Search

Abstract Arthropod declines have been linked to agricultural intensification. However, information about the impacts of intensification is still limited for many crops, as is our understanding of the responses of different arthropod taxa and trophic groups, thus hindering the development of effective mitigation measures. We investigated the impacts of olive farming intensification on canopy-dwelling arthropods in the Mediterranean region. Intensification involves the increased use of agrochemicals, mechanisation and irrigation, but also structural changes from traditional orchards with low densities of large and old trees, to intensive and superintensive orchards with high to very high densities of smaller and younger trees, respectively. Canopy arthropods were vacuum-sampled at 53 sites representing the three orchard intensification levels, in spring, summer and autumn 2017. We evaluated how the arthropod community varied across intensification levels, and in response to orchard structure, management and landscape context. We found no changes in the diversity of arthropod taxa across intensification levels after correcting for sample coverage, but arthropod abundance declined markedly along the intensification gradient. Decreased abundance was associated with changes in orchard structure, lower herbaceous cover, and higher herbicide and insecticide use. The abundance of a specialized olive pest was lower in landscapes with higher woodland cover. The negative effects of intensification were stronger in spring and summer than in autumn, and parasitoids and predators were particularly affected. Overall, results suggest that retaining herbaceous cover, reducing agrochemical inputs and preserving natural woody elements in the landscape, may contribute to mitigate impacts of olive farming intensification on canopy arthropods, particularly on beneficial species.

Abstract Pest control services provided by naturally occurring species (the so-called biocontrol services) are widely recognized to provide key incentives for biodiversity conservation. This is particularly relevant for vertebrate-mediated biocontrol services as many vertebrate species are of conservation concern, with most of their decline associated to landscape modification for agricultural purposes. Yet, we still lack rigorous approaches evaluating landscape-level correlates of biocontrol potential by vertebrates over broad spatial extents to better inform land-use and management decisions. We performed a spatially-explicit interaction-based assessment of potential biocontrol services in Portugal, using 1853 pairwise trophic interactions between 78 flying vertebrate species (birds and bats) and 53 insect pests associated to two widespread and economically valuable crops in the Euro-Mediterranean region, olive groves (Olea europaea subsp. europaea) and vineyards (Vitis vinifera subsp. vinifera). The study area was framed using 1004 square cells, each 10 × 10 km in size. Potential biocontrol services were determined at all those 10 × 10 km grid-cells in which each crop was present as the proportion of the realized out of all potential pairwise interactions between vertebrates and pests. Landscape correlates of biocontrol potential were also explored. Our work suggests that both birds and bats can effectively provide biocontrol services in olive groves and vineyards as they prey many insect pest species associated to both crops. Moreover, it demonstrates that these potential services are impacted by landscape-scale features and that this impact is consistent when evaluated over broad spatial extents. Thus, biocontrol potential by vertebrates significantly increases with increasing amount of natural area, while decreases with increasing area devoted to target crops, particularly olive groves. Overall, our study highlights the suitability of our interaction-based approach to perform spatially-explicit assessments of potential biocontrol services by vertebrates at local spatial scales and suggest its utility for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning over broad spatial extents.

Soil fauna play a key role in nutrient cycling and decomposition, and in recent years, researchers have become more and more interested in this compartment of terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, soil fauna can act as ecosystem engineers by creating, modifying, and maintaining the habitat for other organisms. Ecologists usually utilize live catches in pitfalls traps as a standard method to study the activity of epigeic fauna in addition to relative abundance. Counts in pitfall traps can be used as estimates of relative activity to compare among experimental treatments. This requires taking independent estimates of abundance (e.g., by sifting soil litter, mark−recapture), which can then be used as covariates in linear models to compare the levels of fauna activity (trap catches) among treatments. However, many studies show that the use of pitfall traps is not the most adequate method to estimate soil fauna relative abundances, and these concerns may be extensible to estimating activity. Here, we present two new types of traps devised to study activity in litter fauna, and which we call “cul-de-sac” and “basket traps”, respectively. We experimentally show that, at least for litter dwellers, these new traps are more appropriate to estimate fauna activity than pitfall traps because: (1) pitfall traps contain 3.5× more moisture than the surrounding environment, potentially attracting animals towards them when environmental conditions are relatively dry; (2) cul-de-sac and basket traps catch ca. 4× more of both meso- and macrofauna than pitfall traps, suggesting that pitfall traps are underestimating activity; and (3) pitfall traps show a bias towards collecting 1.5× higher amounts of predators, which suggests that predation rates are higher within pitfall traps. We end with a protocol and recommendations for how to use these new traps in ecological experiments and surveys aiming at estimating soil arthropod activity.

Facilitative or positive interactions are ubiquitous in nature and play a fundamental role in the configuration of ecological communities. In particular, habitat modification and niche construction, in which one organism locally modifies abiotic conditions and favours other organisms by buffering the effects of adverse environmental factors, are among the most relevant facilitative interactions. In line with this, ‘keystone structures’, which provide resources, refuge, or advantageous services decisive for other species, may allow the coexistence of various species and thus considerably contribute to diversity maintenance. Beech cupules are woody husks harbouring beech fruits that remain in the forest soil for relatively long periods of time. In this study, we explored the potential role of these cupules in the distribution and maintenance of the soil fauna inhabiting the leaf litter layer. We experimentally manipulated cupule availability and soil moisture in the field to determine if such structures are limiting and can provide moist shelter to soil animals during drought periods, contributing to minimize desiccation risks. We measured invertebrate abundances inside relative to outside the cupules, total abundances in the leaf litter and animal body sizes, in both dry and wet experimental plots. We found that these structures are preferentially used by the most abundant groups of smaller soil animals—springtails, mites and enchytraeids—during droughts. Moreover, beech cupules can be limiting, as an increase in use was found with higher cupule densities, and are important resources for many small soil invertebrates, driving the spatial structure of the soil community and promoting higher densities in the leaf litter, probably through an increase in habitat heterogeneity. We propose that fruit woody structures should be considered ‘keystone structures’ that contribute to soil community maintenance. Therefore, beech trees may indirectly facilitate soil fauna activities through their decaying fruit husks, hence acting as ecosystem engineers.