Connectedness of habitat fragments boosts conservation benefits for butterflies, but only in landscapes with little cropland

Context Global change pressures (GCPs) imperilspecies and associated ecosystem functions, but studies investigating interactions of landscape-scale pressures remain scarce. Loss of species-rich habitat and agricultural expansion are major threats for biodiversity, but if or how these factors interactively determine community-level shifts and conservation outcomes remains unclear. Objectives We tested whether matrix simplification (dominance of cropland) and reduced connectivity (i.e. landscape-scale habitat loss) either additively, synergistically or antagonistically cause community shifts in butterflies, a group of high conservation relevance. Methods We surveyed butterflies on 30 small calcareous grassland fragments (<1 ha) in Central Germany, representing independent gradients in grassland connectivity (an index combining grassland area and proximity), and matrix quality (landscape proportion of cropland). Using proportional odds logistic regression, we assessed whether connectivity and matrix quality interactively altered the distribution of Red List statuses, and assessed effects of local scale management (mowing, grazing, short-term abandonment). Results We found synergistic, conservation relevant effects: Connectivity boosted the proportion of redlisted species from 20 to 52% in crop land poor landscapes, but not in crop land rich landscapes, particularly driven by endangered and critically endangered species. Grazed sites had the lowest species richness, abundance, and proportions of conservation relevant butterflies. Implications Mitigation measures targeting one landscape-scale pressure only may be inefficient, particularly for red-listed species. Increasing habitat connectivity bolsters butterfly communities and potential pollination services, but only if accompanied by measures to soften the matrix. Hence, halting biodiversity losses needs better understanding and implementation of complex conservation measures at the landscape scale

Saproxylic species are linked to the amount and isolation of dead wood across spatial scales in a beech forest

ContextDead wood is a key habitat for saproxylicspecies, which are often used as indicators of habitatquality in forests. Understanding how the amount andspatial distribution of dead wood in the landscapeaffects saproxylic communities is therefore importantfor maintaining high forest biodiversity.ObjectivesWe investigated effects of the amountand isolation of dead wood on the alpha and betadiversity of four saproxylic species groups, with afocus on how the spatial scale influences results.MethodsWe inventoried saproxylic beetles, wood-inhabiting fungi, and epixylic bryophytes and lichenson 62 plots in the Sihlwald forest reserve in Switzer-land. We used GLMs to relate plot-level speciesrichness to dead wood amount and isolation on spatialscales of 20–200 m radius. Further, we used GDMs todetermine how dead wood amount and isolationaffected beta diversity.ResultsA larger amount of dead wood increasedbeetle richness on all spatial scales, while isolation hadno effect. For fungi, bryophytes and lichens this wasonly true on small spatial scales. On larger scales ofour study, dead wood amount had no effect, whilegreater isolation decreased species richness. Further,we found no strong consistent patterns explaining betadiversity

Aerodynamic roughness parameters in cities: inclusion of vegetation

A widely used morphometric method (Macdonald et al. 1998) to calculate the zero-plane displacement (zd) and aerodynamic roughness length (z0) for momentum is further developed to include vegetation. The adaptation also applies to the Kanda et al. (2013) morphometric method which considers roughness-element height variability. Roughness-element heights (mean, maximum and standard deviation) of both buildings and vegetation are combined with a porosity corrected plan area and drag formulation. The method captures the influence of vegetation (in addition to buildings), with the magnitude of the effect depending upon whether buildings or vegetation are dominant and the porosity of vegetation (e.g. leaf-on or leaf-off state). Application to five urban areas demonstrates that where vegetation is taller and has larger surface cover, its inclusion in the morphometric methods can be more important than the morphometric method used. Implications for modelling the logarithmic wind profile (to 100 m) are demonstrated. Where vegetation is taller and occupies a greater amount of space, wind speeds may be slowed by up to a factor of three

Association of Inherited Variation in Toll-Like Receptor Genes with Malignant Melanoma Susceptibility and Survival

The family of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) is critical in linking innate and acquired immunity. Polymorphisms in the genes encoding TLRs have been associated with autoimmune diseases and cancer. We investigated the genetic variation of TLR genes and its potential impact on melanoma susceptibility and patient survival. The study included 763 cutaneous melanoma cases recruited in Germany and 736 matched controls that were genotyped for 47 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 8 TLR genes. The relationship between genotype, disease status and survival was investigated taking into account patient and tumor characteristics, and melanoma treatment. Analysis of 7 SNPs in TLR2, 7 SNPs in TLR3 and 8 SNPs in TLR4 showed statistically significant differences in distribution of inferred haplotypes between cases and controls. No individual polymorphism was associated with disease susceptibility except for the observed tendency for TLR2-rs3804099 (odds ratio OR  = 1.15, 95% CI 0.99–1.34, p = 0.07) and TLR4-rs2149356 (OR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.73–1.00, p = 0.06). Both polymorphisms were part of the haplotypes associated with risk modulation. An improved overall survival (Hazard ratio HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.88) and survival following metastasis (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34–0.91) were observed in carriers of the variant allele (D299G) of TLR4-rs4986790. In addition various TLR2, TLR4 and TLR5 haplotypes were associated with increased overall survival. Our results point to a novel association between TLR gene variants and haplotypes with melanoma survival. Our data suggest a role for the D299G polymorphism in the TLR4 gene in overall survival and a potential link with systemic treatment at stage IV of the disease. The polymorphic amino acid residue, located in the ectodomain of TLR4, can have functional consequences

Harnessing the biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.Peer reviewe

Evaluation of urban local-scale aerodynamic parameters: implications for the vertical profile of wind speed and for source areas

Nine methods to determine local-scale aerodynamic roughness length (z0) and zero-plane displacement (zd) are compared at three sites (within 60 m of each other) in London, UK. Methods include three anemometric (single-level high frequency observations), six morphometric (surface geometry) and one reference-based approach (look-up tables). A footprint model is used with the morphometric methods in an iterative procedure. The results are insensitive to the initial zd and z0 estimates. Across the three sites, zd varies between 5 – 45 m depending upon the method used. Morphometric methods that incorporate roughness-element height variability agree better with anemometric methods, indicating zd is consistently greater than the local mean building height. Depending upon method and wind direction, z0 varies between 0.1 and 5 m with morphometric z0 consistently being 2 – 3 m larger than the anemometric z0. No morphometric method consistently resembles the anemometric methods. Wind-speed profiles observed with Doppler lidar provide additional data with which to assess the methods. Locally determined roughness parameters are used to extrapolate wind-speed profiles to a height roughly 200 m above the canopy. Wind-speed profiles extrapolated based on morphometric methods that account for roughness-element height variability are most similar to observations. The extent of the modelled source area for measurements varies by up to a factor of three, depending upon the morphometric method used to determine zd and z0

BIOFRAG: A new database for analysing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation

Habitat fragmentation studies are producing inconsistent and complex results across which it is nearly impossible to synthesise. Consistent analytical techniques can be applied to primary datasets, if stored in a flexible database that allows simple data retrieval for subsequent analyses. Method: We developed a relational database linking data collected in the field to taxonomic nomenclature, spatial and temporal plot attributes and further environmental variables (e.g. information on biogeographic region. Typical field assessments include measures of biological variables (e.g. presence, abundance, ground cover) of one species or a set of species linked to a set of plots in fragments of a forested landscape. Conclusion: The database currently holds records of 5792 unique species sampled in 52 landscapes in six of eight biogeographic regions: mammals 173, birds 1101, herpetofauna 284, insects 2317, other arthropods: 48, plants 1804, snails 65. Most species are found in one or two landscapes, but some are found in four. Using the huge amount of primary data on biodiversity response to fragmentation becomes increasingly important as anthropogenic pressures from high population growth and land demands are increasing. This database can be queried to extract data for subsequent analyses of the biological response to forest fragmentation with new metrics that can integrate across the components of fragmented landscapes. Meta-analyses of findings based on consistent methods and metrics will be able to generalise over studies allowing inter-comparisons for unified answers. The database can thus help researchers in providing findings for analyses of trade-offs between land use benefits and impacts on biodiversity and to track performance of management for biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes.Fil: Pfeifer, Marion. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lefebvre, Veronique. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Gardner, Toby A.. Stockholm Environment Institute; SueciaFil: Arroyo Rodríguez, Víctor. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Baeten, Lander. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Banks Leite, Cristina. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Barlow, Jos. Lancaster University; Reino UnidoFil: Betts, Matthew G.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Brunet, Joerg. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; SueciaFil: Cerezo Blandón, Alexis Mauricio. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; ArgentinaFil: Cisneros, Laura M.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Collard, Stuart. Nature Conservation Society of South Australia; AustraliaFil: D´Cruze, Neil. The World Society for the Protection of Animals; Reino UnidoFil: Da Silva Motta, Catarina. Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia; BrasilFil: Duguay, Stephanie. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Eggermont, Hilde. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Eigenbrod, Félix. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Hadley, Adam S.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Hanson, Thor R.. No especifíca;Fil: Hawes, Joseph E.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Heartsill Scalley, Tamara. United State Department of Agriculture. Forestry Service; Puerto RicoFil: Klingbeil, Brian T.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Kolb, Annette. Universitat Bremen; AlemaniaFil: Kormann, Urs. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Kumar, Sunil. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Lachat, Thibault. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest; SuizaFil: Lakeman Fraser, Poppy. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lantschner, María Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Patagonia Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria San Carlos de Bariloche; ArgentinaFil: Laurance, William F.. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Leal, Inara R.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Lens, Luc. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Marsh, Charles J.. University of Leeds; Reino UnidoFil: Medina Rangel, Guido F.. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Melles, Stephanie. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Mezger, Dirk. Field Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Oldekop, Johan A.. University of Sheffield; Reino UnidoFil: Overal , Williams L.. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Departamento de Entomologia; BrasilFil: Owen, Charlotte. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Peres, Carlos A.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Phalan, Ben. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Pidgeon, Anna Michle. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Pilia, Oriana. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Possingham, Hugh P.. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The University Of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Possingham, Max L.. No especifíca;Fil: Raheem, Dinarzarde C.. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences; Bélgica. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Ribeiro, Danilo B.. Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul; BrasilFil: Ribeiro Neto, Jose D.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Robinson, Douglas W.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Robinson, Richard. Manjimup Research Centre; AustraliaFil: Rytwinski, Trina. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Scherber, Christoph. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Slade, Eleanor M.. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Somarriba, Eduardo. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza; Costa RicaFil: Stouffer, Philip C.. State University of Louisiana; Estados UnidosFil: Struebig, Matthew J.. University of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Tylianakis, Jason M.. University College London; Estados Unidos. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Teja, Tscharntke. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Tyre, Andrew J.. Universidad de Nebraska - Lincoln; Estados UnidosFil: Urbina Cardona, Jose N.. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; ColombiaFil: Vasconcelos, Heraldo L.. Universidade Federal de Uberlandia; BrasilFil: Wearn, Oliver. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The Zoological Society of London; Reino UnidoFil: Wells, Konstans. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: Willig, Michael R.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Wood, Eric. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Young, Richard P.. Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust; Reino UnidoFil: Bradley, Andrew V.. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Ewers, Robert M.. Imperial College London; Reino Unid

BIOFRAG - a new database for analyzing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation

Peer reviewe