Search for: All records

Dominant forms of agricultural production in the U.S. Upper Midwest are undermining human health and well being. Restoring critical ecosystem functions to agriculture is key to stabilizing climate, reducing flooding, cleaning water, and enhancing biodiversity. We used simulation models to compare ecosystem functions (food-energy production, nutrient retention, and water infiltration) provided by vegetation associated with continuous corn, corn-soybean rotation, and perennial grassland producing feed for dairy livestock. Compared to continuous corn, most ecosystem functions dramatically improved in the perennial grassland system (nitrate leaching reduced ~90%, phosphorus loss reduced ~88%, drainage increased ~25%, evapotranspiration reduced ~29%), which will translate to improved ecosystem services. Our results emphasize the need to incentivize multiple ecosystem services when managing agricultural landscapes. 

Agricultural landscapes in North America have developed through complex interactions of biophysical, socioeconomic and technological forces. While they can be highly productive, these landscapes are increasingly simplified, causing biodiversity loss. As a result, ecosystem services associated with biodiversity are being dismantled. Agricultural landscape structure arises from collective decisions of farmers over long time periods, which are usually not intentionally coordinated beyond the farm scale. Regaining ecosystem services will require active efforts to intentionally redesign landscapes, in part based on ecological evidence about relationships between landscape structure and ecosystem services. Here we focus on services provided by arthropods and how to foster them at landscape scales. We first provide a brief history of how agricultural landscape structure in temperate North America developed and review the landscape-scale ecological drivers underpinning arthropod-based ecosystem services. We then propose ecological and social principles for designing agricultural landscapes, based on the ecological evidence we reviewed and on previous efforts in agricultural landscape design. Finally, we look ahead to discern prospects for putting agricultural landscape design into practice, including ecological, technological and policy opportunities. To reap benefits from arthropod-based services, future agricultural landscapes will need to increase in structural heterogeneity and diversity across multiple dimensions including crop, farmer and consumer diversity. A number of knowledge gaps persist, including how to design landscapes at spatial scales that are relevant to service providers, identifying areas of overlap or conflict between design for ecosystem services and for biodiversity conservation more broadly and navigating the social and political processes needed to implement landscape design. 

Ecosystem responses to external inputs of nutrients and organisms are highly variable. Theory predicts that ecosystem traits will determine the responses to spatial subsidies, but evidence for how vegetation structure can modulate those effects is lacking. We investigated how vegetation structure (i.e., leaf area index [LAI] and vegetation height) influenced the ecosystem and community responses to insect spatial subsidies in a subarctic grassland. Our experiment consisted of a 2 × 2 manipulation where in one treatment we either blocked flying insects over a 2‐yr period in 1‐m²plots near the shore of Lake Mývatn, Iceland, where deposition of aquatic adult midges (Diptera: Chironomidae) to land is high, or left control plots accessible to flying midges. In the second treatment, grassland vegetation was cut (tall vs. short) at the start of each season and then allowed to regrow. We then measured litter decomposition and arthropod composition and density within each plot (n = 6 replicates × 4 treatments). Midge‐exclusion cages reduced midge deposition by 81% relative to the open plots. Vegetation cutting initially reduced LAI and vegetation height by 3× and 1.5×, respectively, but these were not different by the end of the second‐growing season. We found that vegetation structure modulated the effects of midge subsides on litter decomposition, with taller canopies intercepting more insect subsidies than shorter ones, leading to 18% faster litter decomposition. In contrast, the short‐vegetation plots intercepted fewer subsidies and had higher temperatures and sunlight, resulting in no effects of midges on decomposition. However, by the end of the experiment when all vegetation structure characteristics had converged across all plots, we found no differences in decomposition between treatments. The effects of midge subsidies on arthropod composition depended on the vegetation structure, suggesting that arthropods might also be responding to the structural effects on spatial subsidies. Our findings indicate that vegetation structure can modify the abiotic environment and the quantity of subsidies entering a recipient ecosystem as aerial insects, resulting in ecosystem‐ and community‐level responses. Thus, changing vegetation structure via habitat disturbances will likely have important implications for ecosystem functions that rely on spatial subsidies.