Bird use of three types of field margins in relation to intensive agriculture in Québec, Canada

Jobin, Benoı̂t; Choinière, Line; Bélanger, Luc

doi:10.1016/s0167-8809(00)00206-1

Cited by 77 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The disparity between woody hedgerows with naturally growing or planted trees and shrubs cannot be attributed to their width, which was not significantly different (Jobin et al 2000). Both types of hedgerows with trees were larger than hedgerows with only shrubs and herbaceous field margins.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Between 5 and 19 July 1995, vegetation was inventoried in 17 planted hedgerows (6 with trees, 11 with shrubs), 27 natural hedgerows (15 with trees, 12 with shrubs) and 17 herbaceous field margins [total = 61; see Jobin et al (2000) for a detailed description of the size, structure and total vegetation of hedgerows]. The most common tree species found in planted hedgerows were mostly conifer species: Norway pine (or red pine Pinus resinosa Aiton.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing weed composition in natural and planted hedgerows and in herbaceous field margins adjacent to crop fields

Boutin¹,

Jobin²,

Bélanger³

et al. 2001

Can. J. Plant Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Choinière, L. 2001. Comparing weed composition in natural and planted hedgerows and in herbaceous field margins adjacent to crop fields. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81: 313-324. Hedgerows and field margins are common features of the agricultural landscape in southern Québec. In the last decade, hedgerow establishment has been encouraged primarily for the prevention of soil erosion, though many farmers view them as reservoirs of invasive weeds and pests. In this study, we compared weed assemblages of several hedgerow types and herbaceous field margins. Ranking that takes into consideration weed abundance was clearly demonstrated: planted hedgerows > herbaceous field margins > natural woody hedgerows. The latter harboured many perennial plant species of less weedy propensity than planted hedgerows, which accommodated a larger number of weedy species. In planted hedgerows close to 50% of plants were weeds, even in their central position, although planted and natural hedgerows sheltered similar weed composition in their central parts. Likewise, most species inventoried in adjacent fields were weeds. Weeds characterising the central position of hedgerows/field margins were often species of wet habitats (Lythrum salicaria L., Equisetum arvense L., Cicuta maculata L.). Management practices of hedgerows and perhaps of crop fields adjacent to hedgerows may be mostly responsible for the abundance of weeds in hedgerows and field margins. Les haies brise-vent et les bordures herbacées font partie intégrante du paysage agricole du Québec méridional. L'implantation de haies a récemment été encouragée pour réduire les problèmes liés à l'érosion éolienne mais plusieurs producteurs agricoles voient toujours les haies comme des réservoirs d'espèces nuisibles. Nous avons étudié la composition et la distribution des espèces végétales nuisibles aux cultures dans différents types de haies et un patron clair de l'abondance de ces espèces a été trouvé: haies plantées > bordures herbacées > haies naturelles boisées. Ce dernier type de haie abritait plus d'espèces vivaces non nuisibles aux cultures que les haies plantées lesquelles abritaient surtout des espèces nuisibles. Ainsi, plus de 50% des espèces retrouvées dans les haies plantées étaient des espèces nuisibles, même celles présentes au centre des haies, malgré le fait que la composition spécifique des espèces nuisibles retrouvées au centre des haies naturelles et plantées était similaire. La plupart des espèces inventoriées dans les champs adjacents étaient aussi des espèces nuisibles. Plusieurs des espèces nuisibles retrouvées au centre des haies et des bordures herbacées sont typiques des milieux humides (Lythrum salicaria L., Equisetum arvense L., Cicuta maculata L.). La présence d'espèces nuisibles dans les haies brise-vent et dans les bordures herbacées semble être une conséquence de l'aménagement des haies en soi et possiblement des pratiques agricoles ayant cours dans les champs cultivés adjacents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing weed composition in natural and planted hedgerows and in herbaceous field margins adjacent to crop fields

Boutin¹,

Jobin²,

Bélanger³

et al. 2001

Can. J. Plant Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Agricultural field boundaries such as hedgerows in Europe, Asia and North America have beneficial impacts on adjoining cultivated land; however, many farmlands are cleared of such habitats to increase space for cultivation. Similarly, natural hedges are destroyed because many farmers view hedges as a threat to their crops since they attract birds (Jobin et al 2001). In Great Britain, increased use of machinery, and resulting demand for large fields, resulted in removal of 50% of hedgerow stock (Robinson & Sutherland 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One major variable that accounts for bird diversity in any habitat is vegetation structure, which is further enhanced by the plant species composition (Wilson et al 1997, Hinsley & Bellamy 2000, Jobin et al 2001, Mulwa et al 2012. Effects of habitat fragmentation, patch size and connectivity on species diversity, abundance and distribution have also been considered in many studies (Saunders et al 1991;Wiens 1997;Manu et al 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmland conservation in West Africa: how do hedgerow characteristics affect bird species richness?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sedimentation and siltation of aquatic habitat (Walser and Bart 1999;Whiles et al 2000), wetland drainage (Smith 1990;Lemly et al 2000;Watmough et al 2002;DeVries et al 2003;Jenkins et al 2003), cultivation of natural grasslands (Schmutz 1987;Clayton and Schmutz 1999;Larsen and Work 2003;Davis 2004), overgrazing (Sansom 1999;Mayer 2004;Valone and Saunter 2005), loss of riparian vegetation (Cooper 1993;Stauffer et al 2000;Popotnik and Giuliano 2000) and loss and fragmentation of forest cover (Hobson and Bayne 2000;Cumming et al 2001;Bélanger and Grenier 2002;Tchir et al 2004) affect wildlife habitat and can impact biodiversity negatively. Conversely, conservation tillage (Uri et al 1999;Chan 2001;Mas and Verdu 2003), maintaining or restoring hedgerows (Trnka et al 1990;Hinsley and Bellamy 2000;Jobin et al 2001;Boutin et al 2002;Ouin and Burel 2002), managed grazing on natural grasslands (Howe 1994;Jackson 1999;McIntyre et al 2003), managing livestock in riparian areas (Tewksbury et al 2002;Asamoah et al 2003;Popp et al 2004) and buffering riparian areas (Chapman and Ribic 2002;Jobin et al 2004) can have a positive effect on biodiversity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes to wildlife habitat on agricultural land in Canada, 1981–2001

Javorek¹,

Antonowitsch²,

Callaghan³

et al. 2007

Can. J. Soil. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural land in Canada comprises cultivated land, hayland and grazing land with associated riparian areas, wetlands, woodlands, and natural grasslands. Although these agro-ecosystems support many species of Canada’s native fauna, agricultural land use is dynamic, and changes in agricultural practices can have important implications for biodiversity. We report on Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s National Agri-environmental Health Analysis and Reporting Program’s assessment of wildlife habitat on farmland in Canada. Habitat use matrices were developed for 493 species of birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians associated with farm land habitat in Canada. We derived patterns of land use from Statistics Canada’s Census of Agriculture data and applied them at the soil landscape polygon scale. We developed a proportionally weighted Habitat Capacity index to relate habitat use and land use. A 5% decrease in Habitat Capacity occurred on Canada’s agricultural land from 1981 to 2001, associated with an expansion in cropland and a decline in pasture. A regional pattern of small decline in Habitat Capacity is evident in the Prairie Provinces, where dramatic declines in the use of summerfallow had a positive impact on Habitat Capacity. In eastern Canada, greater decreases in Habitat Capacity occurred, associated with an increase in agricultural intensification. Policies and programs designed to sustain biodiversity should not be developed independently of socioeconomic factors or policies favouring agricultural intensification. We recommend a holistic approach to making policy decisions relevant to environmental and economic sustainability in the Canadian agricultural landscape. Key words: Biodiversity, land use change, agroecosystems, wildlife habitat, indicators

show abstract

Bird use of three types of field margins in relation to intensive agriculture in Québec, Canada

Cited by 77 publications

References 26 publications

Comparing weed composition in natural and planted hedgerows and in herbaceous field margins adjacent to crop fields

Comparing weed composition in natural and planted hedgerows and in herbaceous field margins adjacent to crop fields

Farmland conservation in West Africa: how do hedgerow characteristics affect bird species richness?

Changes to wildlife habitat on agricultural land in Canada, 1981–2001

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About