Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e2016038118 |
| Journal | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America |
| Volume | 118 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| Publication status | Published - 9 Mar 2021 |
Abstract
Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aim to restore biodiversity and biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in landscapes impoverished by modern agriculture. However, a systematic, empirical evaluation of different AES types across multiple taxa and functional groups is missing. Within one orthogonal design, we studied sown flowering AES types with different temporal continuity, size, and landscape context and used calcareous grasslands as seminatural reference habitat. We measured species richness of 12 taxonomic groups (vascular plants, cicadas, orthopterans, bees, butterflies, moths, hoverflies, flower visiting beetles, parasitoid wasps, carabid beetles, staphylinid beetles, and birds) representing 5 trophic levels. A total of 54,955 specimens were identified using traditional taxonomic methods, and bulk arthropod samples were identified through DNA metabarcoding, resulting in a total of 1,077 and 2,110 taxa, respectively. Species richness of most taxonomic groups, as well as multidiversity and richness of pollinators, increased with temporal continuity of AES types. Some groups responded to size and landscape context, but multidiversity and richness of pollinators and natural enemies were not affected. AES flowering fields supported different species assemblages than calcareous grasslands, but assemblages became more similar to those in seminatural grasslands with increasing temporal continuity. Our results indicate that AES flowering fields and seminatural grasslands function synergistically. Flowering fields support biodiversity even when they are relatively small and in landscapes with few remaining seminatural habitats. We therefore recommend a network of smaller, temporally continuous AES flowering fields of different ages, combined with permanent seminatural grasslands, to maximize benefits for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service delivery in agricultural landscapes.
Keywords
- agriculture, conservation, DNA-metabarcoding, ecosystem services, flower fields, Conservation, Agriculture, Ecosystem services, Flower fields
ASJC Scopus subject areas
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 118, No. 10, e2016038118, 09.03.2021.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - A multitaxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management
AU - Boetzl, Fabian A.
AU - Krauss, Jochen
AU - Heinze, Jonathan
AU - Hoffmann, Hannes
AU - Juffa, Jan
AU - König, Sebastian
AU - Krimmer, Elena
AU - Prante, Maren
AU - Martin, Emily A.
AU - Holzschuh, Andrea
AU - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf
PY - 2021/3/9
Y1 - 2021/3/9
N2 - Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aim to restore biodiversity and biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in landscapes impoverished by modern agriculture. However, a systematic, empirical evaluation of different AES types across multiple taxa and functional groups is missing. Within one orthogonal design, we studied sown flowering AES types with different temporal continuity, size, and landscape context and used calcareous grasslands as seminatural reference habitat. We measured species richness of 12 taxonomic groups (vascular plants, cicadas, orthopterans, bees, butterflies, moths, hoverflies, flower visiting beetles, parasitoid wasps, carabid beetles, staphylinid beetles, and birds) representing 5 trophic levels. A total of 54,955 specimens were identified using traditional taxonomic methods, and bulk arthropod samples were identified through DNA metabarcoding, resulting in a total of 1,077 and 2,110 taxa, respectively. Species richness of most taxonomic groups, as well as multidiversity and richness of pollinators, increased with temporal continuity of AES types. Some groups responded to size and landscape context, but multidiversity and richness of pollinators and natural enemies were not affected. AES flowering fields supported different species assemblages than calcareous grasslands, but assemblages became more similar to those in seminatural grasslands with increasing temporal continuity. Our results indicate that AES flowering fields and seminatural grasslands function synergistically. Flowering fields support biodiversity even when they are relatively small and in landscapes with few remaining seminatural habitats. We therefore recommend a network of smaller, temporally continuous AES flowering fields of different ages, combined with permanent seminatural grasslands, to maximize benefits for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service delivery in agricultural landscapes.
AB - Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aim to restore biodiversity and biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in landscapes impoverished by modern agriculture. However, a systematic, empirical evaluation of different AES types across multiple taxa and functional groups is missing. Within one orthogonal design, we studied sown flowering AES types with different temporal continuity, size, and landscape context and used calcareous grasslands as seminatural reference habitat. We measured species richness of 12 taxonomic groups (vascular plants, cicadas, orthopterans, bees, butterflies, moths, hoverflies, flower visiting beetles, parasitoid wasps, carabid beetles, staphylinid beetles, and birds) representing 5 trophic levels. A total of 54,955 specimens were identified using traditional taxonomic methods, and bulk arthropod samples were identified through DNA metabarcoding, resulting in a total of 1,077 and 2,110 taxa, respectively. Species richness of most taxonomic groups, as well as multidiversity and richness of pollinators, increased with temporal continuity of AES types. Some groups responded to size and landscape context, but multidiversity and richness of pollinators and natural enemies were not affected. AES flowering fields supported different species assemblages than calcareous grasslands, but assemblages became more similar to those in seminatural grasslands with increasing temporal continuity. Our results indicate that AES flowering fields and seminatural grasslands function synergistically. Flowering fields support biodiversity even when they are relatively small and in landscapes with few remaining seminatural habitats. We therefore recommend a network of smaller, temporally continuous AES flowering fields of different ages, combined with permanent seminatural grasslands, to maximize benefits for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service delivery in agricultural landscapes.
KW - agriculture
KW - conservation
KW - DNA-metabarcoding
KW - ecosystem services
KW - flower fields
KW - Conservation
KW - Agriculture
KW - Ecosystem services
KW - Flower fields
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102328986&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1073/pnas.2016038118
DO - 10.1073/pnas.2016038118
M3 - Article
VL - 118
JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
SN - 0027-8424
IS - 10
M1 - e2016038118
ER -