Maintenance of the agricultural landscape, preservation of biodiversity and landscape aesthetics are part of a multifunctional agriculture. However, little is known about the influence of single agricultural landscape elements in different seasonal stages on landscape aesthetics. In a Swisswide photo survey, the aesthetic preferences of Swiss residents for typical agricultural landscape elements in the Swiss lowlands were investigated. Photographs of seven ecological compensation areas (ECAs) and seven other elements (crops, high-intensity meadows and pastures) were selected. Each element was presented in four to six different seasonal stages, each on single paper-based questionnaire pages to allow a random selection of elements and seasonal stages. In addition, each element was replicated in each seasonal stage. Four randomly selected elements were sent to each study participant for aesthetic valuation (preference rating scores). Overall, ECAs received higher preference ratings than crops or high-intensity grassland. Most preferred were ECAs with a vertical structure, i.e. trees and bushes, and species-rich elements. In addition, the seasonal stage of a landscape element strongly influenced preference ratings. Flowering stages were clearly liked most. Moreover, perceived diversity and naturalness of an element had a strong positive effect on its rating. The results indicate that ECAs, besides their ecological function, are powerful elements to enhance the public's preference for agricultural landscapes. Moreover, the results might be useful for the development and adaptation of quantitative methods to capture the aesthetic value of agricultural regions and might provide a basis for political decisions concerning direct payments for aesthetic services of agriculture. AbstractThe maintenance of cultivated landscapes, the conservation of biodiversity and landscape aesthetics are part of a multifunctional agriculture. However, little is known about the influence of single agricultural landscape elements in different seasonal stages on landscape aesthetics. In a Swiss-wide photo survey we investigated the aesthetic preferences of Swiss residents for different agricultural landscape elements that are typical in the Swiss lowlands.Photographs of seven crops and seven ecological compensation areas (ECAs) were selected.Each element was presented in four to six different seasonal stages on single paper-based questionnaire pages and, in addition, replicated four times. A random selection of four elements was sent to each study participant who had to rank the four in decreasing order of aesthetic value (preference rating scores). Overall, ECAs received higher preference ratings than crops. Most preferred were high-stem fruit trees, hedgerows, and low-intensity pastures, i.e. ECAs with a vertical structure. Study participants characterised ECAs as varied, speciesrich and beautiful. In addition, the seasonal stage of a landscape element strongly influenced preference ratings. Flowering stages of both ECAs and crop...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Ecological cross compliance S Aviron et al. 248 w ww ww w. .f fr ro on nt ti ie er rs si in ne ec co ol lo og gy y. .o or rg g © © The Ecological Society of America w ww ww w. .f fr ro on nt ti ie er rs si in ne ec co ol lo og gy y. .o or rg g

No abstract

An important goal of ecological compensation areas (ECAs) is to increase biodiversity in adjacent intensively managed farmland and the agricultural landscape at large. We tested whether this goal can be achieved in the case of the agrienvironmental restoration scheme implemented for Swiss grassland using five large arthropod taxa (bees, true bugs, orthopterans, ground beetles and spiders) representing different ecological and functional groups. The species richness and abundance of all groups and species, respectively, was measured along 100 m transects from ECAmeadows into the adjacent intensively managed grassland at 24 sites. Species richness of all arthropod taxa except ground beetles, and the abundance of 63% of the 234 arthropod species sampled with at least five individuals were higher in ECA-meadows than in their surroundings, while the total abundance of spiders and ground beetles was higher in intensively managed meadows. The abundance of 8% of these species were only increased in the ECA-meadows themselves ("stenotopic" species) but 40% had increased abundance both in the ECA-meadows and the adjacent grassland, declining exponentially with increasing distance from ECA-meadows ("edge species"). The 90%-decay distances for these edge species differed among taxonomic groups (117 ± 18 m for true bugs, 137 ± 24 m for spiders, 152 ± 34 m for bees, 167 ± 5.7 m for orthopterans, 185 ± 34 m for ground beetles; mean ± 1 standard error) and independent of taxonomic group were larger for large-sized or predacious species than for small-sized or phytophagous species. Because the average distance between neighbouring ECA-meadows in Swiss grassland is only 73 ± 4 m, the current agrienvrionment scheme very likely enhances arthropod diversity and possibly associated ecosystem services in the Swiss agricultural landscape at large. Albrecht et al.Enhancing arthropod diversity on grassland

The effects of habitat restoration measures designated to promote farmland biodiversity have been documented at the field scale, but little is known about their role in restoring the agricultural mosaic. In this study, we analyzed the effects of wildflower strips (WFS) at the field scale and in the landscape context on butterflies in a Swiss arable landscape. Three hypotheses were tested: (1) butterfly diversity and abundance are higher in WFS than in conventional fields; (2) butterfly diversity and abundance are enhanced by the amount, proximity and connectivity of WFS in the landscape context; (3) additional factors influence butterfly diversity and abundance according to individual site conditions and landscape context characteristics linked to other landscape elements. WFS had more species and individuals of butterflies than conventional habitats. However, promoted species were mainly generalists; few specialists were enhanced. The diversity of all butterflies and of generalists increased linearly with percent cover of WFS, reflecting an effect of restoration measures depending on the landscape context. The influence of proximity and connectivity of WFS were, however, not significant. The occurrence of specialists was conditioned by plant species richness, while the effect of WFS for overall diversity was affected by the amount of grassland in the surroundings. We conclude that to increase the effectiveness of biodiversity-orientated restoration measures, their implementation should be steered toward increasing the share of WFS in the landscape. However, the combination of WFS with additional restoration measures might be needed to halt the decline of specialist species.