Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2019 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Postprint (2)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- biodiversity (1)
- crop production (1)
- dispersal (1)
- disturbance (1)
- ecosystem services (1)
- edge effect (1)
- land sharing vs. land sparing (1)
- landscape diversity (1)
- life‐history traits (1)
- natural habitats (1)
Institute
Meta‐communities of habitat islands may be essential to maintain biodiversity in anthropogenic landscapes allowing rescue effects in local habitat patches. To understand the species‐assembly mechanisms and dynamics of such ecosystems, it is important to test how local plant‐community diversity and composition is affected by spatial isolation and hence by dispersal limitation and local environmental conditions acting as filters for local species sorting. We used a system of 46 small wetlands (kettle holes)—natural small‐scale freshwater habitats rarely considered in nature conservation policies—embedded in an intensively managed agricultural matrix in northern Germany. We compared two types of kettle holes with distinct topographies (flatsloped, ephemeral, frequently plowed kettle holes vs. steep‐sloped, more permanent ones) and determined 254 vascular plant species within these ecosystems, as well as plant functional traits and nearest neighbor distances to other kettle holes. Differences in alpha and beta diversity between steep permanent compared with ephemeral flat kettle holes were mainly explained by species sorting and niche processes and mass effect processes in ephemeral flat kettle holes. The plant‐community composition as well as the community trait distribution in terms of life span, breeding system, dispersal ability, and longevity of seed banks significantly differed between the two habitat types. Flat ephemeral kettle holes held a higher percentage of non‐perennial plants with a more persistent seed bank, less obligate outbreeders and more species with seed dispersal abilities via animal vectors compared with steep‐sloped, more permanent kettle holes that had a higher percentage of wind‐dispersed species. In the flat kettle holes, plant‐species richness was negatively correlated with the degree of isolation, whereas no such pattern was found for the permanent kettle holes. Synthesis: Environment acts as filter shaping plant diversity (alpha and beta) and plant‐community trait distribution between steep permanent compared with ephemeral flat kettle holes supporting species sorting and niche mechanisms as expected, but we identified a mass effect in ephemeral kettle holes only. Flat ephemeral kettle holes can be regarded as meta‐ecosystems that strongly depend on seed dispersal and recruitment from a seed bank, whereas neighboring permanent kettle holes have a more stable local species diversity.
How much do we really lose?
(2019)
Natural landscape elements (NLEs) in agricultural landscapes contribute to biodiversity and ecosystem services, but are also regarded as an obstacle for large‐scale agricultural production. However, the effects of NLEs on crop yield have rarely been measured. Here, we investigated how different bordering structures, such as agricultural roads, field‐to‐field borders, forests, hedgerows, and kettle holes, influence agricultural yields. We hypothesized that (a) yield values at field borders differ from mid‐field yields and that (b) the extent of this change in yields depends on the bordering structure.
We measured winter wheat yields along transects with log‐scaled distances from the border into the agricultural field within two intensively managed agricultural landscapes in Germany (2014 near Göttingen, and 2015–2017 in the Uckermark).
We observed a yield loss adjacent to every investigated bordering structure of 11%–38% in comparison with mid‐field yields. However, depending on the bordering structure, this yield loss disappeared at different distances. While the proximity of kettle holes did not affect yields more than neighboring agricultural fields, woody landscape elements had strong effects on winter wheat yields. Notably, 95% of mid‐field yields could already be reached at a distance of 11.3 m from a kettle hole and at a distance of 17.8 m from hedgerows as well as forest borders.
Our findings suggest that yield losses are especially relevant directly adjacent to woody landscape elements, but not adjacent to in‐field water bodies. This highlights the potential to simultaneously counteract yield losses close to the field border and enhance biodiversity by combining different NLEs in agricultural landscapes such as creating strips of extensive grassland vegetation between woody landscape elements and agricultural fields. In conclusion, our results can be used to quantify ecocompensations to find optimal solutions for the delivery of productive and regulative ecosystem services in heterogeneous agricultural landscapes.