Landscape and Local Controls of Insect Biodiversity in Conservation Grasslands: Implications for the Conservation of Ecosystem Service Providers in Agricultural Environments

Abstract

Abstract:The conservation of biodiversity in intensively managed agricultural landscapes depends on the amount and spatial arrangement of cultivated and natural lands. Conservation incentives that create semi-natural grasslands may increase the biodiversity of beneficial insects and their associated ecosystem services, such as pollination and the regulation of insect pests, but the effectiveness of these incentives for insect conservation are poorly known, especially in North America. We studied the variation in species richness, composition, and functional-group abundances of bees and predatory beetles in conservation grasslands surrounded by intensively managed agriculture in Southwest Ohio, USA. Characteristics of grassland patches and surrounding land-cover types were used to predict insect species richness, composition, and functional-group abundance using linear models and multivariate ordinations. Bee species richness was positively influenced by forb cover and beetle richness was positively related to grass cover; both taxa had greater richness in grasslands surrounded by larger amounts of semi-natural land cover. Functional groups of bees and predatory beetles defined by body size and sociality varied in their abundance according to differences in plant composition of grassland patches, as well as the surrounding land-cover diversity. Intensive agriculture in the surrounding landscape acted as a filter to both bee and beetle species composition in conservation grasslands. Our results support the need for management incentives to consider landscape-level processes in the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Ant species assembly in constructed grasslands is structured at patch and landscape levels

“…Colonisation and establishment of some invertebrates and other taxa are affected by landscape-level factors, such as the proximity of different habitats that may provide complementary resources for foraging, nesting or overwintering (Fahrig et al, 2011). For highly vagile organisms, such as bees and butterflies, grasslands themselves are used for floral resources, and the surrounding landscape might be used for additional resources (Mandelik et al, 2012;Crist & Peters, 2014). For less vagile organisms, such as ants, the surrounding landscape is the source of colonising propagules, and once established, they exhibit long-term dependence on the grassland with little to no use of resources outside of the grassland patch.…”

Diversified Farming in a Monoculture Landscape: Effects on Honey Bee Health and Wild Bee Communities

“…In general, pollinator responses to landscape complexity and noncrop resources have been a subject of several studies ( Ricketts et al 2008 , Batáry et al 2011 , Garibaldi et al 2011 , Shackelford et al 2013 , Crist and Peters 2014 ). However, few studies have investigated the response of managed honey bees and wild bees within the same context ( Shackelford et al 2013 , Mallinger et al 2017 ).…”

Long‐term fertilizer regimes have both direct and indirect effects on arthropod community composition and feeding guilds

“…Most previous studies have investigated the joint effects of vegetation and environmental factors on arthropod communities (Birkhofer et al., ; Crist & Peters, ; Manning et al., ). In contrast, we have attempted to identify the environmental factors that have both direct and indirect effects on the arthropods, depending on how they are mediated by the vegetation.…”

“…Most previous studies have investigated the joint effects of vegetation and environmental factors on arthropod communities (Birkhofer et al, 2008;Crist & Peters, 2014;Manning et al, 2015). In contrast, (Brown, Scholtz, Janeau, Grellier, & Podwojewski, 2010).…”