2016
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158836
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Moveable Feast: Insects Moving at the Forest-Crop Interface Are Affected by Crop Phenology and the Amount of Forest in the Landscape

Abstract: Edges have become prevailing habitats, mainly as a result of habitat fragmentation and agricultural expansion. The interchange of functionally relevant organisms like insects occurs through these edges and can influence ecosystem functioning in both crop and non-crop habitats. However, very few studies have focused on the directionality of insect movement through edges, and the role of crop and non-crop amount has been ignored. Using bi-directional flight interception traps we investigated interchange of herbi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

4
55
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
4
55
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For species with multiple generations per year or long life‐spans, crossing habitats may be necessary to fulfil their foraging requirements (Mandelik et al ; Tscharntke et al ). However, evidence of cross‐habitat spill‐over does not necessarily imply landscape hubs and not all landscapes are equally conductive to cross‐habitat foraging species (Inclán et al ; González et al ). Consequently, while potentially a good indication, our methods might not provide a complete identification of all hubs and connectors central to a management plan.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For species with multiple generations per year or long life‐spans, crossing habitats may be necessary to fulfil their foraging requirements (Mandelik et al ; Tscharntke et al ). However, evidence of cross‐habitat spill‐over does not necessarily imply landscape hubs and not all landscapes are equally conductive to cross‐habitat foraging species (Inclán et al ; González et al ). Consequently, while potentially a good indication, our methods might not provide a complete identification of all hubs and connectors central to a management plan.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, the edge can support a specific set of edge‐preferring species (Duelli & Obrist, ), and the higher predator diversity may increase predation pressure. H3: Predation pressure is higher in fragments which are larger or closer to the supposed source habitat, the not converted, continuous forest, than in smaller fragments, or in those farther away from these source habitats. In this landscape, larger fragments have higher densities of natural enemies (González et al., ), and flying natural enemies move out of the forest fragments more than into those (González et al., ). Moreover, predation pressure can be positively correlated with edge density or perimeter length, because there often are local density increases at edges (Andrén, ). H4: Predation pressure by invertebrate predators decreases with increasing distance from the fragment edge, due to a decrease in densities or mobility of natural enemies that reside in the forest fragment but move out to feed in the surrounding crop (spillover or halo, Blitzer et al., ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both the matrix (Kupfer, Malanson, & Franklin, 2006) and the edges (Forman & Baudry, 1984;Magura, Lövei, & Tóthmérész, 2017) have great influence on the communities within the fragments. Individuals frequently move between these landscape elements (Blitzer et al, 2012;González, Salvo, Defagó, & Valladares, 2016), and some species are closely related to the edges themselves (Duelli & Obrist, 2003;Lövei, Magura, Tóthmérész, & Ködöböcz, 2006). Natural habitats often increase the diversity and abundance of natural enemies (Bianchi et al, 2006;Chaplin-Kramer, O'Rourke, Blitzer, & Kremen, 2011).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Gonzalez et al 2016), more Table 1. Total abundance (number of individuals) of forest-dependent bird species spilling over into coffee matrices (using point counts*) and into pasture matrices (using both point counts* and mist nets**).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%