A landscape ecology approach identifies important drivers of urban biodiversity

Turrini, Tabea; Knop, Eva

doi:10.1111/gcb.12825

Cited by 134 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One location was visited only six times (n = 110). We recorded a total of 3,404 hoverflies (2,710 migratory, 673 non-migratory and 21 unidentified individuals) 2012;Knop, 2016;Magura et al, 2010;Turrini & Knop, 2015). In contrast, these results are in disagreement with the studies ofBates et al (2011) andVerboven, Uyttenbroeck, Brys, and Hermy (2014) who reported a significant difference and a trend for a difference in hoverfly species richness between urban and rural landscapes.…”

contrasting

confidence: 62%

“…While the negative effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity are well known (e.g., Kleijn et al, 2009;Tscharntke, Klein, Kruess, Steffan-Dewenter, & Thies, 2005), the nature of the impact of urbanization remains relatively unclear (Faeth, Bang, & Saari, 2011;Mckinney, 2008). Previous research comparing urbanized areas to rural areas has found contrasting effects of urbanization on species richness and diversity across taxa (e.g., Baldock et al, 2015;Faeth et al, 2011;Magura, Lövei, & Tóthmérész, 2010;Mckinney, 2008;Turrini & Knop, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contrasting responses in community structure and phenology of migratory and non‐migratory pollinators to urbanization

Luder

Knop

Menz

2018

Diversity and Distributions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Anthropogenic landscape change, such as urbanization, can affect community structure and ecological interactions. Furthermore, changes in ambient temperature and resource availability due to urbanization may affect migratory and non‐migratory species differently. However, the response of migratory species to urbanization is poorly investigated, and knowledge for invertebrates in particular is lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether there was a shift in community structure and phenology of hoverflies in urban landscapes, depending on migratory status. Location Switzerland. Methods Using a paired design, we compared urban and rural landscapes to investigate the impact of urbanization on the abundance, diversity and phenology of hoverflies. Furthermore, we tested whether migratory and non‐migratory species responded differently to urbanization. Results We observed a difference in the response of migratory and non‐migratory hoverfly communities. Although the abundance of hoverflies was higher in the rural ecosystem, driven by a high abundance of migratory species, there was no difference in species richness between the land use types. However, the community structure of non‐migratory species was significantly different between urban and rural ecosystems. The phenology of hoverflies differed between the two ecosystems, with an earlier appearance in the year of migratory species in urban landscapes. Main conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the response of migratory insect communities to urbanization. We demonstrated that migratory and non‐migratory hoverflies respond differently to urbanization. This highlights the importance of differentiating between trait and mobility groups to understand community assemblage patterns in anthropogenic landscapes. The differences in phenology supports the growing evidence that urbanization not only affects the phenology of vegetation, but also affects the higher trophic levels. Changes in the phenology and community composition of species as a result of anthropogenic landscape change may have important implications for the maintenance of key ecosystem functions, such as pollination.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 62%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting responses in community structure and phenology of migratory and non‐migratory pollinators to urbanization

Luder

Knop

Menz

2018

Diversity and Distributions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, urbanization did not seem to have an overall negative impact, but it affected urbanization winners and losers in different ways as suggested by previous studies (e.g., Banaszak-Cibicka & Żmihorski, 2012; Hülsmann et al, 2015). Correspondingly, Turrini & Knop (2015) found that urbanization also favors specific species. Community composition may be determined by stochasticity (Sattler et al, 2010), and urbanization impacts depend on geographical, historical and economic factors of cities (McKinney, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Disentangling urban habitat and matrix effects on wild bee species

Fischer

Eichfeld

Kowarik

et al. 2016

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In face of a dramatic decline of wild bee species in many rural landscapes, potential conservation functions of urban areas gain importance. Yet effects of urbanization on pollinators, and in particular on wild bees, remain ambiguous and not comprehensively understood. This is especially true for amenity grassland and extensively managed wastelands within large-scale residential housing areas. Using Berlin as a study region, we aimed to investigate (a) if these greenspaces are accepted by wild bee assemblages as foraging habitats; (b) how assemblage structure of bees and individual bee species are affected by different habitat (e.g., management, flower density) and urban matrix variables (e.g., isolation, urbanization); and (c) to what extent grassland restoration can promote bees in urban environments. In summer 2012, we collected 62 bee species belonging to more than 20% of the taxa known for Berlin. Urbanization significantly affected species composition of bees; 18 species were affiliated to different levels of urbanization. Most bee species were not affected by any of the environmental variables tested, and urbanization had a negative effect only for one bee species. Further, we determined that restoration of diverse grasslands positively affected bee species richnesss in urban environments. We conclude that differently structured and managed greenspaces in large-scale housing areas can provide additional foraging habitats and refuges for pollinators. This supports approaches towards a biodiversity friendly management within urban regions and may be of particular importance given that anthropogenic pressure is increasing in many rural landscapes.

show abstract

“…Several studies have shown that urbanization promotes the reduction of diversity, but increases the abundance of so-called urban exploiters, species specialized in the urban environment (McKinney, 2008;Faeth et al, 2011;Aronson et al, 2014;Turrini and Knop, 2015). A consequence of this process is the biotic homogenization induced mostly because the few adapted species to urban areas become increasingly widespread and locally abundant in cities across the planet (McKinney, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%