Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Semi‐natural grasslands and their biodiversity decline rapidly, although they are key elements of agricultural landscapes. Therefore, there is a need for the re‐establishment of semi‐natural grasslands in intensively managed farmlands (e.g., via sowing wildflower seeds). Our knowledge, however, is limited on how different arthropod groups may respond to such newly established wildflower fields. This knowledge gap is especially relevant for the Pannonian biogeographical region, and more generally for Central Europe, where there is little to no evidence so far. We aimed to compare three different habitats (i.e., sown wildflower fields (WFF), semi‐natural road verges and adjacent crop fields) in terms of their species and individual numbers and assemblage compositions to reveal differences between primary producers (plants), pollinators (bees and hoverflies) and predators (spiders). We selected eight landscapes in Central Hungary within conventionally managed crop areas. We analysed species and individual numbers by generalised linear mixed models (GLMM) and the assemblage composition with non‐metric multidimensional scaling for each taxon in the three habitats. Crop, road verge and WFF habitats had distinct assemblages for each studied group, indicating clear separation among habitats. There are, however, contrasting patterns in the diversity measures of the studied groups. Crop fields are the poorest in both species and individual numbers, road verges harboured the highest abundance of spiders, while WFF had the most bees and plants. No clear pattern for hoverflies emerged. Our results suggest that the studied habitats do not harbour all groups in equal share. We propose that the design of future restorations in Central European farmlands should target a diversity of habitat types needed to support a wide range of functional groups.
Semi‐natural grasslands and their biodiversity decline rapidly, although they are key elements of agricultural landscapes. Therefore, there is a need for the re‐establishment of semi‐natural grasslands in intensively managed farmlands (e.g., via sowing wildflower seeds). Our knowledge, however, is limited on how different arthropod groups may respond to such newly established wildflower fields. This knowledge gap is especially relevant for the Pannonian biogeographical region, and more generally for Central Europe, where there is little to no evidence so far. We aimed to compare three different habitats (i.e., sown wildflower fields (WFF), semi‐natural road verges and adjacent crop fields) in terms of their species and individual numbers and assemblage compositions to reveal differences between primary producers (plants), pollinators (bees and hoverflies) and predators (spiders). We selected eight landscapes in Central Hungary within conventionally managed crop areas. We analysed species and individual numbers by generalised linear mixed models (GLMM) and the assemblage composition with non‐metric multidimensional scaling for each taxon in the three habitats. Crop, road verge and WFF habitats had distinct assemblages for each studied group, indicating clear separation among habitats. There are, however, contrasting patterns in the diversity measures of the studied groups. Crop fields are the poorest in both species and individual numbers, road verges harboured the highest abundance of spiders, while WFF had the most bees and plants. No clear pattern for hoverflies emerged. Our results suggest that the studied habitats do not harbour all groups in equal share. We propose that the design of future restorations in Central European farmlands should target a diversity of habitat types needed to support a wide range of functional groups.
Agricultural intensification has led to significant declines in beneficial insect populations, such as pollinators and natural enemies, along with their ecosystem services. The installation of perennial flower margins in farmland is a popular agri-environmental scheme to mitigate these losses, promoting biodiversity, pollination, and pest control. However, outcomes can vary widely, and recent insights into flower margins in an agricultural context suggest that management could be an important contributor to this variation. This study evaluated two mowing management regimes: the new “three-strip management” method with uneven, curved mowing lines and regular phased mowing as a control method. During the third year of application, we evaluated the effects on the alpha diversity indices of pollinators and natural enemies, as well as plant–pollinator visitation networks. Curved three-strip management significantly increased the abundance of all pollinator groups (+44%) and natural enemies (+50%), and the taxonomic richness and diversity of pollinators, especially for rarer solitary bees. Floral diversity was also higher, with more unique plants blooming in early spring and late summer, generating more unique plant–pollinator interactions (+54%) and a positive impact on multiple network-level properties. Our findings provide new evidence that nature-based management methods can be a win–win solution, creating high-quality habitats that enhance the insect diversity of various groups, support associated ecosystem services, and help restore overall farmland biodiversity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.