How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes
1. Agricultural intensification poses a serious threat to biodiversity as a consequence of increased land-use intensity, decreased landscape heterogeneity and reduced habitat diversity. Although there is interest in the preservation of total species richness of an agricultural landscape (γ diversity...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of applied ecology 2007-04, Vol.44 (2), p.340-351 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 351 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 340 |
container_title | The Journal of applied ecology |
container_volume | 44 |
creator | HENDRICKX, FREDERIK MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER SCHWEIGER, OLIVER SPEELMANS, MARJAN AVIRON, STÉPHANIE AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL BILLETER, REGULA BAILEY, DEBRA BUKACEK, ROMAN BUREL, FRANÇOISE DIEKÖTTER, TIM DIRKSEN, JOLANDA HERZOG, FELIX LIIRA, JAAN ROUBALOVA, MARTINA VANDOMME, VIKI BUGTER, ROB |
description | 1. Agricultural intensification poses a serious threat to biodiversity as a consequence of increased land-use intensity, decreased landscape heterogeneity and reduced habitat diversity. Although there is interest in the preservation of total species richness of an agricultural landscape (γ diversity), the effects of intensification have been assessed primarily by species richness at a local scale (α diversity). This ignores species richness between local communities (β diversity), which is an important component of total species richness. 2. In this study, measures of land-use intensity, landscape structure and habitat diversity were related to γ, α and β diversity of wild bees (Apoidea), carabid beetles (Carabidae), hoverflies (Syrphidae), true bugs (Heteroptera) and spiders (Araneae) within 16 local communities in 24 temperate European agricultural landscapes. 3. The total landscape species richness of all groups was most strongly affected by increased proximity of semi-natural habitat patches. Bees also decreased in landscapes with a high intensity of farmland management, demonstrating additive effects of both factors. 4. Separating total species diversity into components, the decrease in total species richness could be attributed primarily to a decrease in species diversity between local communities. Species richness of the local communities of all investigated groups decreased with increasing land-use intensity and, in the case of spiders, decreasing proximity of the semi-natural habitat patches. 5. The effect of increased habitat diversity appeared to be of secondary importance to total species richness but caused a shift in the relative contribution of α and β diversity towards the latter. 6. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that the effects of agricultural change operate at a landscape level and that examining species diversity at a local level fails to explain the total species richness of an agricultural landscape. The coincidence of patterns of β diversity with those of γ diversity emphasizes that such information is of crucial importance for the implementation and evaluation of restoration programmes aiming to restore sustainable countryside diversity. As local extinction processes in highly fragmented landscapes shape biodiversity, priority should be given to the conservation of diverse agricultural landscape remnants in Europe. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01270.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00162516v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>4539249</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4539249</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5650-da7560ff73c9d02b8b2b9c661b787c504a905b795eaec20c314157fc382fa29d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkdGK1DAUhosoOK6-gWAQvBBsPUmapL3wYllWRxlQ0L0OaZo4Kd1mTNLdnWfwpU23y-iluUk45_v_c8hfFAhDhfN5P1SYclYSzuuKAPAKMBFQ3T0qNqfG42IDQHDZtICfFs9iHACgZZRuit9bf4tGNfVRq4NBMYVZpzmYd_fFco4GuSmZKbp0RLmC9qpzSSXUuxsT1qq1Riek_fXBT2ZKEXmLkk9qRCqkffAH3_-Duwmpn8HpecxzMnMaHp8XT6wao3nxcJ8VVx8vf1xsy93XT58vznelZpxB2SvBOFgrqG57IF3Tka7VnONONEIzqFULrBMtM8poApriGjNhNW2IVaTt6VnxdvXdq1EegrtW4Si9cnJ7vpNLDQBzwjC_wZl9vbKH4H_NJiY5-DlMeT1JKK1rDjXLULNCOvgYg7EnVwxySUkOcglDLmHIJSV5n5K8y9I3D_4qf8Jog5q0i3_1DcdNXdPMfVi5Wzea43_7yy_fLpdX1r9c9UNMPpz0efmW1G1uv1rbVnm5xBPl1XcCmAII1goQ9A94Frn0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>233446045</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK ; MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE ; VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER ; SCHWEIGER, OLIVER ; SPEELMANS, MARJAN ; AVIRON, STÉPHANIE ; AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL ; BILLETER, REGULA ; BAILEY, DEBRA ; BUKACEK, ROMAN ; BUREL, FRANÇOISE ; DIEKÖTTER, TIM ; DIRKSEN, JOLANDA ; HERZOG, FELIX ; LIIRA, JAAN ; ROUBALOVA, MARTINA ; VANDOMME, VIKI ; BUGTER, ROB</creator><creatorcontrib>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK ; MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE ; VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER ; SCHWEIGER, OLIVER ; SPEELMANS, MARJAN ; AVIRON, STÉPHANIE ; AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL ; BILLETER, REGULA ; BAILEY, DEBRA ; BUKACEK, ROMAN ; BUREL, FRANÇOISE ; DIEKÖTTER, TIM ; DIRKSEN, JOLANDA ; HERZOG, FELIX ; LIIRA, JAAN ; ROUBALOVA, MARTINA ; VANDOMME, VIKI ; BUGTER, ROB</creatorcontrib><description>1. Agricultural intensification poses a serious threat to biodiversity as a consequence of increased land-use intensity, decreased landscape heterogeneity and reduced habitat diversity. Although there is interest in the preservation of total species richness of an agricultural landscape (γ diversity), the effects of intensification have been assessed primarily by species richness at a local scale (α diversity). This ignores species richness between local communities (β diversity), which is an important component of total species richness. 2. In this study, measures of land-use intensity, landscape structure and habitat diversity were related to γ, α and β diversity of wild bees (Apoidea), carabid beetles (Carabidae), hoverflies (Syrphidae), true bugs (Heteroptera) and spiders (Araneae) within 16 local communities in 24 temperate European agricultural landscapes. 3. The total landscape species richness of all groups was most strongly affected by increased proximity of semi-natural habitat patches. Bees also decreased in landscapes with a high intensity of farmland management, demonstrating additive effects of both factors. 4. Separating total species diversity into components, the decrease in total species richness could be attributed primarily to a decrease in species diversity between local communities. Species richness of the local communities of all investigated groups decreased with increasing land-use intensity and, in the case of spiders, decreasing proximity of the semi-natural habitat patches. 5. The effect of increased habitat diversity appeared to be of secondary importance to total species richness but caused a shift in the relative contribution of α and β diversity towards the latter. 6. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that the effects of agricultural change operate at a landscape level and that examining species diversity at a local level fails to explain the total species richness of an agricultural landscape. The coincidence of patterns of β diversity with those of γ diversity emphasizes that such information is of crucial importance for the implementation and evaluation of restoration programmes aiming to restore sustainable countryside diversity. As local extinction processes in highly fragmented landscapes shape biodiversity, priority should be given to the conservation of diverse agricultural landscape remnants in Europe.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01270.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAPEAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>agricultural land ; Agriculture ; Agroecology ; Agroecosystems ; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; agro‐ecosystems ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Apoidea ; Applied ecology ; Araneae ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity and Ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Carabidae ; conservation ; Continental interfaces, environment ; diversity partitioning ; Entomology ; Environmental Sciences ; fragmentation ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General agroecology ; General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping ; General agronomy. Plant production ; General aspects ; Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development ; Global Changes ; Habitats ; Heteroptera ; Insect Diversity ; insect ecology ; Insects ; Land use ; landscape ecology ; Landscapes ; natural resource management ; Sciences of the Universe ; Species ; Species diversity ; Sustainable agriculture ; Syrphidae ; Wildlife habitats</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 2007-04, Vol.44 (2), p.340-351</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2007 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Apr 2007</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5650-da7560ff73c9d02b8b2b9c661b787c504a905b795eaec20c314157fc382fa29d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5650-da7560ff73c9d02b8b2b9c661b787c504a905b795eaec20c314157fc382fa29d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9472-4891 ; 0000-0002-8518-3920</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4539249$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/4539249$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=18618443$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-00162516$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCHWEIGER, OLIVER</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SPEELMANS, MARJAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AVIRON, STÉPHANIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BILLETER, REGULA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BAILEY, DEBRA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUKACEK, ROMAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUREL, FRANÇOISE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DIEKÖTTER, TIM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DIRKSEN, JOLANDA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HERZOG, FELIX</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LIIRA, JAAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROUBALOVA, MARTINA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANDOMME, VIKI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUGTER, ROB</creatorcontrib><title>How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>1. Agricultural intensification poses a serious threat to biodiversity as a consequence of increased land-use intensity, decreased landscape heterogeneity and reduced habitat diversity. Although there is interest in the preservation of total species richness of an agricultural landscape (γ diversity), the effects of intensification have been assessed primarily by species richness at a local scale (α diversity). This ignores species richness between local communities (β diversity), which is an important component of total species richness. 2. In this study, measures of land-use intensity, landscape structure and habitat diversity were related to γ, α and β diversity of wild bees (Apoidea), carabid beetles (Carabidae), hoverflies (Syrphidae), true bugs (Heteroptera) and spiders (Araneae) within 16 local communities in 24 temperate European agricultural landscapes. 3. The total landscape species richness of all groups was most strongly affected by increased proximity of semi-natural habitat patches. Bees also decreased in landscapes with a high intensity of farmland management, demonstrating additive effects of both factors. 4. Separating total species diversity into components, the decrease in total species richness could be attributed primarily to a decrease in species diversity between local communities. Species richness of the local communities of all investigated groups decreased with increasing land-use intensity and, in the case of spiders, decreasing proximity of the semi-natural habitat patches. 5. The effect of increased habitat diversity appeared to be of secondary importance to total species richness but caused a shift in the relative contribution of α and β diversity towards the latter. 6. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that the effects of agricultural change operate at a landscape level and that examining species diversity at a local level fails to explain the total species richness of an agricultural landscape. The coincidence of patterns of β diversity with those of γ diversity emphasizes that such information is of crucial importance for the implementation and evaluation of restoration programmes aiming to restore sustainable countryside diversity. As local extinction processes in highly fragmented landscapes shape biodiversity, priority should be given to the conservation of diverse agricultural landscape remnants in Europe.</description><subject>agricultural land</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Agroecology</subject><subject>Agroecosystems</subject><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>agro‐ecosystems</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Apoidea</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Araneae</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity and Ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Carabidae</subject><subject>conservation</subject><subject>Continental interfaces, environment</subject><subject>diversity partitioning</subject><subject>Entomology</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>fragmentation</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General agroecology</subject><subject>General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping</subject><subject>General agronomy. Plant production</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development</subject><subject>Global Changes</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Heteroptera</subject><subject>Insect Diversity</subject><subject>insect ecology</subject><subject>Insects</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>landscape ecology</subject><subject>Landscapes</subject><subject>natural resource management</subject><subject>Sciences of the Universe</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Sustainable agriculture</subject><subject>Syrphidae</subject><subject>Wildlife habitats</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkdGK1DAUhosoOK6-gWAQvBBsPUmapL3wYllWRxlQ0L0OaZo4Kd1mTNLdnWfwpU23y-iluUk45_v_c8hfFAhDhfN5P1SYclYSzuuKAPAKMBFQ3T0qNqfG42IDQHDZtICfFs9iHACgZZRuit9bf4tGNfVRq4NBMYVZpzmYd_fFco4GuSmZKbp0RLmC9qpzSSXUuxsT1qq1Riek_fXBT2ZKEXmLkk9qRCqkffAH3_-Duwmpn8HpecxzMnMaHp8XT6wao3nxcJ8VVx8vf1xsy93XT58vznelZpxB2SvBOFgrqG57IF3Tka7VnONONEIzqFULrBMtM8poApriGjNhNW2IVaTt6VnxdvXdq1EegrtW4Si9cnJ7vpNLDQBzwjC_wZl9vbKH4H_NJiY5-DlMeT1JKK1rDjXLULNCOvgYg7EnVwxySUkOcglDLmHIJSV5n5K8y9I3D_4qf8Jog5q0i3_1DcdNXdPMfVi5Wzea43_7yy_fLpdX1r9c9UNMPpz0efmW1G1uv1rbVnm5xBPl1XcCmAII1goQ9A94Frn0</recordid><startdate>200704</startdate><enddate>200704</enddate><creator>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK</creator><creator>MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE</creator><creator>VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER</creator><creator>SCHWEIGER, OLIVER</creator><creator>SPEELMANS, MARJAN</creator><creator>AVIRON, STÉPHANIE</creator><creator>AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL</creator><creator>BILLETER, REGULA</creator><creator>BAILEY, DEBRA</creator><creator>BUKACEK, ROMAN</creator><creator>BUREL, FRANÇOISE</creator><creator>DIEKÖTTER, TIM</creator><creator>DIRKSEN, JOLANDA</creator><creator>HERZOG, FELIX</creator><creator>LIIRA, JAAN</creator><creator>ROUBALOVA, MARTINA</creator><creator>VANDOMME, VIKI</creator><creator>BUGTER, ROB</creator><general>Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Science</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>1XC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9472-4891</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8518-3920</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>200704</creationdate><title>How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes</title><author>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK ; MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE ; VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER ; SCHWEIGER, OLIVER ; SPEELMANS, MARJAN ; AVIRON, STÉPHANIE ; AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL ; BILLETER, REGULA ; BAILEY, DEBRA ; BUKACEK, ROMAN ; BUREL, FRANÇOISE ; DIEKÖTTER, TIM ; DIRKSEN, JOLANDA ; HERZOG, FELIX ; LIIRA, JAAN ; ROUBALOVA, MARTINA ; VANDOMME, VIKI ; BUGTER, ROB</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5650-da7560ff73c9d02b8b2b9c661b787c504a905b795eaec20c314157fc382fa29d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>agricultural land</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Agroecology</topic><topic>Agroecosystems</topic><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>agro‐ecosystems</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Apoidea</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Araneae</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity and Ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Carabidae</topic><topic>conservation</topic><topic>Continental interfaces, environment</topic><topic>diversity partitioning</topic><topic>Entomology</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>fragmentation</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General agroecology</topic><topic>General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping</topic><topic>General agronomy. Plant production</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development</topic><topic>Global Changes</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Heteroptera</topic><topic>Insect Diversity</topic><topic>insect ecology</topic><topic>Insects</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>landscape ecology</topic><topic>Landscapes</topic><topic>natural resource management</topic><topic>Sciences of the Universe</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Sustainable agriculture</topic><topic>Syrphidae</topic><topic>Wildlife habitats</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCHWEIGER, OLIVER</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SPEELMANS, MARJAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AVIRON, STÉPHANIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BILLETER, REGULA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BAILEY, DEBRA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUKACEK, ROMAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUREL, FRANÇOISE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DIEKÖTTER, TIM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DIRKSEN, JOLANDA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HERZOG, FELIX</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LIIRA, JAAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROUBALOVA, MARTINA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANDOMME, VIKI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUGTER, ROB</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>HENDRICKX, FREDERIK</au><au>MAELFAIT, JEAN-PIERRE</au><au>VAN WINGERDEN, WALTER</au><au>SCHWEIGER, OLIVER</au><au>SPEELMANS, MARJAN</au><au>AVIRON, STÉPHANIE</au><au>AUGENSTEIN, ISABEL</au><au>BILLETER, REGULA</au><au>BAILEY, DEBRA</au><au>BUKACEK, ROMAN</au><au>BUREL, FRANÇOISE</au><au>DIEKÖTTER, TIM</au><au>DIRKSEN, JOLANDA</au><au>HERZOG, FELIX</au><au>LIIRA, JAAN</au><au>ROUBALOVA, MARTINA</au><au>VANDOMME, VIKI</au><au>BUGTER, ROB</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>2007-04</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>340</spage><epage>351</epage><pages>340-351</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><coden>JAPEAI</coden><abstract>1. Agricultural intensification poses a serious threat to biodiversity as a consequence of increased land-use intensity, decreased landscape heterogeneity and reduced habitat diversity. Although there is interest in the preservation of total species richness of an agricultural landscape (γ diversity), the effects of intensification have been assessed primarily by species richness at a local scale (α diversity). This ignores species richness between local communities (β diversity), which is an important component of total species richness. 2. In this study, measures of land-use intensity, landscape structure and habitat diversity were related to γ, α and β diversity of wild bees (Apoidea), carabid beetles (Carabidae), hoverflies (Syrphidae), true bugs (Heteroptera) and spiders (Araneae) within 16 local communities in 24 temperate European agricultural landscapes. 3. The total landscape species richness of all groups was most strongly affected by increased proximity of semi-natural habitat patches. Bees also decreased in landscapes with a high intensity of farmland management, demonstrating additive effects of both factors. 4. Separating total species diversity into components, the decrease in total species richness could be attributed primarily to a decrease in species diversity between local communities. Species richness of the local communities of all investigated groups decreased with increasing land-use intensity and, in the case of spiders, decreasing proximity of the semi-natural habitat patches. 5. The effect of increased habitat diversity appeared to be of secondary importance to total species richness but caused a shift in the relative contribution of α and β diversity towards the latter. 6. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that the effects of agricultural change operate at a landscape level and that examining species diversity at a local level fails to explain the total species richness of an agricultural landscape. The coincidence of patterns of β diversity with those of γ diversity emphasizes that such information is of crucial importance for the implementation and evaluation of restoration programmes aiming to restore sustainable countryside diversity. As local extinction processes in highly fragmented landscapes shape biodiversity, priority should be given to the conservation of diverse agricultural landscape remnants in Europe.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01270.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9472-4891</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8518-3920</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8901 |
ispartof | The Journal of applied ecology, 2007-04, Vol.44 (2), p.340-351 |
issn | 0021-8901 1365-2664 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00162516v1 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Free Content; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | agricultural land Agriculture Agroecology Agroecosystems Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions agro‐ecosystems Animal, plant and microbial ecology Apoidea Applied ecology Araneae Biodiversity Biodiversity and Ecology Biological and medical sciences Carabidae conservation Continental interfaces, environment diversity partitioning Entomology Environmental Sciences fragmentation Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General agroecology General agroecology. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development. Rural area planning. Landscaping General agronomy. Plant production General aspects Generalities. Agricultural and farming systems. Agricultural development Global Changes Habitats Heteroptera Insect Diversity insect ecology Insects Land use landscape ecology Landscapes natural resource management Sciences of the Universe Species Species diversity Sustainable agriculture Syrphidae Wildlife habitats |
title | How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T21%3A30%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20landscape%20structure,%20land-use%20intensity%20and%20habitat%20diversity%20affect%20components%20of%20total%20arthropod%20diversity%20in%20agricultural%20landscapes&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=HENDRICKX,%20FREDERIK&rft.date=2007-04&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=340&rft.epage=351&rft.pages=340-351&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft.coden=JAPEAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01270.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_hal_p%3E4539249%3C/jstor_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=233446045&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=4539249&rfr_iscdi=true |