
653 $aDomínio das abelhas
653 $aEspécies exóticas
700 1 $aPÉREZ-MÉNDEZ, N.
700 1 $aCORDEIRO, G. D.
700 1 $aHUGHES, A.
700 1 $aORR, M.
700 1 $aSANTOS, I. A. dos
700 1 $aFREITAS, B. M.
700 1 $aOLIVEIRA, F. F. de
700 1 $aLEBUHN, G.
700 1 $aBARTOMEUS, I.
700 1 $aAIZEN, M. A.
700 1 $aANDRADE, P. B.
700 1 $aBLOCHTEIN, B.
700 1 $aBOSCOLO, D.
700 1 $aDRUMOND, P. M.
700 1 $aGAGLIANONE, M. C.
700 1 $aHERREN, B. G.
700 1 $aHALINSKI, R.
700 1 $aKRUG, C.
700 1 $aMAUES, M. M.
700 1 $aKIILL, L. H. P.
700 1 $aPINHEIRO, M.
700 1 $aPIRES, C. S. S.
700 1 $aVIANA, B. F.
773 $tEcology$gv. 102, n. 12, e03526, Aug. 2021.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Meio-Norte (CPAMN) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Clima Temperado. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cpact.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Clima Temperado; Embrapa Meio Ambiente. |
|
Data corrente: |
16/07/2014 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
19/12/2014 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Circulação/Nível: |
A - 1 |
|
Autoria: |
ASSALIN, M. R.; QUEIROZ, S. C. do N. de; FERRACINI, V. L.; OLIVEIRA, T.; VILHENA, E.; MATTOS, M. L. T. |
|
Afiliação: |
MARCIA REGINA ASSALIN, CNPMA; SONIA CLAUDIA DO N DE QUEIROZ, CNPMA; VERA LUCIA FERRACINI, CNPMA; TACIANA OLIVEIRA, CNPQ; EDER VILHENA, FAJ; MARIA LAURA TURINO MATTOS, CPACT. |
|
Título: |
A method for determination of imazapic and imazethapyr residues in soil using an ultrasonic assisted extraction and LC-MS/MS. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2014 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, California, v. 93, n. 3, p. 362-364, 2014. |
|
DOI: |
10.1007/s00128-014-1330-6 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Abstract At least 52 % of the planted rice area in Rio Grande do Sul, a major rice producing state in Brazil, employs Clearfield Ò production system, corresponding to 580,000 ha of cultivated area. To grow rice with Clear- field Ò technology, producers combine imazethapyr and imazapic herbicides. However, these herbicides leave residual activity in soil; consequently, the repeated appli- cation of imazethapyr and imazapic on Brazilian Clear- field Ò rice fields has increased these herbicides persistence in treated soils. In this study, a method has been developed for removal and quantification of imazethapyr and imaza- pic residues in soil through ultrasonic assisted extraction using methanol?phosphoric acid aqueous solution (pH 2.0). The detected response was linear for both herbicides within the range of 0.25?5 ng mL -1 with correlations coefficients [0.99. The quantification limit was limit of quantification 0.2 lg Kg -1 for both pesticides. The good recovery rate from all pesticides, which ranges between 70 % and 120 %, demonstrates the method?s validity. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Clearfield production system; Imidazolinone; Residue analysis. |
|
Thesagro: |
Análise química; Cromatografia; Herbicida; Poluição ambiental; Resíduo químico; Solo. |
|
Thesaurus NAL: |
Chemical analysis; Imidazolinone herbicides; Liquid chromatography; Mass spectrometry; Multiresidue analysis; soil; Soil pollution. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
--
P Recursos Naturais, Ciências Ambientais e da Terra |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02286naa a2200385 a 4500
001 2003358
005 2014-12-19
008 2014 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $a10.1007/s00128-014-1330-6$2DOI
100 1 $aASSALIN, M. R.
245 $aA method for determination of imazapic and imazethapyr residues in soil using an ultrasonic assisted extraction and LC-MS/MS.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2014
520 $aAbstract At least 52 % of the planted rice area in Rio Grande do Sul, a major rice producing state in Brazil, employs Clearfield Ò production system, corresponding to 580,000 ha of cultivated area. To grow rice with Clear- field Ò technology, producers combine imazethapyr and imazapic herbicides. However, these herbicides leave residual activity in soil; consequently, the repeated appli- cation of imazethapyr and imazapic on Brazilian Clear- field Ò rice fields has increased these herbicides persistence in treated soils. In this study, a method has been developed for removal and quantification of imazethapyr and imaza- pic residues in soil through ultrasonic assisted extraction using methanol?phosphoric acid aqueous solution (pH 2.0). The detected response was linear for both herbicides within the range of 0.25?5 ng mL -1 with correlations coefficients [0.99. The quantification limit was limit of quantification 0.2 lg Kg -1 for both pesticides. The good recovery rate from all pesticides, which ranges between 70 % and 120 %, demonstrates the method?s validity.
650 $aChemical analysis
650 $aImidazolinone herbicides
650 $aLiquid chromatography
650 $aMass spectrometry
650 $aMultiresidue analysis
650 $asoil
650 $aSoil pollution
650 $aAnálise química
650 $aCromatografia
650 $aHerbicida
650 $aPoluição ambiental
650 $aResíduo químico
650 $aSolo
653 $aClearfield production system
653 $aImidazolinone
653 $aResidue analysis
700 1 $aQUEIROZ, S. C. do N. de
700 1 $aFERRACINI, V. L.
700 1 $aOLIVEIRA, T.
700 1 $aVILHENA, E.
700 1 $aMATTOS, M. L. T.
773 $tBulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, California$gv. 93, n. 3, p. 362-364, 2014.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Meio Ambiente (CNPMA) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Expressão de busca inválida. Verifique!!! |
|
|
