Wildflower strips in the agroecosystem for pollinator biodiversity restoration: Which plant species are capable of self-seeding?

IF 3.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Stefano Benvenuti
{"title":"Wildflower strips in the agroecosystem for pollinator biodiversity restoration: Which plant species are capable of self-seeding?","authors":"Stefano Benvenuti","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The success of wildflower strips for conserving pollinator biodiversity is often hampered by their poor sustainability, attributable to the short duration lifespan of the sown species. This three-year experiment aimed to: i) select the plant species that survived the agronomic disturbance practices implemented and ii) verify which crop management approach favoured their sustainability. Six experimental strips along the longest edges of the adjacent wheat crop were sown during the fall of 2019. The annual wildflower species that showed the best performances in emergence dynamics and seedling growth were some wildflowers derived from segetal weeds that are presently rare in conventional agroecosystems. The species <em>Centaurea cyanus</em>, <em>Agrostemma githago, Glebionis coronaria</em> among others attained the phenological stage of flowering most consistently, and also had the lowest mortality rates in the plant community studied. Despite preparing a stale seedbed, weeds were the most significant obstacle to the sustainability of the strips over time. Soil harrowing at the end of the summer lifecycle led to better plant survival performances (10.9 %) compared to senescent plant shredding (4.8 %). Harrowing also resulted in a greater wildflower survival the following year, as well as a higher number of pollinator visits. Honeybee visits were decreased by wildflower strip thinning over time, probably due to their typical constancy in the daily foraging choice for the same abundant species. A similar reduction was observed by the Lepidoptera. In contrast, generalist pollinators (i.e. Syrphidae, Bombyliidae, solitary bees and Coleoptera) were the least demanding pollinators in terms of the plant biodiversity of the sustainable wildflower strip. Harrowing led to a greater biodiversity of both wildflowers and pollinators (Shannon index, H′), and a lower weed dominance (Simpson index, D), compared to shredding. In summary, some segetal wildflowers could be incorporated into sustainable wildflower strips as they are self-seeding.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"212 ","pages":"Article 107486"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424003112","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

The success of wildflower strips for conserving pollinator biodiversity is often hampered by their poor sustainability, attributable to the short duration lifespan of the sown species. This three-year experiment aimed to: i) select the plant species that survived the agronomic disturbance practices implemented and ii) verify which crop management approach favoured their sustainability. Six experimental strips along the longest edges of the adjacent wheat crop were sown during the fall of 2019. The annual wildflower species that showed the best performances in emergence dynamics and seedling growth were some wildflowers derived from segetal weeds that are presently rare in conventional agroecosystems. The species Centaurea cyanus, Agrostemma githago, Glebionis coronaria among others attained the phenological stage of flowering most consistently, and also had the lowest mortality rates in the plant community studied. Despite preparing a stale seedbed, weeds were the most significant obstacle to the sustainability of the strips over time. Soil harrowing at the end of the summer lifecycle led to better plant survival performances (10.9 %) compared to senescent plant shredding (4.8 %). Harrowing also resulted in a greater wildflower survival the following year, as well as a higher number of pollinator visits. Honeybee visits were decreased by wildflower strip thinning over time, probably due to their typical constancy in the daily foraging choice for the same abundant species. A similar reduction was observed by the Lepidoptera. In contrast, generalist pollinators (i.e. Syrphidae, Bombyliidae, solitary bees and Coleoptera) were the least demanding pollinators in terms of the plant biodiversity of the sustainable wildflower strip. Harrowing led to a greater biodiversity of both wildflowers and pollinators (Shannon index, H′), and a lower weed dominance (Simpson index, D), compared to shredding. In summary, some segetal wildflowers could be incorporated into sustainable wildflower strips as they are self-seeding.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecological Engineering
Ecological Engineering 环境科学-工程:环境
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
293
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers. Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.
×
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