Agricultural landscapes can be managed to protect biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services. One approach to achieve this is to restore native perennial vegetation within croplands. Where rowcrops have displaced prairie, as in the US Midwest, restoration of native perennial vegetation can align with crops in so called “prairie strips.” We tested the effect of prairie strips in addition to other management practices on a variety of taxa and on a suite of ecosystem services. To do so, we worked within a 33-year-old experiment that included treatments that varied methods of agricultural management across a gradient of land use intensity. In the two lowest intensity crop management treatments, we introduced prairie strips that occupied 5% of crop area. We addressed three questions: (1) What are the effects of newly established prairie strips on the spillover of biodiversity and ecosystem services into cropland? (2) How does time since prairie strip establishment affect biodiversity and ecosystem services? (3) What are the tradeoffs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, non-provisioning ecosystem services, and provisioning ecosystem services (crop yield) across a land use intensity gradient (which includes prairie strips)? Within prairie strip treatments, where sampling effort occurred within and at increasing distance from strips, dung beetle abundance, spider abundance and richness, active carbon, decomposition, and pollination decreased with distance from prairie strips, and this effect increased between the first and second year. Across the entire land use intensity gradient, treatments with prairie strips and reduced chemical inputs had higher butterfly abundance, spider abundance, and pollination services. In addition, soil organic carbon, butterfly richness, and spider richness increased with a decrease in land use intensity. Crop yield in one treatment with prairie strips was equal to that of the highest intensity management, even while including the area taken out of production. We found no effects of strips on ant biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions (N2O and CH4). Our results show that, even in early establishment, prairie strips and lower land use intensity can contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services without a disproportionate loss of crop yield.

In order to both combat the decline of biodiversity and produce food, fuel, and fiber for a growing human population, current agricultural landscapes must transition into diversified, multifunctional systems. Perennial cellulosic biofuel crops have potential to meet both of these challenges, acting as multifunctional systems that can enhance biodiversity. What is not well understood, and what we test here, are the tradeoffs among different perennial crops in their performance as biofuels and in biodiversity conservation. Working in an established bioenergy experiment with four native, perennial, cellulosic biofuel crop varieties—ranging from monoculture to diverse restoration planting—we tested the effect of biofuel crop management on flower communities, pollinator communities, and crop yield. The greatest abundance and diversity of pollinators and flowers were in treatments that were successional (unmanaged), followed by restored prairie (seeded mix of native grasses and forbs), switchgrass, and a mix of native grasses. However, biofuel crop yield was approximately the inverse, with native grasses having the highest yield, followed by switchgrass and prairie, then successional treatments. Restored prairie was the optimal biofuel crop when both pollinator conservation and crop yield are valued similarly. We add to mounting evidence that policy is needed to create sustainable markets that value the multifunctionality of perennial biofuel systems in order to achieve greater ecosystem services from agricultural landscapes.

Butterfly abundances are declining globally, with meta‐analysis showing a rate of −2% per year. Agriculture contributes to butterfly decline through habitat loss and degradation. Prairie strips—strips of farmland actively restored to native perennial vegetation—are a conservation practice with the potential to mitigate biodiversity loss, but their impact on butterfly biodiversity is not known. Working within a 30‐year‐old experiment that varied land use intensity, from natural areas to croplands (maize–soy–wheat rotation), we introduced prairie strips to less intensely managed crop treatments. Treatments included conservation land, biologically based (organic) row crops with prairie strips, reduced input row crops with prairie strips, no‐till row crops and conventional row crops. We measured butterfly abundance and richness: (1) within prairie strips and (2) across the gradient of land use intensity at the plot level. Butterfly abundance was higher within prairie strips than in all other treatments. Across the land use intensity gradient at the plot level, the conservation land treatment had the highest abundance, treatments with prairie strips had intermediate levels and no‐till and conventional treatments had the lowest abundances. Also across entire plots, butterfly richness increased as land use intensity decreased. Treatments with prairie strips, which also had reduced land use intensity, had distinct butterfly communities as they harboured several butterfly species that were not found in other row crop treatments. In addition to the known effects of prairie strips on ecosystem services including erosion control and increased water quality, prairie strips can increase biodiversity in multifunctional landscapes.