Piotr Skorka

Dr. Piotr Skorka


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2011 in Acta Ornithologica
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Piotr TryjanowskiPiotr Tryjanowski
Piotr Tryjanowski
THTibor Hartel
Tibor Hartel
ABAndrás Báldi
András Báldi
PSPaweł Szymański
Paweł Szymański
MTMarcin Tobolka
Marcin Tobolka
MŻMichał Żmihorski
Michał Żmihorski

1 July 2009 in Biological Conservation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDawid Moroń
Dawid Moroń
MLMagdalena Lenda
Magdalena Lenda
PSPiotr Skorka
Piotr Skorka
HSHajnalka Szentgyorgyi
Hajnalka Szentgyorgyi
JSJosef Settele
Josef Settele
MWMichal Woyciechowski
Michal Woyciechowski

24 May 2015 in Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Piotr TryjanowskiPiotr Tryjanowski
Piotr Tryjanowski
PSPiotr Skorka
Piotr Skorka
TSTim H. Sparks
Tim H. Sparks
WBWaldemar Biaduń
Waldemar Biaduń
TBTomasz Brauze
Tomasz Brauze
DWDariusz Wysocki
Dariusz Wysocki
Bird feeding is one of the most widespread direct interactions between man and nature, and this has important social and environmental consequences. However, this activity can differ between rural and urban habitats, due to inter alia habitat structure, human behaviour and the composition of wintering bird communities. We counted birds in 156 squares (0.25 km2 each) in December 2012 and again in January 2013 in locations in and around 26 towns and cities across Poland (in each urban area, we surveyed 3 squares and also 3 squares in nearby rural areas). At each count, we noted the number of bird feeders, the number of bird feeders with food, the type of feeders, additional food supplies potentially available for birds (bread offered by people, bins) and finally the birds themselves. In winter, urban and rural areas differ in the availability of food offered intentionally and unintentionally to birds by humans. Both types of food availability are higher in urban areas. Our findings suggest that different types of bird feeder support only those species specialized for that particular food type and this relationship is similar in urban and rural areas.

9 November 2011 in Journal of Applied Ecology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DMDawid Moroń
Dawid Moroń
IGIrena M. Grześ
Irena M. Grześ
PSPiotr Skorka
Piotr Skorka
HSHajnalka Szentgyorgyi
Hajnalka Szentgyorgyi
RLRyszard Laskowski
Ryszard Laskowski
MWMichał Woyciechowski
Michał Woyciechowski
Summary: 1. Wild bees are one of the most important groups of pollinators in the temperate zone. Therefore, population declines have potentially negative impacts for both crop and wildflower pollination. Although heavy metal pollution is recognized to be a problem affecting large parts of the European Union, we currently lack insights into the effects of heavy metals on wild bees.2. We investigated whether heavy metal pollution is a potential threat to wild bee communities by comparing (i) species number, (ii) diversity and (iii) abundance as well as (iv) natural mortality of emerging bees along two independent gradients of heavy metal pollution, one at Olkusz (OLK), Poland and the other at Avonmouth (AVO), UK. We used standardized nesting traps to measure species richness and abundance of wild bees, and we recorded the heavy metal concentration in pollen collected by the red mason bee Osmia rufa as a measure of pollution.3. The concentration of cadmium, lead and zinc in pollen collected by bees ranged from a background level in unpolluted sites [OLK: 1·3, 43·4, 99·8 (mg kg−1); AVO: 0·8, 42·0, 56·0 (mg kg−1), respectively] to a high level on sites in the vicinity of the OLK and AVO smelters [OLK: 6·7, 277·0, 440·1 (mg kg−1); AVO: 9·3, 356·2, 592·4 (mg kg−1), respectively].4. We found that with increasing heavy metal concentration, there was a steady decrease in the number, diversity and abundance of solitary, wild bees. In the most polluted sites, traps were empty or contained single occupants, whereas in unpolluted sites, the nesting traps collected from 4 to 5 species represented by up to ten individuals. Moreover, the proportion of dead individuals of the solitary bee Megachile ligniseca increased along the heavy metal pollution gradient at OLK from 0·2 in uncontaminated sites to 0·5 in sites with a high concentration of pollution.5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings highlight the negative relationship between heavy metal pollution and populations of wild bees and suggest that increasing wild bee richness in highly contaminated areas will require special conservation strategies. These may include creating suitable nesting sites and sowing a mixture of flowering plants as well as installing artificial nests with wild bee cocoons in polluted areas. Applying protection plans to wild pollinating bee communities in heavy metal‐contaminated areas will contribute to integrated land rehabilitation to minimize the impact of pollution on the environment.

11 August 2005 in Population Ecology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Piotr NowickiPiotr Nowicki
Piotr Nowicki
MWMadgalena Witek
Madgalena Witek
PSPiotr Skorka
Piotr Skorka
JSJosef Settele
Josef Settele
MWMichal Woyciechowski
Michal Woyciechowski

1 August 2007 in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PSPiotr Skorka
Piotr Skorka
JSJosef Settele
Josef Settele
MWMichal Woyciechowski
Michal Woyciechowski