Agricultural intensification is a leading cause of global biodiversity loss, which can reduce the provisioning of ecosystem services in managed ecosystems. Organic farming and plant diversification are farm management schemes that may mitigate potential ecological harm by increasing species richness and boosting related ecosystem services to agroecosystems. What remains unclear is the extent to which farm management schemes affect biodiversity components other than species richness, and whether impacts differ across spatial scales and landscape contexts. Using a global meta-dataset, we quantified the effects of organic farming and plant diversification on abundance, local diversity (communities within fields), and regional diversity (communities across fields) of arthropod pollinators, predators, herbivores, and detritivores. Both organic farming and higher in-field plant diversity enhanced arthropod abundance, particularly for rare taxa. This resulted in increased richness but decreased evenness. While these responses were stronger at local relative to regional scales, richness and abundance increased at both scales, and richness on farms embedded in complex relative to simple landscapes. Overall, both organic farming and in-field plant diversification exerted the strongest effects on pollinators and predators, suggesting these management schemes can facilitate ecosystem service providers without augmenting herbivore (pest) populations. Our results suggest that organic farming and plant diversification promote diverse arthropod metacommunities that may provide temporal and spatial stability of ecosystem service provisioning. Conserving diverse plant and arthropod communities in farming systems therefore requires sustainable practices that operate both within fields and across landscapes.

A global synthesis of the effects of diversified farming systems on arthropod diversity within fields and across agricultural landscapes

ISAIA, MARCO;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Agricultural intensification is a leading cause of global biodiversity loss, which can reduce the provisioning of ecosystem services in managed ecosystems. Organic farming and plant diversification are farm management schemes that may mitigate potential ecological harm by increasing species richness and boosting related ecosystem services to agroecosystems. What remains unclear is the extent to which farm management schemes affect biodiversity components other than species richness, and whether impacts differ across spatial scales and landscape contexts. Using a global meta-dataset, we quantified the effects of organic farming and plant diversification on abundance, local diversity (communities within fields), and regional diversity (communities across fields) of arthropod pollinators, predators, herbivores, and detritivores. Both organic farming and higher in-field plant diversity enhanced arthropod abundance, particularly for rare taxa. This resulted in increased richness but decreased evenness. While these responses were stronger at local relative to regional scales, richness and abundance increased at both scales, and richness on farms embedded in complex relative to simple landscapes. Overall, both organic farming and in-field plant diversification exerted the strongest effects on pollinators and predators, suggesting these management schemes can facilitate ecosystem service providers without augmenting herbivore (pest) populations. Our results suggest that organic farming and plant diversification promote diverse arthropod metacommunities that may provide temporal and spatial stability of ecosystem service provisioning. Conserving diverse plant and arthropod communities in farming systems therefore requires sustainable practices that operate both within fields and across landscapes.
2017
23
11
4946
4957
agricultural management schemes, arthropod diversity, functional groups, landscape complexity, meta-analysis, evenness, biodiversity, organic farming
Lichtenberg Elinor; Kennedy CHRISTINA MARIE; Kremen Claire; Batáry Péter; Berendse Frank; Bommarco Riccardo; BOSQUE-PÉREZ NILSA A; Carvalheiro LUÍSA G.; Snyder William; Williams NEAL M.; Winfree Rachael; Klatt Björn; Åström Sandra; Benjamin Faye; Brittain Claire; Chaplin-Kramer Rebecca; Clough Yann; Connelly Heather; Danforth Bryan; Diekötter Tim; Eigenbrode SANFORD D.; Ekroos Johan; Elle Elizabeth; Freitas Breno; Fukuda Yuki; Gaines-Day Hannah; Gratton Claudio; Holzschuh Andrea; Isaacs Rufus; Isaia Marco; Jha Shalene; Jonason Dennis; Jones VINCENT P; Klein ALEXANDRA-MARIA; Krauss Jochen; Letourneau Deborah; Macfadyen Sarina; Mallinger RACHEL E; Martin EMILY A; Martinez Eliana; Memmott Jane; Morandin Lora; Neame Lisa; Otieno Mark; Park Mia; Pfiffner Lukas; Pocock MICHAEL J.O.; Ponce Carlos; Potts Simon; Poveda Katja; Ramos Mariangie; Rosenheim JAY A; Rundlöf Maj; Sardinas Hillary; Saunders MANU E; Schon NICOLE L; Sciligo Amber; Sidhu C.; STEFFAN-DEWENTER Ingolf; Tscharntke Teja; Vesely Milan; Weisser Wolfgang; Wilson Julianna; Crowder DAVID W
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
GCB-16-1362-R1.pdf

Open Access dal 13/04/2018

Descrizione: Documento Post Print
Tipo di file: POSTPRINT (VERSIONE FINALE DELL’AUTORE)
Dimensione 3.23 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
3.23 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
2017_GCB_Global_farming.pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 592.48 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
592.48 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1632250
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 248
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 227
social impact