skip to main content


Title: A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production
Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield–related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1832042
NSF-PAR ID:
10164425
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; more » ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; « less
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Science Advances
Volume:
5
Issue:
10
ISSN:
2375-2548
Page Range / eLocation ID:
eaax0121
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Agricultural landscapes can be managed to protect biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services. One approach to achieve this is to restore native perennial vegetation within croplands. Where rowcrops have displaced prairie, as in the US Midwest, restoration of native perennial vegetation can align with crops in so called “prairie strips.” We tested the effect of prairie strips in addition to other management practices on a variety of taxa and on a suite of ecosystem services. To do so, we worked within a 33-year-old experiment that included treatments that varied methods of agricultural management across a gradient of land use intensity. In the two lowest intensity crop management treatments, we introduced prairie strips that occupied 5% of crop area. We addressed three questions: (1) What are the effects of newly established prairie strips on the spillover of biodiversity and ecosystem services into cropland? (2) How does time since prairie strip establishment affect biodiversity and ecosystem services? (3) What are the tradeoffs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, non-provisioning ecosystem services, and provisioning ecosystem services (crop yield) across a land use intensity gradient (which includes prairie strips)? Within prairie strip treatments, where sampling effort occurred within and at increasing distance from strips, dung beetle abundance, spider abundance and richness, active carbon, decomposition, and pollination decreased with distance from prairie strips, and this effect increased between the first and second year. Across the entire land use intensity gradient, treatments with prairie strips and reduced chemical inputs had higher butterfly abundance, spider abundance, and pollination services. In addition, soil organic carbon, butterfly richness, and spider richness increased with a decrease in land use intensity. Crop yield in one treatment with prairie strips was equal to that of the highest intensity management, even while including the area taken out of production. We found no effects of strips on ant biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions (N 2 O and CH 4 ). Our results show that, even in early establishment, prairie strips and lower land use intensity can contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services without a disproportionate loss of crop yield. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    Butterfly abundances are declining globally, with meta‐analysis showing a rate of −2% per year. Agriculture contributes to butterfly decline through habitat loss and degradation. Prairie strips—strips of farmland actively restored to native perennial vegetation—are a conservation practice with the potential to mitigate biodiversity loss, but their impact on butterfly biodiversity is not known.

    Working within a 30‐year‐old experiment that varied land use intensity, from natural areas to croplands (maize–soy–wheat rotation), we introduced prairie strips to less intensely managed crop treatments. Treatments included conservation land, biologically based (organic) row crops with prairie strips, reduced input row crops with prairie strips, no‐till row crops and conventional row crops. We measured butterfly abundance and richness: (1) within prairie strips and (2) across the gradient of land use intensity at the plot level.

    Butterfly abundance was higher within prairie strips than in all other treatments. Across the land use intensity gradient at the plot level, the conservation land treatment had the highest abundance, treatments with prairie strips had intermediate levels and no‐till and conventional treatments had the lowest abundances. Also across entire plots, butterfly richness increased as land use intensity decreased. Treatments with prairie strips, which also had reduced land use intensity, had distinct butterfly communities as they harboured several butterfly species that were not found in other row crop treatments.

    In addition to the known effects of prairie strips on ecosystem services including erosion control and increased water quality, prairie strips can increase biodiversity in multifunctional landscapes.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    As demand for wood products increases in step with global population growth, balancing the potentially competing values of biodiversity conservation, carbon storage and timber production is a major challenge. Land sparing involves conserving forest while growing timber in intensively managed areas. On the other hand, land sharing utilizes ecological forestry approaches, but with a larger management footprint due to lower yields. While the sparing‐sharing framework has been widely tested and debated in agricultural settings to balance competing values, such land‐allocation strategies have been rarely studied in forestry.

    We examined whether a sparing, sharing or Triad strategy best achieves multiple forest objectives simultaneously. In Triad, management units (stands) in forest landscapes are allocated to one of three treatments: reserve (where conservation is the sole objective), intensive (timber production is the sole objective) and ecological (both objectives are combined). To our knowledge, ours is the first Triad study from the temperate zone to quantify direct measures of biodiversity (e.g. species' abundance).

    Using a commonly utilized forest planning tool parameterized with empirical data, we modelled the capacity of a temperate rainforest to provide multiple ecosystem services (biodiversity, carbon storage, timber production and old‐growth forest structure) over 125 years based on 43 different allocation scenarios. We then quantified trade‐offs between scenarios, taking into account the landscape structure, and determined which strategies most consistently balanced ecosystem services.

    Sparing strategies were best when the services provided by both old‐growth and early seral (young) forests were prioritized, but at a cost to species associated with mid‐seral stages, which benefitted most from Triad and sharing strategies. Therefore, sparing provides the greatest net benefit, particularly given that old‐growth‐associated species and ecosystem services are currently of the greatest conservation concern.

    Synthesis and applications. We found that maximizing multiple elements of biodiversity and ecosystem services simultaneously with a single management strategy was elusive. The strategy that maximized each service and species varied greatly by both the service and the level of timber production. Fortunately, a diversity of management options can produce the same wood supply, providing ample decision space for establishing priorities and evaluating trade‐offs.

     
    more » « less
  4. The mandate by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to increase renewable fuel production in the USA has resulted in extensive research into the sustainability of perennial bioenergy crops such as switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and miscanthus (Miscanthus× giganteus). Perennial grassland crops have been shown to support greater aboveground biodiversity and ecosystem function than annual crops. However, management considerations, such as what crop to plant or whether to use fertilizer, may alter belowground diversity and ecosystem functioning associated with these grasslands as well. In this study, we compared crop type (switchgrass or miscanthus) and nitrogen fertilization effects on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) and soil nematode abundance, activity, and diversity in a long-term experiment. We quantified AMF root colonization, AMF extra-radical hyphal length, soil glomalin concentrations, AMF richness and diversity, plant-parasitic nematode abundance, and nematode family richness and diversity in each treatment. Mycorrhizal activity and diversity were higher with switchgrass than with miscanthus, leading to higher potential soil carbon contributions via increased hyphal growth and glomalin production. Plant-parasitic nematode (PPN) abundance was 2.3 ×  higher in miscanthus plots compared to switchgrass, mostly due to increases in dagger nematodes (Xiphinema). The higher PPN abundance in miscanthus may be a consequence of lower AMF in this species, as AMF can provide protection against PPN through a variety of mechanisms. Nitrogen fertilization had minor negative effects on AMF and nematode diversity associated with these crops. Overall, we found that crop type and fertilizer application associated with perennial bioenergy cropping systems can have detectable effects on the diversity and composition of soil communities, which may have important consequences for the ecosystem services provided by these systems. 
    more » « less
  5. Landscape diversity is one of the key drivers for maintaining ecosystem services in agricultural production by providing vital habitats and alternative food sources for beneficial insects and pollinators within the agricultural landscapes. The landscape structure, land uses, and diversity differ between geographic locations. However, how the changes of landscape structure and land use diversity affect the arthropod diversity in a geographic area is poorly understood. Here, we tested the impact of landscape diversity on the rice locations in Bangladesh. Results ranged from highly diversified to very highly diversified in Chattogram (>7.9), to highly diversified (0.590.79) in Satkhira and moderately (0.390.59) to less diversified (0.190.39) in Patuakhali. These significant different landscape diversities influenced the arthropod diversity in rice fields. Arthropod species diversity increases with the increase in the Land Use Mix (LUM) index. The maximum tillering stage of rice growth harbored higher abundance and species diversity in rice fields. Moreover, we found that vegetation is the most important factor influencing the abundance of arthropods. Extensive agriculture and forest contributed substantially to predicting arthropod richness. Meanwhile, barren land and high-density residential land as well as intensive agriculture had large impact on species diversity. This study indicates that landscape diversity plays a vital role in shaping the species diversity in rice fields, providing guidelines for the conservation of arthropod diversity, maximizing natural pest control ecosystem service and more secure crop production itself. 
    more » « less