Farm management and landscape context shape plant diversity at wetland edges in the Prairie Pothole Region of Canada

IF 4.3 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
David Anthony Kirk, Juan Andrés Martínez-Lanfranco, Douglas J. Forsyth, Amanda E. Martin
{"title":"Farm management and landscape context shape plant diversity at wetland edges in the Prairie Pothole Region of Canada","authors":"David Anthony Kirk,&nbsp;Juan Andrés Martínez-Lanfranco,&nbsp;Douglas J. Forsyth,&nbsp;Amanda E. Martin","doi":"10.1002/eap.2943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Evaluating the impacts of farming systems on biodiversity is increasingly important given the need to stem biodiversity loss, decrease fossil fuel dependency, and maintain ecosystem services benefiting farmers. We recorded woody and herbaceous plant species diversity, composition, and abundance in 43 wetland-adjacent prairie remnants beside crop fields managed using conventional, minimum tillage, organic, or perennial cover (wildlife-friendly) land management in the Prairie Pothole Region. We used a hierarchical framework to estimate diversity at regional and local scales (gamma, alpha), and how these are related through species turnover (beta diversity). We tested the expectation that gamma richness/evenness and beta diversity of all plants would be higher in remnants adjacent to perennial cover and organic fields than in conventional and minimum tillage fields. We expected the same findings for plants providing ecosystem services (bee-pollinated species) and disservices (introduced species). We predicted similar relative effects of land management on alpha diversity, but with the expectation that the benefits of organic farming would decrease with increasing grassland in surrounding landscapes. Gamma richness and evenness of all plants were highest for perennial cover, followed by minimum tillage, organic, and conventional sites. Bee-pollinated species followed a similar pattern for richness, but for evenness organic farming came second, after perennial cover sites, followed by minimum tillage and conventional. For introduced species, organic sites had the highest gamma richness and evenness. Grassland amount moderated the effect of land management type on all plants and bee-pollinated plant richness, but not as expected. The richness of organic sites increased with the amount of grassland in the surrounding landscape. Conversely, for conventional sites, richness increased as the amount of grassland in the landscape declined. Our results are consistent with the expectation that adopting wildlife-friendly land management practices can benefit biodiversity at regional and local scales, in particular the use of perennial cover to benefit plant diversity at regional scales. At more local extents, organic farming increased plant richness, but only when sufficient grassland was available in the surrounding landscape; organic farms also had the highest beta diversity for all plants and bee-pollinated plants. Maintaining native cover in agroecosystems, in addition to low-intensity farming practices, could sustain plant biodiversity and facilitate important ecosystem services.</p>","PeriodicalId":55168,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Applications","volume":"34 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eap.2943","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Applications","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2943","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evaluating the impacts of farming systems on biodiversity is increasingly important given the need to stem biodiversity loss, decrease fossil fuel dependency, and maintain ecosystem services benefiting farmers. We recorded woody and herbaceous plant species diversity, composition, and abundance in 43 wetland-adjacent prairie remnants beside crop fields managed using conventional, minimum tillage, organic, or perennial cover (wildlife-friendly) land management in the Prairie Pothole Region. We used a hierarchical framework to estimate diversity at regional and local scales (gamma, alpha), and how these are related through species turnover (beta diversity). We tested the expectation that gamma richness/evenness and beta diversity of all plants would be higher in remnants adjacent to perennial cover and organic fields than in conventional and minimum tillage fields. We expected the same findings for plants providing ecosystem services (bee-pollinated species) and disservices (introduced species). We predicted similar relative effects of land management on alpha diversity, but with the expectation that the benefits of organic farming would decrease with increasing grassland in surrounding landscapes. Gamma richness and evenness of all plants were highest for perennial cover, followed by minimum tillage, organic, and conventional sites. Bee-pollinated species followed a similar pattern for richness, but for evenness organic farming came second, after perennial cover sites, followed by minimum tillage and conventional. For introduced species, organic sites had the highest gamma richness and evenness. Grassland amount moderated the effect of land management type on all plants and bee-pollinated plant richness, but not as expected. The richness of organic sites increased with the amount of grassland in the surrounding landscape. Conversely, for conventional sites, richness increased as the amount of grassland in the landscape declined. Our results are consistent with the expectation that adopting wildlife-friendly land management practices can benefit biodiversity at regional and local scales, in particular the use of perennial cover to benefit plant diversity at regional scales. At more local extents, organic farming increased plant richness, but only when sufficient grassland was available in the surrounding landscape; organic farms also had the highest beta diversity for all plants and bee-pollinated plants. Maintaining native cover in agroecosystems, in addition to low-intensity farming practices, could sustain plant biodiversity and facilitate important ecosystem services.

Abstract Image

农场管理和景观环境决定了加拿大草原洼地地区湿地边缘的植物多样性
鉴于需要遏制生物多样性的丧失、减少对化石燃料的依赖并维持生态系统服务,评估耕作制度对生物多样性的影响变得越来越重要。我们记录了草原洼地地区采用常规、最小耕作、有机或多年生覆盖(野生动物友好型)土地管理方式管理的作物田旁的 43 个湿地邻近草原残留区的木本和草本植物物种多样性、组成和丰度。我们使用了一个分级框架来估算区域和地方尺度的多样性(γ、α),以及这些多样性与物种更替(β多样性)之间的关系。我们对以下预期进行了测试:在多年生植被和有机农田附近的残留物中,所有植物的伽马丰度/匀度和贝塔多样性都将高于常规农田和最小耕作农田。对于提供生态系统服务(蜜蜂授粉物种)和不提供生态系统服务(引进物种)的植物,我们的预期结果相同。我们预测土地管理对阿尔法多样性的相对影响类似,但预计有机耕作的益处会随着周围景观中草地的增加而减少。所有植物的伽马丰富度和均匀度在多年生覆盖地最高,其次是最小耕作地、有机地和常规地。蜜蜂授粉物种的丰富度与此类似,但就均匀度而言,有机耕作地位居第二,仅次于多年生覆盖地,其次是最小耕作地和常规耕作地。就引进物种而言,有机种植地的伽马丰富度和均匀度最高。草地数量减缓了土地管理类型对所有植物和蜜蜂授粉植物丰富度的影响,但与预期不同。有机地块的丰富度随周围草地数量的增加而增加。相反,对于常规管理地点来说,随着景观中草地数量的减少,丰富度也随之增加。我们的研究结果与我们的预期一致,即采用对野生动物友好的土地管理方法可在区域和地方范围内有益于生物多样性,特别是利用多年生植被在区域范围内有益于植物多样性。在更大的局部范围内,有机耕作增加了植物的丰富度,但只有在周围有足够草地的情况下;有机农场的所有植物和蜜蜂授粉植物的贝塔多样性也是最高的。除了低强度耕作方法外,在农业生态系统中保持原生植被可维持植物的生物多样性,并促进重要的生态系统服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecological Applications
Ecological Applications 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
2.00%
发文量
268
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The pages of Ecological Applications are open to research and discussion papers that integrate ecological science and concepts with their application and implications. Of special interest are papers that develop the basic scientific principles on which environmental decision-making should rest, and those that discuss the application of ecological concepts to environmental problem solving, policy, and management. Papers that deal explicitly with policy matters are welcome. Interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged, as are short communications on emerging environmental challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信