Contrasting effects of irrigation and fertilization on plant diversity in hay meadows

Question: The biodiversity of mountain hay meadows has historically been maintained through traditional, low-intensity farming practices. In recent decades, however, agricultural intensification for hay production has led to dramatic declines in their biodiversity. This study asks: which management practices can contribute to maintaining the biodiversity value of mountain hay meadows without jeopardizing agricultural revenue?Location: Eleven semi-natural meadows, canton of Valais, inner Alps, southwest Switzerland.Methods: We experimentally measured the effects of various intensities of fertilization (slurry) and aerial irrigation (sprinklers) on the taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity of plants. The experiment consisted of six different treatments, each randomly applied to one of six plots within a meadow. A plot therefore was (1) not irrigated and only fertilized with slurry, (2) not fertilized and only irrigated with a sprinkler, (3-5) receiving low, medium or high amounts of both fertilizer and water, respectively, or (6) receiving no input of irrigation or fertilizer (control plots).Results: After 4 yr, all biodiversity metrics were negatively impacted under the highest management intensity (irrigation combined with fertilization at concentrations corresponding to the input necessary to achieve maximum local hay yield, i.e. three-thirds of inputs). In contrast, at low-and mid-intensity management levels (irrigation combined with fertilization at one-third and two-thirds of the maximum concentration, respectively) most diversity metrics did not differ from the controls, except for forb species richness, which was already reduced under mid-intensity management compared to low-intensity and control plots. Neither irrigation nor fertilization alone had a negative impact on plant biodiversity.Conclusions: Low to moderate agricultural intensification of hay production does not appear to be detrimental to plant biodiversity among mountain meadows. These results suggest that sustainable management would be obtained via irrigation and fertilization corresponding to one-third to two-thirds of the quantity necessary to achieve maximum local hay yield.

show abstract

“…; Müller et al. ) and experimental (Rajaniemi ; Niu et al. ) findings of similar agricultural practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…; Müller et al. ). Over time, irrigation could probably modify floristic composition because of reduced physiological stress during drought episodes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Experiment‐based recommendations for biodiversity‐friendly management of mountain hay meadows

Lessard‐Therrien

Humbert

Arlettaz

2017

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4). A negative example of the effect of nutrient input by fertilization of adjacent meadows to ditches on phytodiversity was given, e.g., by Müller et al (2016). Depending on the heterogeneity of humidity, the succession stage of a ditch, and the intensity and frequency of maintenance, ditches are not only characterized by a distinct species composition but they also provide important habitats for rare species and species relevant for conservation (Garniel 2000;Herzon and Helenius 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principal threats to the conservation of freshwater habitats in the continental biogeographical region of Central Europe

Grzybowski

Glińska-Lewczuk

2019

Biodivers Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we discuss the threats to freshwater habitats that are highly important to the European Community in the Continental Biogeographical Region of Europe, specifically in Poland. The study covers nine freshwater habitat types distinguished in Natura 2000, Annex I of the Habitats Directive, which is a network of nature protection areas in the territory: standing water bodies (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, and 3160) and running water (3260, 3220, 3240, and 3270), occurring in 806 Special Areas of Conservation in Poland. Of the 72,673 km 2 total area of freshwater habitat covered by Natura 2000 in Poland, only 25.70% was classified, from the period 2006-2018, as favourable status, whereas 68.72% was classified as unfavourable inadequate or unfavourable bad status. Based on a multivariate analysis, we found that significant differences in the conservation status of freshwater habitats resulted from a variety of threats, pressures, and activities, among which the most significant are urbanization and residential and commercial development; transportation and service corridors; decreased and unstable water resources; fishing and harvesting of aquatic resources; agricultural pollution; improper management and use of the agricultural catchment and forest catchment; changes in biocenotic evolution, invasive species succession, and more intense touristic exploration. The changes in conservation status of habitats 3110, 3130, 3140, 3160, and 3260 are also associated with climate change. Taking into account the threats identified, a list of recommended practices for the freshwater habitat types is presented, to be considered in habitat conservation programmes.

show abstract

“…However, places where diversity of life in all of its manifestations (biological, cultural, and linguistic) is high are called biocultural diversity hotspots (Maffi & Woodley, 2010;Babai et al, 2015). Interestingly, high species and, in particular, habitat diversity is often retained in these cultural landscapes where the lifestyle, culture, and accompanying farming practices have preserved the greatest number of unique, "traditional" features (Palang et al, 2006;Plieninger et al, 2006;Babai et al, 2014).…”

Section: The Loss Of Freshwater Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Human impact, such as floodplain disconnection, river damming, aggradation, introduction of invasive species, or intense forestry, pollution by fertilizers and chemical contaminants, caused changes in habitat conditions (eg Schnitzler et al, 2005;Mitsch et al, 2012). A negative effect on phytodiversity in ditches by nutrient input from fertilization of adjacent meadows was observed by Müller et al, (2016). Pollution to surface waters, reported as the cause of the poor conservation status of the habitats, was indicated for all lake habitats (3110,3130,3140,3150,3160).…”

Section: The Biodiversity Of Freshwater Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Principal Threats to the Standing Water Habitats in the Continental Biogeographical Region of Central Europe

Grzybowski

2019

Journal of Landscape Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses threats of standing water habitats of high importance to the European Community in the Continental Biogeographical Region (CBR) of Europe, specifically in Poland, as a reference. The study covers five standing water habitats types distinguished in Natura 2000: 3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160, occurring in 806 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) in Poland. The most significant threats to standing water habitats in the Continental biogeographical region, result from human-induced changes in hydrological conditions that have modified whole natural systems. Based on multivariate analysis, we found that significant differences in the conservation status of the standing water habitats resulted from a variety of threats, pressures, and activities, among which the most significant are decreased and unstable water resources (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160), fishing and harvesting aquatic resources (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160), pollution from use of the catchment (3130, 3140, 3150), improper management and use of the agricultural catchment (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160) and forest catchment (3110, 3140, 3160), urbanisation, residential and commercial development (3150, 3140), transportation and service corridors (3140> 3160 > 3110, 3150), including parking areas (3140), changes in biocenotic evolution, succession, plant species composition (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160), succession of invasive species (3130), and more intense touristic exploration (3110, 3130, 3140, 3150, 3160). Only in the case of habitats 3110, 3130, 3140 changes in their conservation status have been associated with climate change.

show abstract

Contrasting effects of irrigation and fertilization on plant diversity in hay meadows

Cited by 28 publications

References 34 publications

Experiment‐based recommendations for biodiversity‐friendly management of mountain hay meadows

Experiment‐based recommendations for biodiversity‐friendly management of mountain hay meadows

Principal threats to the conservation of freshwater habitats in the continental biogeographical region of Central Europe

The Principal Threats to the Standing Water Habitats in the Continental Biogeographical Region of Central Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About