Arable field margins managed for biodiversity conservation: A review of food resource provision for farmland birds

Vickery, Juliet A.; Feber, Ruth E.; Fuller, Robert

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2009.05.012

Cited by 224 publications

(182 citation statements)

References 135 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

163

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is also possible that, within farms, these options simply cover areas too small to provide benefits effectively in practice because sustainable local populations of the target species require larger habitat patches (Whittingham 2007). Arable and grassland margins can provide nesting and spring foraging habitat for many species (Vickery, Feber & Fuller 2009), but are unlikely to address population-limiting factors. A failure of the options to deliver prey availability as well as abundance could also limit their benefits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape‐scale responses of birds to agri‐environment management: a test of the English Environmental Stewardship scheme

Baker

Freeman

Grice

et al. 2012

Journal of Applied Ecology

137

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. Agri-environment schemes (AES) are used extensively across Europe to address biodiversity declines in farmland. In England, Environmental Stewardship (ES) was introduced in 2005 to address the shortcomings of previous schemes, but as for schemes in other countries, assessments to date have revealed little evidence for national-scale biodiversity benefits. 2. Here, we assess the efficacy of ES in driving changes in national farmland bird populations over the period 2002-2010, using BTO ⁄ JNCC ⁄ RSPB Breeding Bird Survey data. We tested for associations between ES management options, grouped into categories reflecting intended biological effects (e.g. stubble), and species' population growth rates, wherever benefits of management might be expected to occur. 3. We found strong evidence for positive effects of management that provides winter food resources (i.e. ES stubble and wild bird seed [WBS] crops) on population growth rates across multiple granivorous species, at three landscape scales. The results for management aiming to provide breeding season benefits (i.e. grassland, field margin and boundary [hedge, ditch] management) showed mixed patterns of positive and negative associations. 4. The results for stubble and WBS provide the first evidence for landscape-scale responses of biodiversity to AES management. The negative relationships identified may also show the importance of management context driving unforeseen predation or competition effects. 5. Synthesis and Applications. This study demonstrates that agri-environment scheme management has the potential to have national-scale effects on avian population growth rates, although our results suggest that some components of the scheme have had little effect on bird populations. Therefore, whilst this study provides the first proof-of-concept for broad-and-shallow scheme impacts on biodiversity, our results underline the importance of targeting towards populationlimiting factors, here winter food resources. A combination of low uptake of key in-field options that provide winter seed and a failure to cover the late-winter period effectively explains the lack of national population responses. Such issues need to be addressed before schemes like Environmental Stewardship will achieve their goals. This study shows the value of feedback from monitoring for informing scheme design, through identifying problems and testing solutions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape‐scale responses of birds to agri‐environment management: a test of the English Environmental Stewardship scheme

Baker

Freeman

Grice

et al. 2012

Journal of Applied Ecology

137

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing functional diversity in multiple cropping systems (groups A, B, and C) promotes biodiversity in the agroecosystem and increases food web complexity by providing new habitats for a variety of animals and soil organisms that would not be present in a single crop environment (Altieri 1999;Sokos et al 2013). In particular, spatial diversity (group C) can maximize nesting opportunities for birds and create habitats for a range of invertebrates (Vickery et al 2009). It can also increase the diversity and abundance of pollinators ), which in turn may increase crop production by up to 40 % (Bretagnolle and Gaba, submitted).…”

Section: Multiple Cropping Systems To Reduce Environmental Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple cropping systems as drivers for providing multiple ecosystem services: from concepts to design

Gaba

Lescourret

Boudsocq

et al. 2014

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

274

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Provisioning services, such as the production of food, feed, and fiber, have always been the main focus of agriculture. Since the 1950s, intensive cropping systems based on the cultivation of a single crop or a single cultivar, in simplified rotations or monocultures, and relying on extensive use of agrochemical inputs have been preferred to more diverse, self-sustaining cropping systems, regardless of the environmental consequences. However, there is increasing evidence that such intensive agroecosystems have led to a decline in biodiversity as well as threatening the environment and have damaged a number of ecosystem services such as the biogeochemical nutrient cycles and the regulation of climate and water quality. Consequently, the current challenge facing agriculture is to ensure the future of food production while reducing the use of inputs and limiting environmental impacts and the loss of biodiversity. Here, we review examples of multiple cropping systems that aim to use biotic interactions to reduce chemical inputs and provide more ecosystem services than just provisioning. Our main findings are the identification of underlying ecological processes and management strategies related to the provision of pairs of ecosystem services namely food production and a regulation service. We also found gaps between ecological knowledge and the constraints of agricultural practices in taking account of the interactions and possible trade-offs between multiple ecosystem services as well as socioeconomic constraints. We present guidelines for the design of multiple cropping systems combining ecological, agricultural, and genetic concepts and approaches.

show abstract

“…This is in line with thinking on the causes of decline in biodiversity being related to a homogenisation of the landscape and its habitats (Benton et al, 2003) and to a decline in non-cropped, non-sprayed habitats. Therefore, there is real potential for improving biodiversity by increasing habitat heterogeneity and non-sprayed areas, so that, for example, food provision for birds is supported through a highly diverse biocoenosis of non-target invertebrates (Vickery et al, 2009). …”

Section: Mitigation Of Risks Deriving From Pesticide Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

Topping

Craig

Jong

et al. 2015

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation for published item:oppingD ghris tF nd grigD eter F nd de tongD prnk nd uleinD wihel nd vskowskiD yszrd nd wnhiniD frr nd ieperD ilvi nd mithD o nd ousD tos¡ e ulo nd treisslD prnz nd wrowskyD ulus nd iktkD eldrik nd vn der vindenD on @PHISA 9owrds lndspe sle mngement of pestiides X ie using hnges in modelled oupny nd undne to ssess longEterm popultion impts of pestiidesF9D iene of the totl environmentFD SQU F ppF ISWEITWF Further information on publisher's website: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractPesticides are regulated in Europe and this process includes an environmental risk assessment (ERA) for non-target arthropods (NTA). Traditionally a non-spatial or field trial assessment is used. In this study we exemplify the introduction of a spatial context to the ERA as well as suggest a way in which the results of complex models, necessary for proper inclusion of spatial aspects in the ERA, can be presented and evaluated easily using abundance and occupancy ratios (AOR). We used an agent-based simulation system and an existing model for a widespread carabid beetle (Bembidion lampros), to evaluate the impact of a fictitious highly-toxic pesticide on population density and the distribution of beetles in time and space. Landscape structure and field margin management were evaluated by comparing scenario-based ERAs for the beetle. Source-sink dynamics led to an off-crop impact even when no pesticide was present off-crop. In addition, the impacts increased with multi-year application of the pesticide whereas current ERA considers only maximally one year. These results further indicated a complex interaction between landscape structure and pesticide effect in time, both in-crop and off-crop, indicating the need for NTA ERA to be conducted at landscape-and multi-season temporal-scales. Use of AOR indices to compare ERA outputs facilitated easy comparison of scenarios, allowing simultaneous evaluation of impacts and planning of mitigation measures. The landscape and population ERA approach also demonstrates that there is a potential to change from regulation of a pesticide in isolation, towards the consideration of pesticide management at landscape scales and provision of biodiversity benefits via inclusion and testing of mitigation measures in authorisation procedures.

show abstract

Arable field margins managed for biodiversity conservation: A review of food resource provision for farmland birds

Cited by 224 publications

References 135 publications

Landscape‐scale responses of birds to agri‐environment management: a test of the English Environmental Stewardship scheme

Landscape‐scale responses of birds to agri‐environment management: a test of the English Environmental Stewardship scheme

Multiple cropping systems as drivers for providing multiple ecosystem services: from concepts to design

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About