Ethiopian coffee cultivation—Implications for bird conservation and environmental certification

Abstract

Coffee cultivation plays a role in biodiversity alteration and conservation in much of the tropics. This is particularly so in Ethiopia, where coffee is an indigenous shrub and a major commodity in national and local trade. In southwestern Ethiopia, coffee (Coffea arabica, "highland coffee") is harvested from both forests (its natural habitat) and from within farmland where it is grown in small patches under isolated shade trees. We investigated the effects of management practices on bird assemblages in each of these systems. We found that bird assemblages in the forest remnants were distinct from those in the farmland even if many species were regularly found in both habitats. Coffee cultivation in open farmlands promoted bird species diversity through the retention of forest trees, while coffee cultivation in forests reduced bird diversity. Forest coffee management may, however, ensure that forest remnants are not converted to other forms of more open agriculture. Certification standards for "ecologically friendly" coffee in Ethiopia need to take this complexity into account.

Coffee landscapes as refugia for native woody biodiversity as forest loss continues in southwest Ethiopia

“…In addition to planned biodiversity for shade coffee, associated 454 biodiversity such as ferns (Yeshitila, 2008), epiphytes (Hylander 455 and Nemomissa, 2008), and birds (Gove et al, 2008) (Mendez et al, 2010). 460 Generally, woody species richness in state-owned plantations 461 and smallholder farms in this study is comparable to traditional 462 polyculture and rustic coffee systems of Latin America, respectively 463 (Moguel and Toledo, 1999;Philpott et al, 2008).…”

“…agricultural land. In addition to our findings for woody species, 365 found many species of epiphytes and orchids 366 Nemomissa, 2008, 2009;Hylander et al, 2013), and bird species 367 (Gove et al, 2008) are maintained in semi-forest coffee systems. 368 However, other researchers (Schmitt et al, 2010b;Hundera et al, 369 2013a) found that lianas, herbs, shrubs and orchids were not well 370 conserved in coffee farms.…”

Tree cover mediates the effect on rapeseed leaf damage of excluding predatory arthropods, but in an unexpected way

“…However, the effectiveness of natural enemies in suppressing crop pests is influenced by processes at both local and landscape scales Chaplin-Kramer and Kremen, 2012;Tscharntke et al, 2012). Many studies show that the presence of different land-use types in the landscape, such as high tree density or cover of semi-natural habitats, can enhance the species richness of pest-controlling organisms or the natural pest control services across agricultural landscape (Bianchi et al, 2006;Rusch et al, 2013;Weibull et al, 2003;Gove et al, 2008;Clough et al, 2009), but results are not consistent. Some studies show higher predation from birds (Perfecto et al, 2004;Johnson et al, 2010) and arthropod natural enemies (Langellotto and Denno, 2004;Bianchi et al, 2006) on insect herbivores in complex habitats.…”

“…This mosaic of land-use types could influence the natural enemy abundance and the corresponding crop pest suppression services (Abate et al, 2000). For example, heterogeneous farmlands of southwestern Ethiopia harbor a rich bird fauna with about the same species richness of insectivorous birds as in the adjacent forests (Gove et al, 2013), even though the overall species richness increases with tree cover (Gove et al, 2008). In our study area, Engelen (2012) recorded an average of 58 bird species per homegarden and these included many insectivorous species indicating the potential for pest control in this landscape.…”

Supporting conservation with biodiversity research in sub-Saharan Africa’s human-modified landscapes

“…Fewer studies consider East and southern African tropical forests than West African forests, but work is emerging to support land-use planning in the region, and results largely conform to those found for West Africa. Agroforestry in Ethiopian and Tanzania supports less diversity than forests but more than other land uses (Gove et al 2008;Hemp 2006;Hall et al 2011;Negash et al 2012). …”