Assessment of spatial variability of multiple ecosystem services in grasslands of different intensities

Grasslands provide multiple Ecosystem Services (ES) such as forage provision, carbon sequestration or habitat provision. Knowledge about the trade-offs between these ES is of great importance for grassland management. Yet, the outcome of different management strategies on ES provision is highly uncertain due to spatial variability. We aim to characterize the provision (level and spatial variability) of grassland ES under various management strategies. To do so, we combine empirical data for multiple ES with spatially explicit census data on land use intensities. We analyzed the variations of five ES (forage provision, climate regulation, pollination, biodiversity conservation and outdoor recreation) using data from biodiversity fieldwork, experimental plots for carbon as well as social network data from Flickr. These data were used to calculate the distribution of modelled individual and multiple ES values from different grassland management types in a Swiss case study region using spatial explicit information for 17,383 grassland parcels. Our results show that (1) management regime and intensity levels play an important role in ES provision but their impact depends on the ES. In general, extensive management, especially in pastures, favors all ES but forage provision, whereas intensive management favors only forage provision and outdoor recreation; (2) ES potential provision varies between parcels under the same management due to the influence of environmental drivers, related to topography and landscape structure; (3) there is a trade-offs between forage provision and other ES at the cantonal level but a synergy between forage provision and biodiversity conservation within the grassland categories, due to the negative impact of elevation on both ES. Information about multiple ES provision is key to support effective agri-environmental measures and information about the spatial variability can prevent uncertain outputs of decision-making processes

Intensification of agriculture, landscape composition and wild bee communities: A large scale study in four European countries

The impacts of agricultural practices and landscape composition on bee communities were investigated in 14 sites located in four Western European countries (Belgium, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland). Standardized interviews with farmers assessed agricultural practices in terms of agricultural inputs (nitrogen fertilization and pesticides), livestock density and crop types. The proportion of semi-natural habitats was calculated for each site. We showed negative effects of agricultural intensification on species richness, abundance and diversity of wild bees. By contrast, bee species richness increased with the amount of semi-natural habitats in the landscape. Using a co-inertia analysis, we found an opposition between two types of agricultural specialization: towards crop production or towards animal husbandry. Species richness, abundance and diversity of wild bees were greater in sites turned towards crop production. In these sites, flowering crops provided abundant food resources for bees whereas, in the other group of sites, intensive animal husbandry led to landscapes dominated by forage crops rather than flower-rich permanent grasslands. We also showed that bumblebees seemed to be less sensitive to agricultural intensification than solitary bees

Landscape level processes driving carabid crop assemblage in dynamic farmlands

International audienceLandscape heterogeneity has been shown to be a major factor in the maintenance of biodiversity and associated services in agricultural landscapes. Farmlands are mosaics of fields with various crop types and farming practices. Crop phenology creates asynchrony between fields sown and harvested in different periods (winter vs. spring crops). The present study was conducted to examine the influence of such spatio-temporal heterogeneity on biodiversity, with the hypothesis that it would lead to spatio-temporal redistribution (shifting) of species. Species richness and activity-density of carabid beetles in winter cereal (winter) and maize (spring) crops were compared across 20 landscapes distributed along a double gradient of relative area and spatial configuration of winter and spring crops. Maize fields were sampled in spring and late summer for comparison over time. The response of carabid species richness to landscape heterogeneity was weak in spring, but maize field richness benefited from adjacencies with woody habitat, in late summer. In spring, increased length of interfaces between winter and spring crops lowered carabid activity-density in winter cereal fields, suggesting that maize fields acted as sinks. Interfaces between woody habitats and crops increased activity-density in both crop types. We found no evidence of spatio-temporal complementation, but different species benefited from winter cereals and maize in spring and late summer, increasing overall diversity. These findings confirm the role of adjacencies between woody and cultivated habitats in the conservation of abundant carabid assemblage in winter cereals and maize. We conclude that between-field population movement occurs, and advocate for better consideration of farmland heterogeneity in future researc

The interplay of landscape composition and configuration: new pathways to manage functional biodiversity and agroecosystem services across Europe

Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity and ecosystem services is a key aim of a sustainable agriculture. However, how the spatial arrangement of crop fields and other habitats in landscapes impacts arthropods and their functions is poorly known. Synthesising data from 49 studies (1515 landscapes) across Europe, we examined effects of landscape composition (% habitats) and configuration (edge density) on arthropods in fields and their margins, pest control, pollination and yields. Configuration effects interacted with the proportions of crop and non-crop habitats, and species’ dietary, dispersal and overwintering traits led to contrasting responses to landscape variables. Overall, however, in landscapes with high edge density, 70% of pollinator and 44% of natural enemy species reached highest abundances and pollination and pest control improved 1.7- and 1.4-fold respectively. Arable-dominated landscapes with high edge densities achieved high yields. This suggests that enhancing edge density in European agroecosystems can promote functional biodiversity and yield-enhancing ecosystem services