@article{Tscharntke2005, title = {Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management}, author = {T. Tscharntke and A. M. Klein and A. Kruess and I. Steffan-Dewenter and C. Thies}, journal = {Ecology Letters}, month = {August}, number = 8, pages = {857--874}, volume = 8, year = 2005, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x}, timestamp = {2008.01.14}, sn = {1461-023X}, tc = {54}, file = {Tscharntke2005.pdf:Tscharntke2005.pdf:PDF}, ji = {Ecol. Lett.}, owner = {kej}, numlit = {00174}, ut = {ISI:000230335900009}, doi = {10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x}, abstract = {Understanding the negative and positive effects of agricultural land use for the conservation of biodiversity, and its relation to ecosystem services, needs a landscape perspective. Agriculture can contribute to the conservation of high-diversity systems, which may provide important ecosystem services such as pollination and biological control via complementarity and sampling effects. Land-use management is often focused on few species and local processes, but in dynamic, agricultural landscapes, only a diversity of insurance species may guarantee resilience (the capacity to reorganize after disturbance). Interacting species experience their surrounding landscape at different spatial scales, which influences trophic interactions. Structurally complex landscapes enhance local diversity in agroecosystems, which may compensate for local high-intensity management. Organisms with high-dispersal abilities appear to drive these biodiversity patterns and ecosystem services, because of their recolonization ability and larger resources experienced. Agri-environment schemes (incentives for farmers to benefit the environment) need to broaden their perspective and to take the different responses to schemes in simple (high impact) and complex (low impact) agricultural landscapes into account. In simple landscapes, local allocation of habitat is more important than in complex landscapes, which are in total at risk. However, little knowledge of the relative importance of local and landscape management for biodiversity and its relation to ecosystem services make reliable recommendations difficult.}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/27fb18cd553ca1d6b7f2e3623043dadc3/karinnadrowski}, keywords = {parasitoid biodiversity communities fragmentation agri-environmental_schemes coffee agriculture natural_enemy insects plantation habitat bioenergy_fauna generalist trophic_cascades biodiversity_loss ecosystem_service biological_control} } @article{Billeter2008, title = {Indicators for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: a pan-European study}, author = {R. Billeter and J. Liira and D. Bailey and R. Bugter and P. Arens and I. Augenstein and S. Aviron and J. Baudry and R. Bukacek and F. Burel and M. Cerny and G. De Blust and R. De Cock and T. Diekotter and H. Dietz and J. Dirksen and C. Dormann and W. Durka and M. Frenzel and R. Hamersky and F. Hendrickx and F. Herzog and S. Klotz and B. Koolstra and A. Lausch and D. Le Coeur and J. P. Maelfait and P. Opdam and M. Roubalova and A. Schermann and N. Schermann and T. Schmidt and O. Schweiger and M.J.M. Smulders and M. Speelmans and P. Simova and J. Verboom and W.K.R.E. van Wingerden and M. Zobel}, journal = {Journal of Applied Ecology}, number = 1, pages = {141-150}, volume = 45, year = 2008, url = {http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01393.x}, timestamp = {2008.01.23}, owner = {kej}, doi = {10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01393.x}, eprint = {http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01393.x}, abstract = {Summary 1. In many European agricultural landscapes, species richness is declining considerably. Studies performed at a very large spatial scale are helpful in understanding the reasons for this decline and as a basis for guiding policy. In a unique, large-scale study of 25 agricultural landscapes in seven European countries, we investigated relationships between species richness in several taxa, and the links between biodiversity and landscape structure and management. 2. We estimated the total species richness of vascular plants, birds and five arthropod groups in each 16-km2 landscape, and recorded various measures of both landscape structure and intensity of agricultural land use. We studied correlations between taxonomic groups and the effects of landscape and land-use parameters on the number of species in different taxonomic groups. Our statistical approach also accounted for regional variation in species richness unrelated to landscape or land-use factors. 3. The results reveal strong geographical trends in species richness in all taxonomic groups. No single species group emerged as a good predictor of all other species groups. Species richness of all groups increased with the area of semi-natural habitats in the landscape. Species richness of birds and vascular plants was negatively associated with fertilizer use. 4. Synthesis and applications. We conclude that indicator taxa are unlikely to provide an effective means of predicting biodiversity at a large spatial scale, especially where there is large biogeographical variation in species richness. However, a small list of landscape and land-use parameters can be used in agricultural landscapes to infer large-scale patterns of species richness. Our results suggest that to halt the loss of biodiversity in these landscapes, it is important to preserve and, if possible, increase the area of semi-natural habitat.}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/20f80416452cfb726662bd033ff88f401/karinnadrowski}, keywords = {indicator biodiversity greenveins agriculture Europe landscape landscape_structure} } @article{Herzog2006, title = {Assessing the intensity of temperate European agriculture at the landscape scale}, author = {F. Herzog and B. Steiner and D. Bailey and J. Baudry and R. Billeter and R. Bukacek and G. De Blust and R. De Cock and J. Dirksen and C. F. Dormann and R. De Filippi and E. Frossard and J. Liira and T. Schmidt and R. Stockli and C. Thenail and W. van Wingerden and R. Bugter}, journal = {European Journal Of Agronomy}, month = {February}, number = 2, pages = {165--181}, volume = 24, year = 2006, timestamp = {2008.05.28}, sn = {1161-0301}, owner = {kej}, ut = {ISI:000234788900008}, doi = {10.1016/j.eja.2005.07.006}, description = {Analysis of a questionaire of farmland intensity in Europe.}, abstract = {The intensity of agricultural production was assessed in 25 landscape test sites across temperate Europe using a standardised farmer questionnaire. The intensity indicators, nitrogen input (to arable crops and to permanent grassland), density of livestock units and number of pesticide applications (herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and retardants), were recorded and integrated into an overall intensity index. All three components were needed to appropriately characterise the intensity of agricultural management. Four hypotheses were tested. (i) A low diversity of crops is related to higher intensity. The contrary was observed, namely because diverse crop rotations contained a higher share of crops which are more demanding in terms of nitrogen and of plant protection. (ii) Intensity decreases when there is more permanent grassland. This was confirmed by our study. (iii) Large farms are managed more intensively. There was no relation between farm size and intensity. (iv) Large fields are managed more intensively. There was a tendency towards higher nitrogen input and livestock density in landscapes with larger fields but only a few of the results were statistically significant. The aggregated overall intensity index was of limited usefulness mainly because of limitations in interpretability. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/212d5dc5163c09fbb0ca9bbb16db7a769/karinnadrowski}, keywords = {questionaire intensity agriculture sustainability Europe landscape assessment nitrogen} }