Correction: Effects of a Possible Pollinator Crisis on Food Crop Production in Brazil.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167292.].

Effects of a Possible Pollinator Crisis on Food Crop Production in Brazil.

Animal pollinators contribute to human food production and security thereby ensuring an important component of human well-being. The recent decline of these agents in Europe and North America has aroused the concern of a potential global pollinator crisis. In order to prioritize efforts for pollinator conservation, we evaluated the extent to which food production depends on animal pollinators in Brazil-one of the world's agriculture leaders-by comparing cultivated area, produced volume and yield value of major food crops that are pollinator dependent with those that are pollinator non-dependent. In addition, we valued the ecosystem service of pollination based on the degree of pollinator dependence of each crop and the consequence of a decline in food production to the Brazilian Gross Domestic Product and Brazilian food security. A total of 68% of the 53 major food crops in Brazil depend to some degree on animals for pollination. Pollinator non-dependent crops produce a greater volume of food, mainly because of the high production of sugarcane, but the cultivated area and monetary value of pollinator dependent crops are higher (59% of total cultivated area and 68% of monetary value). The loss of pollination services for 29 of the major food crops would reduce production by 16.55-51 million tons, which would amount to 4.86-14.56 billion dollars/year, and reduce the agricultural contribution to the Brazilian GDP by 6.46%- 19.36%. These impacts would be largely absorbed by family farmers, which represent 74.4% of the agricultural labor force in Brazil. The main effects of a pollinator crisis in Brazil would be felt by the poorer and more rural classes due to their lower income and direct or exclusive dependence on this ecosystem service.

Seasonal timing of pseudoviviparous reproduction of Leiothrix (Eriocaulaceae) rupestrian species in South-eastern Brazil.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pseudovivipary is an asexual reproductive strategy. Leiothrix spiralis and L. vivipara (Eriocaulaceae) are pseudoviviparous and occur in rupestrian grasslands, a habitat that has a predominance of sandy and shallow soil, with low water retention. This study aims to investigate the seasonal variation effect of moisture availability on L. spiralis and L. vivipara pseudoviviparous reproduction, and to compare their life history attributes, on rupestrian grasslands in Southeastern Brazil. METHODS: A field study was conducted, including observations concerning pseudoviviparous reproduction and measurement of demographic variables in both L. spiralis and L. vivipara. Soil moisture measurements were also performed to study its effect on the pseudoviviparous reproduction of L. spiralis and L. vivipara. KEY RESULTS: Flower head and plantlet production in L. spiralis were highly correlated with soil moisture. All scapes split off in the drier period, indicating that this is a splitter ramet species. Plantlet mortality was positively correlated with scapes splitting off. The L. vivipara phenophases were not synchronized to the variation in soil moisture, since flower heads and plantlets were produced throughout the year. Moreover, the splitting off of scapes was not observed. In addition, plantlets were formed early, as soon as the flower heads appeared, and remained suspended. Therefore, this species was called 'canopy forming'. CONCLUSIONS: Seasonal timing of pseudoviviparous reproduction can be a vital component of the successful establishment of plantlets in L. spiralis, considering that in this species the plantlets are formed only after the flower head touches the ground. In contrast, in L. vivipara, the plantlets are formed early, without touching the ground. Moreover, L. spiralis is a splitter ramet species, while L. vivipara is a canopy-forming species. The pseudoviviparous canopy-forming strategy appears to be more advantageous than the splitter ramet strategy, because even under similar soil moisture conditions, the survival of L. vivipara plantlets was greater than that of L. spiralis.