Untitled

Rojas, Liliana Ríos; Godoy, Carolina; Hanson, Paul; Kleinn, C.; Hilje, Luko

doi:10.1023/a:1013324520197

Cited by 14 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A meta-analysis on biodiversity in cacao and coffee agroforestry systems reported that when comparing total species richness between forests and agroforests, the latter had, on average, only 11% less forest species than the former (De Beenhouwer et al 2013 ). Other studies also reported a high biodiversity of ants (Perfecto and Vandermeer 2002 ; De la Mora et al 2013 ; Arenas-Clavijo and Armbrecht 2018 ), bees (Jha and Dick 2008 ; Jha and Vandermeer 2010 ; Cepeda-Valencia et al 2014 ), birds (Calvo and Blake 1998 ; Sánchez-Clavijo et al 2009 ; Leyequien et al 2010 ; Bakermans et al 2012 ; McDermott et al 2015 ; Narango et al 2019 ; Estrada-Carmona et al 2019 ; Schooler et al 2020 ), butterflies (Mahata et al 2019 ), hoppers (Rojas et al 2001 ), frogs (Murrieta-Galindo et al 2013 , b ), mammals (Gallina et al 1996 ; Bali et al 2007 ; Caudill et al 2014 ; Guzmán et al 2016 ), epiphytes (Moorhead et al 2010 ; De Beenhouwer et al 2015 ), and soil biota (Cardoso et al 2003 ; Arias et al 2012 ; Naeem Shahid et al 2012 ; Arias and Abarca 2014 ; De Beenhouwer et al 2015 ; Prates Júnior et al 2019 ; Teixeira et al 2021 ), specifically in shaded coffee plantations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological quality as a coffee quality enhancer. A review

Vania

Benavides‐Frias

Jacobi

et al. 2023

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As both coffee quality and sustainability become increasingly important, there is growing interest in understanding how ecological quality affects coffee quality. Here we analyze, for the first time, the state of evidence that ecological quality, in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem functions, impacts the quality of Coffea arabica and C. canephora , based on 78 studies. The following ecosystem functions were included: pollination; weed, disease, and pest control; water and soil fertility regulation. Biodiversity was described by the presence, percentage, and diversity of shade trees. Coffee quality was described by the green bean physical characteristics, biochemical compounds, and organoleptic characteristics. The presence and diversity of shade trees positively impacted bean size and weight and reduced the percentage of rejected beans, but these observations were not consistent over different altitudes. In fact, little is known about the diversity of shade trees and their influence on biochemical compounds. All biochemical compounds varied with the presence of shade, percentage of shade, and elevation. Coffee beans from more diverse tree shade plantations obtained higher scores for final total organoleptic quality than simplified tree shade and unshaded plantations. Decreasing ecological quality diminished ecosystem functions such as pollination, which in turn negatively affected bean quality. Shade affected pests and diseases in different ways, but weeds were reduced. High soil quality positively affected coffee quality. Shade improved the water use efficiency, such that coffee plants were not water stressed and coffee quality was improved. While knowledge on the influence of shade trees on overall coffee quality remains scarce, there is evidence that agroecosystem simplification is negatively correlated with coffee quality. Given global concerns about biodiversity and habitat loss, we recommend that the overall definition of coffee quality include measures of ecological quality, although these aspects are not always detectable in certain coffee quality characteristics or the final cup.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological quality as a coffee quality enhancer. A review

Vania

Benavides‐Frias

Jacobi

et al. 2023

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effects of management intensity and season on arboreal ant diversity and abundance in coffee agroecosystems

Philpott¹,

Perfecto²,

Vandermeer³

Topics in Biodiversity and Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural intensification decreases arthropod predator diversity, abundance and population stability, and may affect interactions between top predators and their arthropod preyultimately affecting ecosystem services. Coffee management intensification (reduction or removal of shade trees) reduces diversity of arthropod predators (ground-foraging ants). Because ants provide ecosystem services by controlling pests, influences of intensification on arboreal, coffee-foraging ant diversity and abundance are important. We here address how coffee intensification affects: (1) coffee-foraging ant diversity and abundance and (2) seasonal fluctuations in ant abundance. In each of four coffee sites of varying management intensity in Chiapas, Mexico, we sampled vegetation and using two methods, sampled ant diversity and abundance over two years. Sites significantly differed in vegetation and management intensity. Coffee-foraging ant diversity generally decreased with increasing management intensity (16-26% fewer species observed in the most intensivelymanaged site). Ant abundance was higher in the wet season. Management intensity, however, did not influence ant abundance or seasonal fluctuations in abundance. Our results highlight the importance of diverse agricultural systems in maintaining arthropod predator diversity, and point to one model system in which we may effectively test how diversity per se affects ecosystem services.

show abstract

Planning tree species diversification in Kenya based on differences in tree species composition between farms. II. Analysis of tree niches.

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns exist about the limited diversity of tree species in agricultural landscapes. Complete tree inventories were carried out on 201 farms from four villages in western Kenya to establish whether significant differences in tree species composition existed between farms, and if so their magnitude and implications for new introductions and plantings. Novel types of ordination using the Hellinger ecological distance and polynomial Redundancy Analysis indicated wide heterogeneity between farms with respect to tree species composition of five niches, including homestead, cropland, fallow, woodlot, and external boundary (p £ 0.05). Multiple regression analysis confirmed the ordination results using the abundance of dominant species as the response variable. The relationship between location and species composition differed with those of two previous surveys. Methodological differences in sampling intensity, locations and time of sampling between these surveys could have caused the difference. The maps of spatial distribution of compositional types provided in the previous surveys were not confirmed, whereas villages were found to contain several farms with a species composition that was not typical of their village. Meaningful results about the species composition of a landscape should include several farms per village and use a sampling grid finer than 5 · 5 km 2 .

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 14 publications

References 7 publications

Ecological quality as a coffee quality enhancer. A review

Ecological quality as a coffee quality enhancer. A review

Effects of management intensity and season on arboreal ant diversity and abundance in coffee agroecosystems

Planning tree species diversification in Kenya based on differences in tree species composition between farms. II. Analysis of tree niches.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About