Local and landscape-scale agricultural intensification is a major driver of global biodiversity loss. Controversially discussed solutions include wildlife-friendly farming or combining high-intensity farming with land-sparing for nature. Here, we integrate biodiversity and crop productivity data for smallholder cacao in Indonesia to exemplify for tropical agroforests that there is little relationship between yield and biodiversity under current management, opening substantial opportunities for wildlife-friendly management. Species richness of trees, fungi, invertebrates, and vertebrates did not decrease with yield. Moderate shade, adequate labor, and input level can be combined with a complex habitat structure to provide high biodiversity as well as high yields. Although livelihood impacts are held up as a major obstacle for wildlife-friendly farming in the tropics, our results suggest that in some situations, agroforests can be designed to optimize both biodiversity and crop production benefits without adding pressure to convert natural habitat to farmland.agroecosystems | ecosystem services | ecology-economy trade-offs | endemic species richness | shade trees

No abstract

Assessing the overall biological diversity of tropical rain forests is a seemingly insurmountable task for ecologists. Therefore, researchers frequently sample selected taxa that they believe reflect general biodiversity patterns. Usually, these studies focus on the congruence of α diversity (the number of species found per sampling unit) between taxa rather than on β diversity (turnover of species assemblages between sampling units). Such approaches ignore the potential role of habitat heterogeneity that, depending on the taxonomic group considered, can greatly enhance β diversity at local and landscape scales. We compared α and β diversity of four plant groups (trees, lianas, terrestrial herbs, epiphytic liverworts) and eight animal groups (birds, butterflies, lower canopy ants, lower canopy beetles, dung beetles, bees, wasps, and the parasitoids of the latter two) at 15 sites in Sulawesi, Indonesia, that represented natural rain forest and three types of cacao agroforests differing in management intensity. In total, we recorded 863 species. Patterns of species richness per study site varied strongly between taxonomic groups. Only 13-17% of the variance in species richness of one taxonomic group could be predicted from the species richness of another, and on average 12-18% of the variance of β diversity of a given group was predicted by that in other groups, although some taxon pairs had higher values (up to 76% for wasps and their parasitoids). The degree of congruence of patterns of α diversity was not influenced by sampling completeness, whereas the indicator value for β diversity improved when using a similarity index that accounts for incomplete sampling. The indication potential of α diversity for β diversity and vice versa was limited within taxa (7-20%) and virtually nil between them (0-4%). We conclude that different taxa can have largely independent patterns of α diversity and that patterns of β diversity can be more congruent. Thus, conservation plans on a landscape scale need to put more emphasis on the high heterogeneity of agroforests and the overarching role of β diversity shaping overall diversity patterns. Abstract. Assessing the overall biological diversity of tropical rain forests is a seemingly insurmountable task for ecologists. Therefore, researchers frequently sample selected taxa that they believe reflect general biodiversity patterns. Usually, these studies focus on the congruence of a diversity (the number of species found per sampling unit) between taxa rather than on b diversity (turnover of species assemblages between sampling units). Such approaches ignore the potential role of habitat heterogeneity that, depending on the taxonomic group considered, can greatly enhance b diversity at local and landscape scales. We compared a and b diversity of four plant groups (trees, lianas, terrestrial herbs, epiphytic liverworts) and eight animal groups (birds, butterflies, lower canopy ants, lower canopy beetles, dung beetles, bees, wasps, and the parasitoids of the latter two) at 15 ...

Summary1. Avian ecosystem services such as the suppression of pests are considered to be of high ecological and economic importance in a range of ecosystems, especially in tropical agroforestry. However, how bird predation success is related to the diversity and composition of the bird community, as well as local and landscape factors, is poorly understood. 2. We quantified arthropod predation in relation to the identity and diversity of insectivorous birds using experimental exposure of artificial, caterpillar-like prey in 15 smallholder cacao agroforestry systems differing in local shade-tree management and distance to primary forest. The bird community was assessed using both mist-netting (targeting active understorey insectivores) and point counts (higher completeness of species inventories). 3. Bird predation was not related to local shade-tree management or overall bird species diversity, but to the activity of insectivorous bird species and the proximity to primary forest. Insectivore activity was best predicted by mist-netting-based data, not by point counts. We identified the abundant Indonesian endemic lemon-bellied white-eye Zosterops chloris as the main driver of predation on artificial prey. 4. Synthesis and applications. The suppression of arthropods is a major ecosystem service provided by insectivorous birds in agricultural systems world-wide, potentially reducing herbivore damage on plants and increasing yields. Our results show that avian predation success can be driven by single and abundant insectivorous species, rather than by overall bird species richness. Forest proximity was important for enhancing the density of this key species, but did also promote bird species richness. Hence, our findings are both of economical as well as ecological interest because the conservation of nearby forest remnants will likely benefit human needs and biodiversity conservation alike.

No abstract