Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction
Meta-Analysis on Different Taxa
References
All Topics
Environmental Science
Ecology

Biodiversity Drifts in Agricultural Landscapes

Profile image of Olga M. C. C. AmeixaOlga M. C. C. Ameixa

2011, InTech eBooks

visibility

…

description

21 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

We are in the midst of the sixth global mass extinction event (McNeely & Scherr, 2002; Thomas et al., 2004). Around the globe, biological communities that took millions of years to develop-including tropical rain forests, coral reefs, old-growth forests, prairies and coastal wetlands-have been devastated as a result of human actions. Biologists predict that tens of thousands of species and millions of unique populations will go extinct in the coming decades (Brown & Laband, 2006; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005a). If the current predictions are correct, the rates of environmental changes may outpace the capacities of organisms to adapt to the changes. There are seven major threats to biodiversity: habitat destruction; habitat fragmentation; habitat degradation (including pollution); global climate change; the overexploitation of species for human use; the invasion of exotic species; and the increased spread of disease. Most threatened species and ecosystems face at least two or more of these threats, which can interact synergistically to speed the way to extinction and hinder efforts at protecting biodiversity (Burgman et al., 2007; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005b). All seven threats are the result of an expanding human population's ever increasing use of the world's natural resources (Primack, 2008). Agroecosystems include a large proportion of the world's biodiversity (Pimentel et al., 1992). Over the past two decades, research has demonstrated the value of agricultural biodiversity in all its forms, including crop and livestock genetic diversity, and associated species important for production, for example, pollinators, soil microorganisms, beneficial insects, and predators of pests and wild species that occur in agricultural landscapes (Uphoff et al., 2006). Some species are almost completely dependent on agricultural habitats for survival, e.g. Great Bustard Otis tarda, Grey Partridge Perdix perdix or the Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa (Kleijn et al., 2006). Since the 1960's both industrial agriculture in developed countries and the original green revolution in developing countries have depended on improved seeds, chemical fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation. This production model involved a small number of crops, generally in monoculture (to increase efficiency in use of inputs and mechanization), increased pesticide and fertilizer use and short crop-rotations (Benton et al., 2003). Wild flora and fauna were considered direct competitors for resources or harvested products, www.intechopen.com Ecosystems Biodiversity 316 while water was diverted from wetlands and natural habitats for irrigation (Uphoff et al., 2006), and intensification has reduced the suitability of agricultural fields for a wide range of organisms (Benton et al., 2003). The cultivation of annual crops has expanded at the cost of non-crop habitats such as extensive grasslands, fallow, hedges and field margins (Benton et al., 2003; Tilman et al., 2001b). Non-crop habitats provide dispersal corridors for wildlife and habitat islands required by many species as refuges and feeding areas (Öckinger & Smith, 2007; Stoate et al., 2001). Non-crop habitats can also act as biodiversity reservoirs for natural enemies, which can potentially improve natural pest control in agricultural landscapes (Ives et al., 2000; Wilby & Thomas, 2002), however, they can also act as reservoirs for pest species, which can colonize the crops (van Emden, 1965). The expansion of agricultural intensification (AI) is often considered to be an important factor that has contributed to a rapid decline in biodiversity in agroecosystems (Benton et al., 2003; Mattison & Norris, 2005) and negatively affected the production of ecosystem services, e.g., maintenance of fertile soils, biotic regulation, nutrient recycling, assimilation of wastes, sequestration of carbon dioxide, and maintenance of genetic information (

Figures (8)
Krebs et al. (1999) suggest that biodiversity in agroecosystems depends on both farm management and landscape heterogeneity. Landscape context can modify the influence of organic farming on plants (Roschewitz et al., 2005a) or may be even more important for the diversity of bees, butterflies, carabids and spiders than the local farming system (Kremen et al., 2002; Schmidt et al., 2005; Weibull et al., 2000; Weibull et al., 2003). The contrasting results between organic and conventional fields maybe larger when these fields are isolated in homogeneous landscapes and the species pool may be too small to allow a response in terms of biodiversity to organic farming (Tscharntke et al., 2005). The landscape context of an agricultural field may make a difference in compensating field isolation or agricultural practices that reduce diversity. Field boundaries, hedges and fallows satisfy a set of wildlife requirements (refuge, food, breeding sites, etc.) that promote enoriac noarcictancoa in aonweriwiltyaral landcranac (Rantnn ot al NNN2\ facilitating Ananth +o_
Krebs et al. (1999) suggest that biodiversity in agroecosystems depends on both farm management and landscape heterogeneity. Landscape context can modify the influence of organic farming on plants (Roschewitz et al., 2005a) or may be even more important for the diversity of bees, butterflies, carabids and spiders than the local farming system (Kremen et al., 2002; Schmidt et al., 2005; Weibull et al., 2000; Weibull et al., 2003). The contrasting results between organic and conventional fields maybe larger when these fields are isolated in homogeneous landscapes and the species pool may be too small to allow a response in terms of biodiversity to organic farming (Tscharntke et al., 2005). The landscape context of an agricultural field may make a difference in compensating field isolation or agricultural practices that reduce diversity. Field boundaries, hedges and fallows satisfy a set of wildlife requirements (refuge, food, breeding sites, etc.) that promote enoriac noarcictancoa in aonweriwiltyaral landcranac (Rantnn ot al NNN2\ facilitating Ananth +o_
Fig. 2. Hypothetical non-linear effects of landscape complexity around cultivated fields on the biological diversity in such fields. Dmax: saturation point of complexity, above which landscapes are so complex that no further effects of complexity are expected; Dyin: minimum threshold of complexity below which landscapes are too simple for maintaining biodiversity (adapted from Conception 2008).
Fig. 2. Hypothetical non-linear effects of landscape complexity around cultivated fields on the biological diversity in such fields. Dmax: saturation point of complexity, above which landscapes are so complex that no further effects of complexity are expected; Dyin: minimum threshold of complexity below which landscapes are too simple for maintaining biodiversity (adapted from Conception 2008).
Biodiversity Drifts in Agricultural Landscapes
Biodiversity Drifts in Agricultural Landscapes
Fig. 3. Frequencies of papers claiming various types of effect of AI on biodiversity for the four taxa studied. G-test, significance 5%
Fig. 3. Frequencies of papers claiming various types of effect of AI on biodiversity for the four taxa studied. G-test, significance 5%
Fig. 4. Frequencies of papers claiming various types of effect of landscape structure on biodiversity for the four taxa studied. G-test, significance 5%
Fig. 4. Frequencies of papers claiming various types of effect of landscape structure on biodiversity for the four taxa studied. G-test, significance 5%

Related papers

Land-use changes and biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes. A case study
Javier Sanz Cañada

A wide range of global biodiversity is concentrated in rural landscapes. Indeed, many wild species and natural habitats are directly or indirectly associated with agricultural systems. In turn, some genomes of wild species can contribute, on one hand, to agricultural productivity and quality and, on the other, to ongoing biological control of crop-specific pests. Thus, management of these landscapes should consider applying agricultural practices adapted to biodiversity conservation, which will also result in enhanced production levels. One way to infer the state of conservation of biodiversity in rural landscapes is through knowledge of their spatial structure, i.e., the configuration and composition of different land uses and remnant natural vegetation. This knowledge can serve to evaluate the behavior of the ecological processes associated with the above mentioned structure and to assess the integrity of the landscape and its potential biodiversity. The current spatial pattern of...

View PDFchevron_right
Trends in agricultural biodiversity
Vernon H Heywood

Perspectives on new crops and new uses, 1999

Although the context of this paper is a “World Biodiversity Update,” any attempt at such would be pre-sumptuous if not impossible. What I will attempt, however, is to highlight some of the major developments in biodiversity action and policy that have emerged during the past year or ...

View PDFchevron_right
New services and roles of biodiversity in modern agroecosystems: A review
Behnam Kamkar

Ecological Indicators, 2018

Ecosystem services and biodiversity are critical to ensure sustainable development of agricultural activities. Based on available scientific knowledge, high shares of biodiversity are followed by more carbon sequestration, reduced soil erosion risk, improved production and food security. This review aims to detect biodiversity services in three aspects; (1) providing ecosystem services in modern agroecosystems in response to future challenges, (2) the ability of biodiversity to support agroecosystems, and (3) the agenda for future research on biodiversity. To address our research objectives, we conducted a widespread literature search to estimate new services and roles of biodiversity in modern agroecosystems. The search was set from the date of the first relevant article until the end of the year 2017. Biodiversity is measured by many indices. Many recent studies have proposed new methods and software for biodiversity assessment such as BioFTF, BAT, LaDy and Entropart. According to the present literature review, biodiversity has a pervasive role in climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies. Levels of biodiversity, such as genetic, species and ecosystem, can affect pest control in several ways such as biological control, resulting in complex multi-trophic interactions. The relationships between land use and biodiversity are fundamental in understanding the links between people and their environment. Two models have been planned to increase production in agroecosystems whilst minimizing the consequences for biodiversity: land sharing and land sparing. Studies have shown how biodiversity can be integrated into Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on a global scale. LCA mainly introduces biodiversity as an endpoint category modeled as a loss in species richness due to the conversion and management of land in time and space. This review shows that ecological restoration of agroecosystems is generally effective and can be recommended as a way to increase biodiversity in agricultural ecosystems. The conservation, management, and sustainable use of these services require specific attention and a coherent global policy approach. In conclusion, to protect biodiversity in agroecosystems, a policy consonance and strategic support to ecosystems should be considered. This review suggests that advanced research are needed on relationships between biodiversity and genetic erosion, map of life, pest control and urban agriculture. 1) the ability of biodiversity to support ecosystems as modern

View PDFchevron_right
Biodiversity conservation in agriculture requires a multi-scale approach
Katherine Ennis
View PDFchevron_right
Predicting biodiversity change and averting collapse in agricultural landscapes
Chase Mendenhall

The equilibrium theory of island biogeography 1 is the basis for estimating extinction rates 2 and a pillar of conservation science 3,4 . The default strategy for conserving biodiversity is the designation of nature reserves, treated as islands in an inhospitable sea of human activity 5 . Despite the profound influence of islands on conservation theory and practice 3,4 , their mainland analogues, forest fragments in human-dominated landscapes, consistently defy expected biodiversity patterns based on island biogeography theory . Countryside biogeography is an alternative framework, which recognizes that the fate of the world's wildlife will be decided largely by the hospitality of agricultural or countryside ecosystems 12,14-17 . Here we directly test these biogeographic theories by comparing a Neotropical countryside ecosystem with a nearby island ecosystem, and show that each supports similar bat biodiversity in fundamentally different ways. The island ecosystem conforms to island biogeographic predictions of bat species loss, in which the water matrix is not habitat. In contrast, the countryside ecosystem has high species richness and evenness across forest reserves and smaller forest fragments. Relative to forest reserves and fragments, deforested countryside habitat supports a less species-rich, yet equally even, bat assemblage. Moreover, the bat assemblage associated with deforested habitat is compositionally novel because of predictable changes in abundances by many species using human-made habitat. Finally, we perform a global meta-analysis of bat biogeographic studies, spanning more than 700 species. It generalizes our findings, showing that separate biogeographic theories for countryside and island ecosystems are necessary. A theory of countryside biogeography is essential to conservation strategy in the agricultural ecosystems that comprise roughly half of the global land surface and are likely to increase even further 14 .

View PDFchevron_right
Biodiversity at risk under future cropland expansion and intensification
Alfredo Romero-Muñoz

Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2017

View PDFchevron_right
Effects of biotechnology on biodiversity: herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant GM crops
Klaus Ammann

TRENDS in Biotechnology, 2005

View PDFchevron_right
Comparative biodiversity along a gradient of agricultural landscapes
Jacques Baudry

Acta Oecologica-international Journal of Ecology, 1998

View PDFchevron_right
Biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: Investing without losing interest
Unai Pascual

Agriculture …, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
How Agricultural Intensification Affects Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
Juan Jose Contreras Gomez

Advances in Ecological Research, 2016

Introduction 1.1 General Objective and Goals 2. The CAP and AI 2.1 CAP as a Driver of Agriculture in Europe 2.2 How Does CAP Affect AI? 2.3 How Does CAP Affect Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Through AI? 2.4 The AGRIPOPES Project-Examining the Multiple Effects of AI on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 3. Local-Level and Landscape-Level Effects of AI 3.1 Local (Field)-Level Components of AI and Their Effect on Biodiversity 3.2 Landscape-Level Components of AI and Their Effect of Biodiversity 3.3 Farm-Level Components of AI 3.4 Comparing the Importance of Local-vs Landscape-Level Components of AI on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 4. Organic-Conventional Comparisons 4.1 Landscape Context 4.2 Functional and Taxon-Specific Responses of Biodiversity to Farming Practices 5. Linking AI to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 5.1 General Model 5.2 Study Area, Biodiversity Surveys and Biocontrol Experiment 5.3 Structural Equation Modelling 5.4 Results and Discussion of SEM

View PDFchevron_right

References (110)

  1. References
  2. Alavanja, M. C. R.; Ward, M. H. & Reynolds, P. (2007). Carcinogenicity of agricultural pesticides in adults and children, Journal of Agromedicine, 12, 39-56.
  3. Ameixa, O. M. C. C. & Kindlmann, P. (2008). Agricultural policy-induced landscape changes: effects on carabid abundance and their biocontrol potential, European Journal of Entomology, 105, 467-476.
  4. Asteraki, E. J.; Hanks, C. B. & Clements, R. O. (1995). The influence of different types of grassland field margin on carabid beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) communities, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 54, 195-202.
  5. Aviron, S.; Burel, F.; Baudry, J. & Schermann, N. (2005). Carabid assemblages in agricultural landscapes: impacts of habitat features, landscape context at different spatial scales and farming intensity, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 108, 205-217.
  6. Banks, J. E. & Stark, J. D. (2004). Aphid response to vegetation diversity and insecticide applications, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 103, 595-599.
  7. Batáry, P.; Báldi, A.; Szél, G.; Podlussány, A.; Rozner, I. & Erdős, S. (2007). Responses of grassland specialist and generalist beetles to management and landscape complexity, Diversity and Distributions, 13, 196-202.
  8. Bates, F. S. & Harris, S. (2009). Does hedgerow management on organic farms benefit small mammal populations?, Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 129, 124-130.
  9. Bengtsson, J.; Ahnström, J. & Weibull, A.-C. (2005). The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Ecology, 42, 261- 269.
  10. Benton, T. G.; Bryant, D. M.; Cole, L. & Crick, H. Q. P. (2002). Linking agricultural practice to insect and bird populations: A historical study over three decades, Journal of Applied Ecology, 39, 673-687.
  11. Benton, T. G.; Vickery, J. A. & Wilson, J. D. (2003). Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key?, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 18, 182-188.
  12. Blackburn, J. & Wallace, A. (2001). Comparative abundance of centipedes on organic and conventional farms, and its possible relation to declines in farmland bird populations, Basic and Applied Ecology, 2, 373-381.
  13. Blake, S.; Foster, G. N.; Eyre, M. D. & Luff, M. L. (1994). Effects of habitat type and grassland management practices on the body size distribution of carabid beetles, Pedobiologia, 38, 502-512.
  14. Bradbury, R. B.; Browne, S. J.; Stevens, D. K. & Aebischer, N. J. (2004). Five-year evaluation of the impact of the Arable Stewardship Pilot Scheme on birds, Ibis, 146, 171-180.
  15. Brittain, C.; Bommarco, R.; Vighi, M.; Settele, J. & Potts, S. G. (2010). Organic farming in isolated landscapes does not benefit flower-visiting insects and pollination, Biological Conservation, 143, 1860-1867.
  16. Brown, R. M. & Laband, D. N. (2006). Species imperilment and spatial patterns of development in the United States, Conservation Biology, 20, 239-244.
  17. Burel, F.; Baudry, J.; Butet, A.; Clergeau, P.; Delettre, Y.; Le Coeur, D.; Dubs, F.; Morvan, N.; Paillat, G.; Petit, S.; Thenail, C.; Brunel, E. & Lefeuvre, J.-C. (1998). Comparative biodiversity along a gradient of agricultural landscapes, Acta Oecologica, 19, 47-60.
  18. Burel, F.; Butet, A.; Delettre, Y. R. & Millàn de la Peña, N. (2004). Differential response of selected taxa to landscape context and agricultural intensification, Landscape and Urban Planning, 67, 195-204.
  19. Burgman, M. A.; Keith, D.; Hopper, S. D.; Widyatmoko, D. & Drill, C. (2007). Threat syndromes and conservation of the Australian flora, Biological Conservation, 134, 73-82.
  20. Chamberlain, D. E.; Fuller, R. J.; Bunce, R. G. H.; Duckworth, J. C. & Shrubb, M. (2000). Changes in the abundance of farmland birds in relation to the timing of agricultural intensification in England and Wales, Journal of Applied Ecology, 37, 771-788.
  21. Clay, J. W. (2004). World Agriculture and the Environment: A Commodity-by-Commodity Guide to Impacts and Practices, Island Press, Washington DC, USA.
  22. Clough, Y.; Holzschuh, A.; Gabriel, D.; Purtauf, T.; Kleijn, D.; Kruess, A.; Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Tscharntke, T. (2007a). Alpha and beta diversity of arthropods and plants in organically and conventionally managed wheat fields, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 804-812.
  23. Clough, Y.; Kruess, A. & Tscharntke, T. (2007b). Local and landscape factors in differently managed arable fields affect the insect herbivore community of a non-crop plant species, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 22-28.
  24. Cole, L.; McCracken, D.; Downie, I.; Dennis, P.; Foster, G.; Waterhouse, T.; Murphy, K.; Griffin, A. & Kennedy, M. (2005). Comparing the effects of farming practices on ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and spider (Araneae) assemblages of Scottish farmland, Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 441-460.
  25. Concepción, E.; Díaz, M. & Baquero, R. (2008). Effects of landscape complexity on the ecological effectiveness of agri-environment schemes, Landscape Ecology, 23, 135- 148.
  26. Davey, C. M.; Vickery, J. A.; Boatman, N. D.; Chamberlain, D. E.; Parry, H. R. & Siriwardena, G. M. (2010). Assessing the impact of Entry Level Stewardship on lowland farmland birds in England, Ibis, 152, 459-474.
  27. Davy, C. M.; Russo, D. & Fenton, M. B. (2007). Use of native woodlands and traditional olive groves by foraging bats on a Mediterranean island: consequences for conservation, Journal of Zoology, 273, 397-405.
  28. Delgado, A. & Moreira, F. (2010). Between-year variations in Little Bustard Tetrax tetrax population densities are influenced by agricultural intensification and rainfall, Ibis, 152, 633-642.
  29. Di Giulio, M.; Edwards, P. J. & Meister, E. (2001). Enhancing insect diversity in agricultural grasslands: the roles of management and landscape structure, Journal of Applied Ecology, 38, 310-319.
  30. Dıaz, M. & Telleria, J. L. (1994). Predicting the effects of agricultural changes in central Spain croplands on seed-eating overwintering birds, Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 49, 289-298.
  31. Dich, J.; Zahm, S. H.; Hanberg, A. & Adami, H.-O. (1997). Pesticides and Cancer, Cancer Causes & Control, 8, 420-443.
  32. Dinham, B. & Malik, S. L. L. M. (2003). Pesticides and Human Rights, International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 9, 40-52.
  33. Doxa, A.; Bas, Y.; Paracchini, M. L.; Pointereau, P.; Terres, J. M. & Jiguet, F. (2010). Low- intensity agriculture increases farmland bird abundances in France, Journal of Applied Ecology, 47, 1348-1356.
  34. Duelli, P. & Obrist, M. K. (2003). Regional biodiversity in an agricultural landscape: the contribution of seminatural habitat islands, Basic and Applied Ecology, 4, 129-138.
  35. Duelli, P.; Obrist, M. K. & Schmatz, D. R. (1999). Biodiversity evaluation in agricultural landscapes: above-ground insects, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 74, 33- 64. European Environment Agency report (2004). High Nature Value Farmland - Characteristics, Trends and Policy Challenges., Copenhagen.
  36. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (2003). Jelle Bruinsma, Rome.
  37. Feehan, J.; Gillmor, D. A. & Culleton, N. (2005). Effects of an agri-environment scheme on farmland biodiversity in Ireland, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 107, 275- 286.
  38. Geiger, F.; Bengtsson, J.; Berendse, F.; Weisser, W. W.; Emmerson, M.; Morales, M. B.; Ceryngier, P.; Liira, J.; Tscharntke, T.; Winqvist, C.; Eggers, S.; Bommarco, R.; Pärt, T.; Bretagnolle, V.; Plantegenest, M.; Clement, L. W.; Dennis, C.; Palmer, C.; Oñate, J. J.; Guerrero, I.; Hawro, V.; Aavik, T.; Thies, C.; Flohre, A.; Hänke, S.; Fischer, C.; Goedhart, P. W. & Inchausti, P. (2010). Persistent negative effects of pesticides on biodiversity and biological control potential on European farmland, Basic and Applied Ecology, 11, 97-105.
  39. Genghini, M.; Gellini, S. & Gustin, M. (2006). Organic and integrated agriculture: the effects on bird communities in orchard farms in northern Italy, Biodiversity and Conservation, 15, 3077-3094.
  40. Gibson, R. H.; Pearce, S.; Morris, R. J.; Symondson, W. O. C. & Memmott, J. (2007). Plant diversity and land use under organic and conventional agriculture: a whole-farm approach, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 792-803.
  41. Groppali, R. (1993). Breeding birds in traditional tree rows and Hedges in the central Po Valley (Province of Cremona, Northern Italy), In Landscape Ecology and Agroecosystems (Eds, Bunce, R. G. H., Ryszkowski, L. and Paoletti, M. G.) Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp. 153-158.
  42. Hald, A. B. (1999). Weed vegetation (wild flora) of long established organic versus conventional cereal fields in Denmark, Annals of Applied Biology, 134, 307-314.
  43. Hasken, K.-H. & Poehling, H.-M. (1995). Effects of different intensities of fertilisers and pesticides on aphids and aphid predators in winter wheat, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 52, 45-50.
  44. Hendrickx, F.; Maelfait, J.-P.; Van Wingerden, W.; Schweiger, O.; Speelmans, M.; Aviron, S.; Augenstein, I.; Billeter, R.; Bailey, D.; Bukacek, R.; Burel, F. O.; Diekötter, T. I. M.; Dirksen, J.; Herzog, F.; Liira, J.; Roubalova, M.; Vandomme, V. & Bugter, R. O. B. (2007). How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 340-351.
  45. Hodgson, J. A.; Kunin, W. E.; Thomas, C. D.; Benton, T. G. & Gabriel, D. (2010). Comparing organic farming and land sparing: optimizing yield and butterfly populations at a landscape scale, Ecology Letters, 13, 1358-1367.
  46. Hole, D. G.; Perkins, A. J.; Wilson, J. D.; Alexander, I. H.; Grice, F. & Evans, A. D. (2005). Does organic farming benefit biodiversity?, Biological Conservation, 122, 113-130.
  47. Holling, C. S. (1996). Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience, In Engineering Within Ecological Constraints (Ed, Schulze, P.) National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 31-44.
  48. Holzschuh, A.; Steffan-Dewenter, I.; Kleijn, D. & Tscharntke, T. (2007). Diversity of flower- visiting bees in cereal fields: Effects of farming system, landscape composition and regional context, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 41 -49.
  49. Hooper, D. U.; Chapin, F. S.; Ewel, J. J.; Hector, A.; Inchausti, P.; Lavorel, S.; Lawton, J. H.; Lodge, D. M.; Loreau, M.; Naeem, S.; Schmid, B.; Setälä, H.; Symstad, A. J.; Vandermeer, J. & Wardle, D. A. (2005). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge, Ecological Monographs, 75, 3-35.
  50. Hutton, S. A. & Giller, P. S. (2003). The effects of the intensification of agriculture on northern temperate dung beetle communities, Journal of Applied Ecology, 40, 994- 1007.
  51. Hyvönen, T.; Ketoja, E.; Salonen, J.; Jalli, H. & Tiainen, J. (2003). Weed species diversity and community composition in organic and conventional cropping of spring cereals, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 97, 131-149.
  52. Ives, A. R.; Klug, J. L. & Gross, K. (2000). Stability and species richness in complex communities, Ecology Letters, 3, 399-411.
  53. Kitahara, M. & Sei, K. (2001). A comparison of the diversity and structure of butterfly communities in semi-natural and human-modified grassland habitats at the foot of Mt. Fuji, central Japan, Biodiversity and Conservation, 10, 331-351.
  54. Kleijn, D.; Baquero, R. A.; Clough, Y.; Díaz, M.; De Esteban, J.; Fernández, F.; Gabriel, D.; Herzog, F.; Holzschuh, A.; Jöhl, R.; Knop, E.; Kruess, A.; Marshall, E. J. P.; Steffan- Dewenter, I.; Tscharntke, T.; Verhulst, J.; West, T. M. & Yela, J. L. (2006). Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries, Ecology Letters, 9, 243-254.
  55. Kleijn, D.; Berendse, F.; Smit, R. & Gilissen, N. (2001). Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes, Nature, 413, 723- 725.
  56. Kleijn, D.; Berendse, F.; Smit, R.; Gilissen, N.; Smit, J.; Brak, B. & Groeneveld, R. (2004). Ecological Effectiveness of Agri-Environment Schemes in Different Agricultural Landscapes in The Netherlands, Conservation Biology, 18, 775-786.
  57. Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W. J. (2003). How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity?, Journal of Applied Ecology, 40, 947- 969.
  58. Kleijn, D. & van Zuijlen, G. J. C. (2004). The conservation effects of meadow bird agreements on farmland in Zeeland, The Netherlands, in the period 1989-1995, Biological Conservation, 117, 443-451.
  59. Knop, E. V. A.; Kleijn, D.; Herzog, F. & Schmid, B. (2006). Effectiveness of the Swiss agri- environment scheme in promoting biodiversity, Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 120-127.
  60. Krebs, J. R.; Wilson, J. D.; Bradbury, R. B. & Siriwardena, G. M. (1999). The second Silent Spring?, Nature, 400, 611-612.
  61. Kremen, C.; Williams, N. M.; Bugg, R. L.; Fay, J. P. & Thorp, R. W. (2004). The area requirements of an ecosystem service: crop pollination by native bee communities in California, Ecology Letters, 7, 1109-1119.
  62. Kremen, C.; Williams, N. M. & Thorp, R. W. (2002). Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99, 16812-16816.
  63. Mattison, E. H. A. & Norris, K. (2005). Bridging the gaps between agricultural policy, land- use and biodiversity, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20, 610-616.
  64. McNeely, J. A. & Scherr, S. J. (2002 ). Ecoagriculture: Strategies to Feed the World and Save Wild Biodiversity, Island Press, Washington, DC.
  65. Melnychuk, N. A.; Olfert, O.; Youngs, B. & Gillott, C. (2003). Abundance and diversity of Carabidae (Coleoptera) in different farming systems, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 95, 69-72.
  66. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005a). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, In Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Island Press, Covelo, CA.
  67. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005b). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis, In Millennium Ecosystem Assessment World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
  68. Mooney, H. A.; Cooper, A. & Reid, W. (2005). Confronting the human dilemma, Science, 434, 561-562.
  69. Öckinger, E. & Smith, H. G. (2007). Semi-natural grasslands as population sources for pollinating insects in agricultural landscapes, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 50-59.
  70. Östman, Ö. (2002). Distribution of bird cherry-oat aphids Rhopalosiphum padi (L.) in relation to landscape and farming practices, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 93, 67-71.
  71. Ottvall, R. & Smith, H. G. (2006). Effects of an agri-environment scheme on wader populations of coastal meadows of southern Sweden, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 113, 264-271.
  72. Peach, W. J.; Lovett, L. J.; Wotton, S. R. & Jeffs, C. (2001). Countryside stewardship delivers cirl buntings Emberiza cirlus in Devon, UK, Biological Conservation, 101, 361-373.
  73. Petit, S. & Burel, F. (1998). Effects of landscape dynamics on the metapopulation of a ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a hedgerow network, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 69, 243-252.
  74. Pfiffner, L. & Luka, H. (2003). Effects of low-input farming systems on carabids and epigeal spiders -a paired farm approach, Basic and Applied Ecology, 4, 117-127.
  75. Pimentel, D.; Stachow, U.; Takacs, D. A.; Brubaker, H. W.; Dumas, A. R.; Meaney, J. J.; O'Neill, J. A. S.; Onsi, D. E. & Corzelius, D. B. (1992). Conserving biological diversity in agricultural/forestry systems, Bioscience, 432, 354-362.
  76. Pocock, M. J. O. & Jennings, N. (2008). Testing biotic indicator taxa: the sensitivity of insectivorous mammals and their prey to the intensification of lowland agriculture, Journal of Applied Ecology, 45, 151-160.
  77. Primack, R. B. (2008). A Primer of Conservation Biology, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland , MA. Reganold, J. P.; Glover, J. D.; Andrews, P. K. & Hinman, H. R. (2001). Sustainability of three apple production systems, Nature, 410, 926-930.
  78. Robinson, R. A. & Sutherland, W. J. (2002). Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain, Journal of Applied Ecology, 39, 157-176.
  79. Roschewitz, I.; Gabriel, D.; Tscharntke, T. & Thies, C. (2005a). The effects of landscape complexity on arable weed species diversity in organic and conventional farming, Journal of Applied Ecology, 42, 873-882.
  80. Roschewitz, I.; Hücker, M.; Tscharntke, T. & Thies, C. (2005b). The influence of landscape context and farming practices on parasitism of cereal aphids, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 108, 218-227.
  81. Rundlöf, M.; Bengtsson, J. & Smith, H. G. (2008). Local and landscape effects of organic farming on butterfly species richness and abundance, Journal of Applied Ecology, 45, 813-820.
  82. Rundlof, M. & Smith, H. G. (2006). The effect of organic farming on butterfly diversity depends on landscape context, Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 1121-1127.
  83. Schmidt, M. H.; Roschewitz, I.; Thies, C. & Tscharntke, T. (2005). Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground-dwelling farmland spiders, Journal of Applied Ecology, 42, 281-287.
  84. Schmitzberger, I.; Wrbka, T.; Steurer, B.; Aschenbrenner, G.; Peterseil, J. & Zechmeister, H. G. (2005). How farming styles influence biodiversity maintenance in Austrian agricultural landscapes, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 108, 274-290.
  85. Shah, P. A.; Brooks, D. R.; Ashby, J. E.; Perry, J. N. & Woiwod, I. P. (2003). Diversity and abundance of the coleopteran fauna from organic and conventional management systems in southern England, Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 5, 51-60.
  86. Stoate, C.; Boatman, N. D.; Borralho, R. J.; Carvalho, C. R.; Snoo, G. R. d. & Eden, P. (2001). Ecological impacts of arable intensification in Europe, Journal of Environmental Management, 63, 337-365.
  87. Swift, M. (2004). Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes -Are we asking the right questions?, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 104, 113-134.
  88. Thies, C. & Tscharntke, T. (1999). Landscape structure and biological control in agroecosystems, Science, 285, 893-895.
  89. Thomas, J. A.; Telfer, M. G.; Roy, D. B.; Preston, C. D.; Greenwood, J. J. D.; Asher, J.; Fox, R.; Clarke, R. T. & Lawton, J. H. (2004). Comparative losses of British butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis, Science, 303, 1879-1881.
  90. Thorbek, P. & Bilde, T. (2004). Reduced numbers of generalist arthropod predators after crop management, Journal of Applied Ecology, 41, 526-538.
  91. Tilman, D.; Cassman, K. G.; Matson, P. A.; Naylor, R. & Polasky, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices, Nature, 418, 671-677.
  92. Tilman, D.; Fargione, J.; Wolff, B.; D'Antonio, C.; Dobson, A.; Howarth, R.; Schindler, D.; Schlesinger, W. H.; Simberloff, D. & Swackhamer, D. (2001a). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change, Science 292 (5515), 281-284.
  93. Tilman, D.; Fargione, J.; Wolff, B.; D'Antonio, C.; Dobson, A.; Howarth, R.; Schindler, D.; Schlesinger, W. H.; Simberloff, D. & Swackhamer, D. (2001b). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change, Science, 292, 281-284.
  94. Tscharntke, T.; Klein, A. M.; Kruess, A.; Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Thies, C. (2005). Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity -ecosystem service management, Ecology Letters, 8, 857-874.
  95. Tucker, G. M. & Heath, M. F. (1994). Birds in Europe: Their conservation status, Birdlife International, Cambridge.
  96. Tybirk, K.; Alrøe, H. F. & Frederiksen, P. (2004). Nature quality in organic farming: A conceptual analysis of considerations and criteria in a european context, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17, 249-274.
  97. Uphoff, N.; Ball, A. S.; Fernandes, E.; Herren, H.; Husson, O.; Laing, M.; Palm, C.; Pretty, J. & Sanchez, P. (Eds.) (2006) Biological approaches to sustainable soil systems, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
  98. van Emden, H. F. (1965). The role of uncultivated land in the biology of crop pests and beneficial insects, Scientific Horticulture, 17, 121-136.
  99. Vollhardt, I. M. G.; Tscharntke, T.; Wäckers, F. L.; Bianchi, F. J. J. A. & Thies, C. (2008). Diversity of cereal aphid parasitoids in simple and complex landscapes, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 126, 289-292.
  100. Weibull, A.-C.; Bengtsson, J. & Nohlgren, E. (2000). Diversity of butterflies in the agricultural landscape: the role of farming system and landscape heterogeneity, Ecography, 23, 743-750.
  101. Weibull, A.-C.; Östman, Ö. & Granqvist, Å. (2003). Species richness in agroecosystems: the effect of landscape, habitat and farm management, Biodiversity and Conservation, 12, 1335-1355.
  102. WHO and UN Environment Program (1990). Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 85-9.
  103. Wickramasinghe, L. P.; Harris, S.; Jones, G. & Vaughan Jennings, N. (2004). Abundance and Species Richness of Nocturnal Insects on Organic and Conventional Farms: Effects of Agricultural Intensification on Bat Foraging, Conservation Biology, 18, 1283- 1292.
  104. Wickramasinghe, L. P.; Harris, S.; Jones, G. & Vaughan, N. (2003). Bat activity and species richness on organic and conventional farms: impact of agricultural intensification, Journal of Applied Ecology, 40, 984-993.
  105. Wilby, A. & Thomas, M. B. (2002). Natural enemy diversity and pest control: patterns of pest emergence with agricultural intensification, Ecology Letters, 5, 353-360.
  106. Wilcove, D. S.; Rothstein, D.; Dubow, J.; Phillips, A. & Losos, E. (1998). Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States, Bioscience, 48, 607-615.
  107. Williamson, T. (1986). Parish boundaries and early fields: Continuity and discontinuity, Journal of Historical Geography, 12, 241-248.
  108. Wilson, A.; Vickery, J. & Pendlebury, C. (2007). Agri-environment schemes as a tool for reversing declining populations of grassland waders: Mixed benefits from Environmentally Sensitive Areas in England, Biological Conservation, 136, 128-135.
  109. Wood, S.; Sebastian, K. & Scherr, S. J. (2000). In International Food Policy Research Institute and World Resources InstituteWashington, DC, USA.
  110. Zahm, S. H. & Ward, M. H. (1998). Pesticides and Childhood Cancer, Environmental Health Perspectives, 106, 893-908.

Related papers

The impact of agricultural practices on biodiversity
Alison McLaughlin

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 1995

Agricultural activities such as tillage, drainage, intercropping, rotation, grazing and extensive usage of pesticides and fertilizers have significant implications for wild species of flora and fauna. Species capable of adapting to the agricultural landscape may be limited directly by the disturbance regimes of grazing, planting and harvesting, and indirectly by the abundance of plant and insect foods available. Some management techniques, such as drainage, create such fundamental habitat changes that there are significant shifts in species composition. This paper considers the relative merits of conventional tillage versus reduced, or notill farming, and reviews the benefits of rest-rotation grazing, crop rotation and intercropping in terms of maintaining wild species populations.

View PDFchevron_right
Agriculture Intensification - A Devastating Foe of AGRO-Biodiversity
Amit Kour

Acta Scientific Agriculture

The increasing demand for food and bio-energy leads to agriculture intensification that has driven the landscape heterogeneity decline, high agrochemical consumption, and abandonment of less fertile land per unit area as a result of which several species associated with farmland are unable to cope with the dramatic decline in both their range and abundance of distribution leading to loss of farmland diversity giving rise to conflict between intensive agriculture production and agro-faunal conservation goals with profound effects on the functioning of ecosystem challenging agro-industry to regulate such practices with sustainable intensification that facilitates persistence of indigenous biodiversity at scales that contribute to biodiversity at the national level for the beneficence of agro-faunal diversity at the same time. This paper assesses intensive farming practices on cropland relative to their impacts on biodiversity to determine whether it can help fill gaps in our knowledge about the management of farm landscape by conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification approach to prepare species sensitive new strategies and policies to fulfill all the proponents of benefits for conservation of agro-biodiversity.

View PDFchevron_right
Biodiversity in agriculture requires a multi-scale approach
Katherine Ennis, Hsun-Yi Hsieh, Jörgen Rudolphi

Biodiversity loss-one of the most prominent forms of modern environmental change-has been heavily driven by terrestrial habitat loss and, in particular, the spread and intensification of agriculture. Expanding agricultural land-use has led to the search for strong conservation strategies, with some suggesting that biodiversity conservation in agriculture is best maximized by reducing local management intensity, such as fertilizer and pesticide application. Others highlight the importance of landscape-level approaches that incorporate natural or semi-natural areas in landscapes surrounding farms. Here, we show that both of these practices are valuable to the conservation of biodiversity, and that either local or landscape factors can be most crucial to conservation planning depending on which types of organisms one wishes to save. We performed a quantitative review of 266 observations taken from 31 studies that compared the impacts of localized (within farm) management strategies and landscape complexity (around farms) on the richness and abundance of plant, invertebrate and vertebrate species in agro-ecosystems. While both factors significantly impacted species richness, the richness of sessile plants increased with less-intensive local management, but did not significantly respond to landscape complexity. By contrast, the richness of mobile vertebrates increased with landscape complexity, but did not significantly increase with less-intensive local management. Invertebrate richness and abundance responded to both factors. Our analyses point to clear differences in how various groups of organisms respond to differing scales of management, and suggest that preservation of multiple taxonomic groups will require multiple scales of conservation.

View PDFchevron_right
Ultimate drivers of native biodiversity change in agricultural systems
Nick Reid

F1000Research, 2013

(0) Comments 2 1 OPINION ARTICLE Ultimate drivers of native biodiversity change in agricultural systems [v1; ref status: indexed,

View PDFchevron_right
Combining biodiversity conservation with agricultural intensification
Christoph Scherber

2012

Lesson #1: Pesticides are a largely underestimated determinant of biodiversity loss.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Geography
  • Ecology
  • Agriculture
  • Biodiversity
  • Habitat Destruction
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved