Herbivore and pollinator responses to grassland management intensity along experimental changes in plant species richness

Hudewenz, Anika; Klein, Alexandra‐Maria; Scherber, Christoph; Stanke, Lea; Tscharntke, Teja; Vogel, Anja; Weigelt, Alexandra; Weisser, Wolfgang W.; Ebeling, Anne

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.02.024

Cited by 80 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies on trophic interactions in biodiversity experiments have largely relied on artificially sown gradients in plant diversity [14-16]. To achieve more realistic results, we performed this study in an old grassland and only changed the relative importance of grasses and forbs [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling direct and indirect effects of experimental grassland management and plant functional-group manipulation on plant and leafhopper diversity

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPlant biodiversity can affect trophic interactions in many ways, including direct bottom-up effects on insects, but is negatively affected by agricultural intensification. Grassland intensification promotes plant productivity, resulting in changes in plant community composition, and impacts on higher trophic levels. Here, we use a novel grassland management experiment combining manipulations of cutting and fertilization with experimental changes in plant functional group composition (independent of management effects) to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of agricultural management on insect herbivore diversity and abundance. We used leafhoppers as model organisms as they are a key insect taxon in grasslands and react rapidly to management changes. Leafhoppers were sampled between May and September 2010 using standardized sweep netting and pan traps.ResultsPlant diversity, functional group composition and management regime in grasslands affected leafhopper species richness and abundance. Higher cutting frequencies directly led to decreasing leafhopper species richness, presumably due to the higher disturbance frequency and the reduction in food-resource heterogeneity. In contrast, fertilizer application had only a small indirect negative effect via enhanced aboveground plant biomass, reduced plant diversity and changes in functional group composition. The manipulated increase in grass cover had contrasting direct and indirect effects on leafhopper species richness: grass cover directly increased leafhopper species richness, but negatively affected plant diversity, which in turn was positively related to leafhopper species richness. In conclusion, insect diversity is driven in complex direct and indirect ways by grassland management, including changes in functional group composition.ConclusionsThe availability of preferred food sources and the frequency of disturbance are important direct and indirect drivers of leafhopper species richness, interacting in complex ways with plant diversity and food resource heterogeneity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling direct and indirect effects of experimental grassland management and plant functional-group manipulation on plant and leafhopper diversity

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some other studies did not yield any links between plant richness and grasshopper richness (Torrusio et al 2002;Hudewenz et al 2012) indicating that the positive plant-grasshopper richness relationship was not necessarily general. Consistently with our predictions, plant species diversity determined grasshopper species richness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…However, while increasing plant diversity enhanced grasshopper species richness up to an optimal value, beyond this optimum it had an adverse effect resulting in a quadratic relationship between plant diversity and grasshopper species richness and abundance. Our approach integrating the effect of both plant diversity and identity, and the species-specific response of grasshoppers helps us to understand the nonlinear response of grasshopper communities to plant diversity and the conflicting results observed in previous studies on the relationship between plant and grasshopper diversity (e.g., Scherber et al 2006;Hudewenz et al 2012). While some grasshoppers seemed to increase in abundance with high plant diversity, a majority of species benefited mainly from a single resource (F. rubra) and were independent or even negatively impacted by high plant diversity (e.g., E. elegantulus).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing grasshopper (Orthoptera: Acrididae) communities in sown margin strips: the role of plant diversity and identity

Badenhausser

Gross

Cordeau

et al. 2015

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grasshoppers are important components of grassland invertebrate communities, particularly as nutrient recyclers and as prey for many bird species. Sown margin strips are key features of agri-environmental schemes in European agricultural landscapes and have been shown to benefit grasshoppers depending on the initial sown seed mixture. Understanding the mechanisms by which the sown mixture impacts grasshoppers in sown margin strips is the aim of our study. Here, we investigated plantgrasshopper interactions in sown margin strips and the respective effects of plant identity and diversity on grasshoppers. We surveyed plants and grasshoppers in 44 sown margin strips located in Western France which were initially established with three sowing mixtures dominated, respectively, by alfalfa, Festuca rubra and Lolium perenne and Festuca arundinacea. Grasshopper species contrasted in their response to plant diversity and to the abundance of sown and non-sown plant species. Some grasshopper species were positively correlated with the abundance of grass and especially of a single sown plant species, F. rubra. In contrast, other grasshopper species benefited from high plant diversity likely due to their high degree of polyphagy. At the community level, these contrasted responses were translated into a positive linear relationship between grass cover and grasshopper abundance and into a quadratic relationship between plant diversity and grasshopper diversity or abundance. Since plant identity and diversity are driven by the initial sown mixture, our study suggests that by optimizing the seed mixture, it is possible to manage grasshopper diversity or abundance in sown margin strips.

show abstract

“…The fact that herbivore populations (mainly leafhoppers, planthoppers, Orthoptera, and caterpillars) were much higher in naturalized roughs than in mowed turf may be another reason for apparent absence of spillover of epigeal predators and biological control from naturalized to mowed habitat. Studies in other types of grassland habitats have also shown higher herbivore populations in less-intensively managed meadows or hayfields compared to mowed or cut swards Greiler 1995, Morris 2000;Guido and Gianelle 2001;Albrecht et al 2010;Hudewenz et al 2012). Many natural enemies benefit from access to pollen and nectar, honeydew, seeds, and alternative prey (Wäckers et al 2005) which may also be more available in naturalized roughs than in mowed turf.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Naturalized habitat on golf courses: source or sink for natural enemies and conservation biological control?

Dobbs

Potter

2016

Urban Ecosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many golf courses are converting out-of-play areas to meadow-like habitat to reduce mowing, irrigation, and chemical inputs. Such naturalized roughs, which often constitute 50 % or more of a course's total acreage, support biodiversity by providing habitat for pollinators and other wildlife. This study explored the hypothesis that they also serve as reservoirs of invertebrate natural enemies whose services extend to suppress pests in adjacent mowed turf. We used vacuum sampling, pitfall traps, and ant baits to compare arthropod populations in grassland or meadow-type naturalized roughs and traditional mowed roughs at two courses, and tested for spillover of biological control using sentinel eggs or larvae of a grass-feeding caterpillar exposed near or farther from naturalized areas into mowed turf. Although some natural enemies (e.g., spiders) were more abundant in naturalized roughs, we saw no direct spillover of predation which was quite high regardless of habitat type. Most likely that is because ground-nesting ants (Lasius, Solenopsis, and Pheidole spp.), which are dominant predators in this system, were equally or more abundant in the mowed turfgrass. Herbivorous insects, too, were more abundant in naturalized roughs, so prey availability may discourage solitary ground-dwelling predators from leaving those refuges to forage in mowed areas. There was no parasitism of sentinel eggs or larvae in our trials. Despite absence of direct spillover of predation, we argue that naturalized roughs might be more purposely designed and managed to promote parasitoids, insectivorous birds, and other enemies that provide diffuse biological control services elsewhere on the course.Land-use planners and landscape managers are being challenged to design relatively more sustainable landscapes that provide for the aesthetic, restorative, and recreational needs of Urban Ecosyst

show abstract

Herbivore and pollinator responses to grassland management intensity along experimental changes in plant species richness

Cited by 80 publications

References 68 publications

Disentangling direct and indirect effects of experimental grassland management and plant functional-group manipulation on plant and leafhopper diversity

Disentangling direct and indirect effects of experimental grassland management and plant functional-group manipulation on plant and leafhopper diversity

Enhancing grasshopper (Orthoptera: Acrididae) communities in sown margin strips: the role of plant diversity and identity

Naturalized habitat on golf courses: source or sink for natural enemies and conservation biological control?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About