Search

Agricultural intensification drives biodiversity loss and shapes farmers' profit, but the role of legacy effects and detailed quantification of ecological-economic trade-offs are largely unknown. In Europe during the 1950s, the Eastern communist bloc switched to large-scale farming by forced collectivization of small farms, while the West kept small-scale private farming. Here we show that large-scale agriculture in East Germany reduced biodiversity, which has been maintained in West Germany due to >70% longer field edges than those in the East. In contrast, profit per farmland area in the East was 50% higher than that in the West, despite similar yield levels. In both regions, switching from conventional to organic farming increased biodiversity and halved yield levels, but doubled farmers' profits. In conclusion, European Union policy should acknowledge the surprisingly high biodiversity benefits of small-scale agriculture, which are on a par with conversion to organic agriculture.

Effects of agricultural intensification (AI) on biodiversity are often assessed on the plot scale, although processes determining diversity also operate on larger spatial scales. Here, we analyzed the diversity of vascular plants, carabid beetles, and birds in agricultural landscapes in cereal crop fields at the field (n = 1350), farm (n = 270), and European-region (n = 9) scale. We partitioned diversity into its additive components alpha, beta, and gamma, and assessed the relative contribution of beta diversity to total species richness at each spatial scale. AI was determined using pesticide and fertilizer inputs, as well as tillage operations and categorized into low, medium, and high levels. As AI was not significantly related to landscape complexity, we could disentangle potential AI effects on local vs. landscape community homogenization. AI negatively affected the species richness of plants and birds, but not carabid beetles, at all spatial scales. Hence, local AI was closely correlated to beta diversity on larger scales up to the farm and region level, and thereby was an indicator of farm- and region-wide biodiversity losses. At the scale of farms (12.83-20.52%) and regions (68.34-80.18%), beta diversity accounted for the major part of the total species richness for all three taxa, indicating great dissimilarity in environmental conditions on larger spatial scales. For plants, relative importance of alpha diversity decreased with AI, while relative importance of beta diversity on the farm scale increased with AI for carabids and birds. Hence, and in contrast to our expectations, AI does not necessarily homogenize local communities, presumably due to the heterogeneity of farming practices. In conclusion, a more detailed understanding of AI effects on diversity patterns of various taxa and at multiple spatial scales would contribute to more efficient agri-environmental schemes in agroecosystems.

Context: Landscape composition and configuration, as well as seasonal landscape dynamics shape the behaviour, movement and energy expenditure of animals, i.e. foraging, hiding or fleeing, and ultimately survival. Especially in highly modified agricultural systems, it is crucial to understand how animal behaviour is influenced by landscape context to develop sustainable land management concepts. Objectives: We show how landscape composition and configuration, together with seasonal dynamics affect animal behavioural types, accounting for the different life-history events in both sexes. Methods: We investigated 34 European hares in two contrasting agricultural landscapes (a simple and a complex landscape) by using tri-axial accelerometer data to classify the animals' behaviour into five categories: resting, foraging, moving, grooming and standing upright (i.e. vigilance behaviour). We tested whether the amount of behaviours per category changed with landscape composition and configuration, season and sex. Results: During peak breeding, hares in areas of high habitat diversity rested more, moved less and spent less time searching for resources. During winter, hares moved more and rested less. Females rested less and foraged more in areas with large agricultural fields. Conclusions: A complex landscape is particularly important during the breeding season, allowing animals to allocate enough energy into reproduction. In winter, hares in areas of low habitat diversity may not find enough thermal and anti-predator shelter to move as much as they would need to meet their requirements. Hence, high habitat diversity and small field sizes guarantee species persistence in human-altered agricultural areas throughout the year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agricultural land‐use practices have intensified over the last decades, leading to population declines of various farmland species, including the European hare (Lepus europaeus). In many European countries, arable fields dominate agricultural landscapes. Compared to pastures, arable land is highly variable, resulting in a large spatial variation of food and cover for wildlife over the course of the year, which potentially affects habitat selection by hares. Here, we investigated within‐home‐range habitat selection by hares in arable areas in Denmark and Germany to identify habitat requirements for their conservation. We hypothesized that hare habitat selection would depend on local habitat structure, that is, vegetation height, but also on agricultural field size, vegetation type, and proximity to field edges. Active hares generally selected for short vegetation (1–25 cm) and avoided higher vegetation and bare ground, especially when fields were comparatively larger. Vegetation >50 cm potentially restricts hares from entering parts of their home range and does not provide good forage, the latter also being the case on bare ground. The vegetation type was important for habitat selection by inactive hares, with fabaceae, fallow, and maize being selected for, potentially providing both cover and forage. Our results indicate that patches of shorter vegetation could improve the forage quality and habitat accessibility for hares, especially in areas with large monocultures. Thus, policymakers should aim to increase areas with short vegetation throughout the year. Further, permanent set‐asides, like fallow and wildflower areas, would provide year‐round cover for inactive hares. Finally, the reduction in field sizes would increase the density of field margins, and farming different crop types within small areas could improve the habitat for hares and other farmland species. We studied habitat selection by a threatened farmland species and found that vegetation height in combination with agricultural field size was the most important explanatory variable. This has valuable implications for the management of arable areas, like the introduction of permanent set‐asides covered by short vegetation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agri-environmental schemes involving organic farming or set-aside management aim at promoting biodiversity and restoring ecosystem functioning in agrarian landscapes. Application of pesticides in these crop fields is strongly regulated facilitating the spread of weeds but also allowing for the establishment of endangered herbs and a variety of animals. Recent studies found gastropods and earthworms to be legitimate dispersers of seeds of wild plants. We assumed that both groups also play a significant role in the spread and establishment of wild plants within crop fields. Therefore, we are conducting a series of experiments in three different study systems on (1) the role of earthworms and gastropods as dispersers of rare herbs and weeds in an organic rye field in Germany, (2) the seed feeding behavior of gastropods of plants sown in fallow ground in Switzerland, and (3) weed dispersal in irrigated rice fields by golden apple snails in the Philippines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Agricultural intensification negatively affects farmland biodiversity, and thereby, ecosystem services such as predation of weed seeds. Landscape complexity (large and diverse areas of semi-natural habitats) and organic farming (without pesticides and mineral fertilizers) can counteract this negative trend, but little is known about their relative importance. We experimentally studied seed removal of four economically relevant weed species by excluding (i) vertebrates, (ii) vertebrates plus large invertebrates and (iii) neither vertebrates nor invertebrates (control) at the field edge and in the interior of 22 organically or conventionally managed winter wheat fields, located across a gradient of landscape complexity (41–94% arable land). Arable land (%) was used as a simple predictor of landscape complexity, as it is closely related to landscape parameters such as habitat type diversity. Seed predation and removal were mainly influenced by large invertebrates, seed species identity, with Cirsium arvense being more affected than Poa trivialis, Apera spica-venti and Galium aparine and landscape complexity in interaction with farming practice, as it increased in conventional fields, but decreased in organic fields as landscape complexity decreased. Seed predation and removal did not consistently correspond to seed predator densities, as small mammal abundances decreased in conventional fields, but increased in organic fields as landscape complexity decreased and carabid activity densities were higher in organic compared to conventional fields. Slug activity density showed same response to landscape complexity and farming practice like seed removal and appeared to additionally influence the movement of seeds. In conclusion, our assessment of interacting local and landscape effect adds to the current knowledge of seed predation and removal. Farming practice and landscape complexity affect seed predator species differentially, thereby resulting in complex pattern of seed predation and removal. The service of weed seed predation is provided by small mammals and invertebrates and the disservice of seed dispersal and movement is provided by slugs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]