C. Carvell

Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics · 2002–2020

A researcher in the Science corpus: 14 papers; trusts 9 researchers and is trusted by 37 researchers here, as inferred from the citation graph.

Subfields

• Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics — 125 citations into it; #292 of 6,648 by trust here, #293 by citations
• Insect Science — 67 citations into it; #912 of 2,259 by trust here, #105 by citations
• Nature and Landscape Conservation — 67 citations into it; #585 of 6,941 by trust here, #1,024 by citations
• Plant Science — 64 citations into it; #1,709 of 8,232 by trust here, #786 by citations
• Genetics — 41 citations into it

Whom C. Carvell trusts overall

Their strongest outbound trust, strongest first, inferred from their citations.

1. Richard F. Pywell
2. Dave Goulson
3. A. Kells
4. W. Meek
5. R. A. Robinson
6. M. Telfer
7. Simon M. Smart
8. Ben Darvill
9. I. Steffan‐Dewenter
10. C. Westphal

Who trusts C. Carvell overall

1. Richard F. Pywell
2. Dave Goulson
3. Paul H. Williams
4. Zhenghua Xie
5. T. Wood
6. Mark J. Whittingham
7. W. Meek
8. S. Potts
9. E. Venturini
10. C. Kearns

Papers from C. Carvell's perspective

Ordered by how strongly the researchers C. Carvell trusts endorse each paper. Same corpus, a different order for every researcher.

1. Post‐war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain
2. Causes of rarity in bumblebees
3. Habitat use and conservation of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) under different grassland management regimes
4. Mass flowering crops enhance pollinator densities at a landscape scale
5. Plant traits as predictors of performance in ecological restoration
6. Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America)
7. The effect of arable field margin composition on invertebrate biodiversity
8. How effective are European agri‐environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity?
9. Does specialization explain rarity and decline among British bumblebees? A response to Goulson et al.
10. Neonicotinoid Pesticide Reduces Bumble Bee Colony Growth and Queen Production (Science)

Their papers

• Pollinator monitoring more than pays for itself (2020) — 92 citations
• Monitoring insect pollinators and flower visitation: The effectiveness and feasibility of different survey methods (2019) — 149 citations
• Widespread losses of pollinating insects in Britain (2019) — 610 citations
• Identifying key knowledge needs for evidence‐based conservation of wild insect pollinators: a collaborative cross‐sectoral exercise (2013) — 100 citations
• Molecular and spatial analyses reveal links between colony-specific foraging distance and landscape-level resource availability in two bumblebee species (2012) — 91 citations
• Management to enhance pollen and nectar resources for bumblebees and butterflies within intensively farmed landscapes (2011) — 120 citations
• Comparing the efficacy of agri‐environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and diversity on arable field margins (2006) — 465 citations
• Assessing the value of annual and perennial forage mixtures for bumblebees by direct observation and pollen analysis (2006) — 118 citations
• Declines in forage availability for bumblebees at a national scale (2006) — 409 citations
• Determinants of overwintering habitat quality for beetles and spiders on arable farmland (2005) — 138 citations
• Providing foraging resources for bumblebees in intensively farmed landscapes (2005) — 267 citations
• The response of foraging bumblebees to successional change in newly created arable field margins (2004) — 157 citations
• Assessing habitat quality for butterflies on intensively managed arable farmland (2004) — 146 citations
• Habitat use and conservation of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) under different grassland management regimes (2002) — 247 citations