Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (8) (remove)
Language
- English (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (8)
Keywords
- BEEHAVE (2)
- apis mellifera (2)
- colony viability (2)
- concepts (2)
- crop diversity (2)
- cropping system (2)
- decline (2)
- ecosystem services provisioning (2)
- ecosystems (2)
- forage availability (2)
Institute
The cultivation of energy crops leads to direct and indirect land use changes that impair the biodiversity of the agricultural landscape. In our study, we analyse the effects of mitigation measures on the European brown hare (Lepus europaeus), which is directly affected by ongoing land use change and has experienced widespread decline throughout Europe since the 1960s. Therefore, we developed a spatially explicit and individual-based ecological model to study the effects of different landscape configurations and compositions on hare population development. As an input, we used two 4 x 4 km large model landscapes, which were generated by a landscape generator based on real field sizes and crop proportions and differed in average field size and crop composition. The crops grown annually are evaluated in terms of forage suitability, breeding suitability and crop richness for the hare. In six mitigation scenarios, we investigated the effects of a 10 % increase in the following measures: (1) mixed silphie, (2) miscanthus, (3) grass-clover ley, (4) alfalfa, (5) set-aside, and (6) general crop richness. All mitigation measures had significant effects on hare population development. Compared to the base scenario, the relative change in hare abundance ranged from a factor of 0.56 in the grass-clover ley scenario to-0.16 in the miscanthus scenario. The mitigation measures of mixed silphie, grass-clover ley and increased crop richness led to distinct increases in hare abundance in both landscapes ( > 0.3). The results show that both landscape configuration and composition have a significant effect on hare population development, which responds particularly strongly to compositional changes. The increase in crop diversity, e.g., through the cultivation of alternative energy crops such as mixed silphie and grass-clover ley, proves to be beneficial for the brown hare.
Movement behavior is an essential element of fundamental ecological processes such as competition and predation. Although intraspecific trait variation (ITV) in movement behaviors is pervasive, its consequences for ecological community dynamics are still not fully understood. Using a newly developed individual-based model, we analyzed how given and constant ITVs in foraging movement affect differences in foraging efficiencies between species competing for common resources under various resource distributions. Further, we analyzed how the effect of ITV on emerging differences in competitive abilities ultimately affects species coexistence. The model is generic but mimics observed patterns of among-individual covariation between personality, movement and space use in ground-dwelling rodents. Interacting species differed in their mean behavioral types along a slow-fast continuum, integrating consistent individual variation in average behavioral expression and responsiveness (i.e. behavioral reaction norms). We found that ITV reduced interspecific differences in competitive abilities by 5-35% and thereby promoted coexistence via an equalizing mechanism. The emergent relationships between behavioral types and foraging efficiency are characteristic for specific environmental contexts of resource distribution and population density. As these relationships are asymmetric, species that were either 'too fast' or 'too slow' benefited differently from ITV. Thus, ITV in movement behavior has consequences for species coexistence but to predict its effect in a given system requires intimate knowledge on how variation in movement traits relates to fitness components along an environmental gradient.
Editorial
(2020)
Resilience trinity
(2020)
Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.
Resilience trinity
(2020)
Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.
Forage availability has been suggested as one driver of the observed decline in honey bees. However, little is known about the effects of its spatiotemporal variation on colony success. We present a modeling framework for assessing honey bee colony viability in cropping systems. Based on two real farmland structures, we developed a landscape generator to design cropping systems varying in crop species identity, diversity, and relative abundance. The landscape scenarios generated were evaluated using the existing honey bee colony model BEEHAVE, which links foraging to in-hive dynamics. We thereby explored how different cropping systems determine spatiotemporal forage availability and, in turn, honey bee colony viability (e.g., time to extinction, TTE) and resilience (indicated by, e.g., brood mortality). To assess overall colony viability, we developed metrics,P(H)andP(P,)which quantified how much nectar and pollen provided by a cropping system per year was converted into a colony's adult worker population. Both crop species identity and diversity determined the temporal continuity in nectar and pollen supply and thus colony viability. Overall farmland structure and relative crop abundance were less important, but details mattered. For monocultures and for four-crop species systems composed of cereals, oilseed rape, maize, and sunflower,P(H)andP(P)were below the viability threshold. Such cropping systems showed frequent, badly timed, and prolonged forage gaps leading to detrimental cascading effects on life stages and in-hive work force, which critically reduced colony resilience. Four-crop systems composed of rye-grass-dandelion pasture, trefoil-grass pasture, sunflower, and phacelia ensured continuous nectar and pollen supply resulting in TTE > 5 yr, andP(H)(269.5 kg) andP(P)(108 kg) being above viability thresholds for 5 yr. Overall, trefoil-grass pasture, oilseed rape, buckwheat, and phacelia improved the temporal continuity in forage supply and colony's viability. Our results are hypothetical as they are obtained from simplified landscape settings, but they nevertheless match empirical observations, in particular the viability threshold. Our framework can be used to assess the effects of cropping systems on honey bee viability and to develop land-use strategies that help maintain pollination services by avoiding prolonged and badly timed forage gaps.
Forage availability has been suggested as one driver of the observed decline in honey bees. However, little is known about the effects of its spatiotemporal variation on colony success. We present a modeling framework for assessing honey bee colony viability in cropping systems. Based on two real farmland structures, we developed a landscape generator to design cropping systems varying in crop species identity, diversity, and relative abundance. The landscape scenarios generated were evaluated using the existing honey bee colony model BEEHAVE, which links foraging to in-hive dynamics. We thereby explored how different cropping systems determine spatiotemporal forage availability and, in turn, honey bee colony viability (e.g., time to extinction, TTE) and resilience (indicated by, e.g., brood mortality). To assess overall colony viability, we developed metrics,P(H)andP(P,)which quantified how much nectar and pollen provided by a cropping system per year was converted into a colony's adult worker population. Both crop species identity and diversity determined the temporal continuity in nectar and pollen supply and thus colony viability. Overall farmland structure and relative crop abundance were less important, but details mattered. For monocultures and for four-crop species systems composed of cereals, oilseed rape, maize, and sunflower,P(H)andP(P)were below the viability threshold. Such cropping systems showed frequent, badly timed, and prolonged forage gaps leading to detrimental cascading effects on life stages and in-hive work force, which critically reduced colony resilience. Four-crop systems composed of rye-grass-dandelion pasture, trefoil-grass pasture, sunflower, and phacelia ensured continuous nectar and pollen supply resulting in TTE > 5 yr, andP(H)(269.5 kg) andP(P)(108 kg) being above viability thresholds for 5 yr. Overall, trefoil-grass pasture, oilseed rape, buckwheat, and phacelia improved the temporal continuity in forage supply and colony's viability. Our results are hypothetical as they are obtained from simplified landscape settings, but they nevertheless match empirical observations, in particular the viability threshold. Our framework can be used to assess the effects of cropping systems on honey bee viability and to develop land-use strategies that help maintain pollination services by avoiding prolonged and badly timed forage gaps.
Both climate change and land use regimes affect the viability of populations, but they are often studied separately. Moreover, population viability analyses (PVAs) often ignore the effects of large environmental gradients and use temporal resolutions that are too coarse to take into account that different stages of a population's life cycle may be affected differently by climate change. Here, we present the High-resolution Large Environmental Gradient (HiLEG) model and apply it in a PVA with daily resolution based on daily climate projections for Northwest Germany. We used the large marsh grasshopper (LMG) as the target species and investigated (1) the effects of climate change on the viability and spatial distribution of the species, (2) the influence of the timing of grassland mowing on the species and (3) the interaction between the effects of climate change and grassland mowing. The stageand cohort-based model was run for the spatially differentiated environmental conditions temperature and soil moisture across the whole study region. We implemented three climate change scenarios and analyzed the population dynamics for four consecutive 20-year periods. Climate change alone would lead to an expansion of the regions suitable for the LMG, as warming accelerates development and due to reduced drought stress. However, in combination with land use, the timing of mowing was crucial, as this disturbance causes a high mortality rate in the aboveground life stages. Assuming the same date of mowing throughout the region, the impact on viability varied greatly between regions due to the different climate conditions. The regional negative effects of the mowing date can be divided into five phases: (1) In early spring, the populations were largely unaffected in all the regions; (2) between late spring and early summer, they were severely affected only in warm regions; (3) in summer, all the populations were severely affected so that they could hardly survive; (4) between late summer and early autumn, they were severely affected in cold regions; and (5) in autumn, the populations were equally affected across all regions. The duration and start of each phase differed slightly depending on the climate change scenario and simulation period, but overall, they showed the same pattern. Our model can be used to identify regions of concern and devise management recommendations. The model can be adapted to the life cycle of different target species, climate projections and disturbance regimes. We show with our adaption of the HiLEG model that high-resolution PVAs and applications on large environmental gradients can be reconciled to develop conservation strategies capable of dealing with multiple stressors.