What specific plant traits support ecosystem services such as pollination, bio-control and water quality protection in temperate climates? A systematic map
Abstract:Background
Agricultural intensification has contributed to increased diffuse source pollution within water catchments, reduced heterogeneity within the landscape and caused major declines in farmland wildlife. This decrease in biodiversity has been shown to decrease vital ecosystem services such as pollination, biological pest control (bio-control) and water quality protection. The morphological traits of plant species, such as floral display size and leaf area, provide support to these service… Show more
“…The primary purpose of extracting this meta-data was to aid future study validity assessments and synthesis of studies on sub-topics of interest identified from our systematic map exercise. Study validity assessments were based on a modified list of variables used by Haddaway et al [30] and combined with topic specific quality measures used by Cresswell et al [31]. Terms including 'yes' , 'partially' , 'not at all' , or 'unclear' were applied to each study based on study design (i.e., type of comparator), sample-selection methods, and other sources of bias as outlined below.…”
Section: Study Validity Assessment Study Validity Assessmentmentioning
Background: There is growing evidence of the potential negative consequences of altered flow regimes, in terms of magnitude, frequency, timing, duration or season pattern, on fluvial ecosystems and the fisheries they support. The scientific and policy communities have acknowledged the need for a better understanding of the effects of flow alteration on fish productivity. We conducted a systematic map to provide an overview of the existing literature base on the effects of flow-regime changes on direct outcomes of freshwater or estuarine fish productivity in temperate regions to inform stakeholders and policy makers. Methods: To identify relevant articles for inclusion in this systematic map, we searched six bibliographic databases, 29 organizational websites, one search engine, and 297 reviews, and solicited grey literature through relevant sources. We screened articles at title and abstract, then by full-text using predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies were coded for key variables of interest, along with a very basic critical appraisal for internal validity (i.e., susceptibility to bias). The quantity and characteristics of the available evidence, knowledge gaps and subtopics with sufficient coverage for full systematic reviewing are reported in a narrative synthesis. The distribution and frequency of examined effects of flow-regime changes on fish productivity outcomes are presented in visual heatmaps. Review findings: A total of 1368 studies from 1199 articles were included in the systematic map database and used to identify a number of interesting themes in the evidence base: (1) large evidence bases were found in temperate regions of United States of America (USA), Canada, and Australia; (2) most studies either used a temporal or spatial trend design i.e., lacking a 'true' before intervention time period, or no intervention control sites; (3) the most studied causes of altered flow regime were natural (e.g., floods, droughts, climate change), hydroelectric facilities (hydro), and dams with no hydro; and (4) there were clear clusters of studies evaluating effects of changes in magnitude and surrogate measures (e.g., velocity, water depth) on fish productivity outcomes, in particular abundance and diversity metrics. A number of potential knowledge gaps were identified: including geographic (Northern Africa, and possibly parts of Asia), causes of altered flow regime (restoration, land-use change, and water abstraction/extraction/diversion), interventions (flow duration, frequency, rate of change, or timing), outcomes (population viability) and specific intervention/cause/outcome groups (e.g., changes in flow magnitude due to hydro or natural causes and fish survival,
“…The primary purpose of extracting this meta-data was to aid future study validity assessments and synthesis of studies on sub-topics of interest identified from our systematic map exercise. Study validity assessments were based on a modified list of variables used by Haddaway et al [30] and combined with topic specific quality measures used by Cresswell et al [31]. Terms including 'yes' , 'partially' , 'not at all' , or 'unclear' were applied to each study based on study design (i.e., type of comparator), sample-selection methods, and other sources of bias as outlined below.…”
Section: Study Validity Assessment Study Validity Assessmentmentioning
Background: There is growing evidence of the potential negative consequences of altered flow regimes, in terms of magnitude, frequency, timing, duration or season pattern, on fluvial ecosystems and the fisheries they support. The scientific and policy communities have acknowledged the need for a better understanding of the effects of flow alteration on fish productivity. We conducted a systematic map to provide an overview of the existing literature base on the effects of flow-regime changes on direct outcomes of freshwater or estuarine fish productivity in temperate regions to inform stakeholders and policy makers. Methods: To identify relevant articles for inclusion in this systematic map, we searched six bibliographic databases, 29 organizational websites, one search engine, and 297 reviews, and solicited grey literature through relevant sources. We screened articles at title and abstract, then by full-text using predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies were coded for key variables of interest, along with a very basic critical appraisal for internal validity (i.e., susceptibility to bias). The quantity and characteristics of the available evidence, knowledge gaps and subtopics with sufficient coverage for full systematic reviewing are reported in a narrative synthesis. The distribution and frequency of examined effects of flow-regime changes on fish productivity outcomes are presented in visual heatmaps. Review findings: A total of 1368 studies from 1199 articles were included in the systematic map database and used to identify a number of interesting themes in the evidence base: (1) large evidence bases were found in temperate regions of United States of America (USA), Canada, and Australia; (2) most studies either used a temporal or spatial trend design i.e., lacking a 'true' before intervention time period, or no intervention control sites; (3) the most studied causes of altered flow regime were natural (e.g., floods, droughts, climate change), hydroelectric facilities (hydro), and dams with no hydro; and (4) there were clear clusters of studies evaluating effects of changes in magnitude and surrogate measures (e.g., velocity, water depth) on fish productivity outcomes, in particular abundance and diversity metrics. A number of potential knowledge gaps were identified: including geographic (Northern Africa, and possibly parts of Asia), causes of altered flow regime (restoration, land-use change, and water abstraction/extraction/diversion), interventions (flow duration, frequency, rate of change, or timing), outcomes (population viability) and specific intervention/cause/outcome groups (e.g., changes in flow magnitude due to hydro or natural causes and fish survival,
“…One way to optimise multiple benefits from field margins at the field and landscapes scale could therefore be to adjust management practices locally according to purpose. Cresswell et al [58] used systematic mapping to identify which plant traits deliver different ecosystem services to help inform future plant community design of vegetative strips.…”
Section: Multipurpose Vegetated Strips and Conflicting Objectivesmentioning
Background: Agriculture can have substantial negative impacts on the environment. The establishment and management of vegetated strips adjacent to farmed fields (including various field margins, buffer strips and hedgerows) are commonly advocated mitigation measures for these negative environmental impacts. However, it may be difficult to obtain reliable evidence on the effects of implementation and management of vegetated strips, even though a substantial body of evidence exists. We describe a systematic map of research relating to vegetated strips in boreotemperate farming systems to answer the question: What evidence exists regarding the effects of field margins on nutrients, pollutants, socioeconomics, biodiversity, and soil retention in boreo-temperate systems?Methods: We searched 13 bibliographic databases, 1 search engine and 37 websites of stakeholder organisations using a predefined and tested search string focusing on a comprehensive list of English language vegetated strip synonyms. Searches in Danish, Finnish, Spanish, and Swedish were also conducted using web searches. We screened search results at title, abstract and full text levels, recording the number of studies deemed non-relevant (with reasons at full text). A systematic map database of meta-data (i.e. descriptive summary information about the settings and methods) for relevant studies was produced following full text assessment. The systematic map database is provided as an evidence atlas: interactive, web-based geographical information system.
Results:Over 31,000 search results were identified, resulting in a total of 1072 relevant primary research studies and 130 evidence reviews. Articles used a variety of terminology to describe vegetated strips, with 'field margin' , 'hedgerow' , 'shelterbelt' and 'riparian buffer' most common. The volume of primary research is increasing linearly year-by-year, whilst the increase in reviews has tailed off in the last 10 years. The USA and UK were most frequently studied and reviewed. Arable systems were investigated in c. 70% of primary research but 50% of reviews. Some 50% of primary research vegetated strips were field edge and 25% riparian, whilst riparian and field edge strips were roughly equally the focus of around a half of all described strips in reviews. Terrestrial biodiversity, nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) and soil/water loss or retention were the most commonly measured outcomes in primary studies and reviews, although some other outcomes were more common in reviews than research articles (e.g. pesticides).
Conclusions:We identified substantial bodies of evidence on particular sets of related outcomes and ecosystem services, which constitute important knowledge clusters/synthesis gaps relating to: strip width, terrestrial biodiversity, nutrient retention, hydrological regimes, toxic substances, erosion protection, pests, carbon sequestration, and soil and biodiversity combined. We also identified key knowledge gaps relating to: climate regulation, freshwater biodiversity, stri...
“…From a total of 11,705 from the initial search, 56 articles met all the relevant criteria to be included for data extraction. Data extracted from the systematic map report (Cresswell et al, ), on the identified plant traits and their corresponding ecosystem service, are shown in Figure .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Plant traits and related ecosystem services investigated in the literature. (Data adapted from Cresswell et al ()…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Articles were considered relevant where they investigated a plant trait and its provision of the target ecosystem services in a temperate region. Any experimental or correlative study, that collected primary data and that met the above criteria, was included in the database (Cresswell, Cunningham, Wilcox, & Randall, ).…”
Farmland vegetative strips are a proven source of support for ecosystem services and are globally used to mitigate effects of agricultural intensification. However, increasing pressures on agricultural land require increases in their functionality, such as supporting multiple ecosystem services concurrently.
The plant species sown in a vegetative strip seed mix determine the establishment, plant community, and ecosystem services that are supported. Currently, there is no clearly defined or structured method to select plant species for multifunctional vegetative strips.
Plant traits determine how plants support ecosystem services. Also, the establishment and persistence of plant communities is influenced by key internal and external factors. We propose a novel, evidence‐informed method of multifunctional vegetative strip design based on these essential traits and factors.
This study had three distinct stages. The first identified plant traits that support water quality protection, pollinators and/or crop pest natural enemies, using existing research evidence. We then identified key factors affecting plant community establishment and persistence. Finally, we applied these standardized methods to design a multifunctional vegetative strip for a specific case study (UK lowland farmland).
Key plant traits identified, included floral display size, flower color, nectar content, leaf surface area, leaf trichome density, percentage fine roots, root length, rooting depth, and root density. Key internal and external establishment factors included life history, native status, distribution, established competitive strategy, associated floristic diversity, flowering time and duration, and preferred soil type and pH. In the United Kingdom case study, we used five different plant traits and all of the identified factors to design a seed mix for a multifunctional vegetative strip.
We present a transferable method of vegetative strip design that can be adapted for other ecosystem services and climates. It provides landowners and advisors with an evidence‐informed approach to increase field margin functionality while supporting farmland biodiversity.
OPEN RESEARCH BADGES
This article has earned an Open Data Badge for making publicly available the digitally‐shareable data necessary to reproduce the reported results. The data is available at
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.8t52n38
.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
