Progressively excluding mammals of different body size affects community and trait structure of ground beetles

Wang, Xiaowei; Steiner, Magdalena; Schütz, Martin; Vandegehuchte, Martijn L.; Risch, Anita C.

doi:10.1111/oik.05198

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although we could not find in the literature any study dealing with the effects of understorey vegetation on carabids in mixed forests, grassland studies can provide relevant information. The results are actually inconsistent, with either positive (Lafage et al, 2014), neutral (Wang et al, 2018;Tsafack et al, 2019) or negative effects (Liu et al, 2016) of herbaceous plant height on activity-density of carabids. In the case of our experiment, we might hypothesise that higher understorey vegetation provided better shelter for carabids against adverse weather conditions or top predators such as birds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Carabid activity‐density increases with forest vegetation diversity at different spatial scales

Jouveau

Toïgo

Giffard

et al. 2019

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. More diverse forests are generally more resistant to insect herbivores. This might be due to positive effects of tree diversity on predation. Although the enemies hypothesis has received conflicting evidence in forest ecosystems.2. Carabids were sampled by pitfall trapping in a tree diversity experiment, at the centre of plots ranging from one to five tree species mixtures. The composition and vertical structure of the vegetation was assessed at three scales, in the understorey, in the canopy of the experimental plots, and in the surrounding area of each plot.3. None of the tested vegetation variables had an effect on the species richness of carabids. In contrast, the vegetation compositional diversity at the understorey, canopy and surrounding scales had additive and positive effects on the activity-density of the carabids.4. Our findings indicate that more diverse forests can host a higher activity-density of predatory carabids, as a result of the combined effect of horizontal and vertical vegetation diversity, which might increase both habitat quality and the amount of feeding resources. This highlights the relevance of manipulative tree diversity experiments to identify the ecological filters shaping local carabid communities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Carabid activity‐density increases with forest vegetation diversity at different spatial scales

Jouveau

Toïgo

Giffard

et al. 2019

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During this process, plant–plant interactions changed, which resulted in decreases in forb richness and family‐level plant diversity as well as a changed plant species composition in the short‐grass vegetation (this study and Firn et al., 2017). We previously demonstrated with our experiment that the size‐selective exclusion of animals (defaunation) affected soil and above‐ground invertebrate communities (Vandegehuchte et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2018) and ecosystem properties (Haynes et al., 2014; Risch et al., 2013, 2018). All these impacts of animal exclusions were particularly strong in the short‐grass vegetation, suggesting that the close relationships between above‐ and below‐ground communities and their abiotic environment (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Size‐selective exclusion of mammals and invertebrates differently affects grassland plant communities depending on vegetation type

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human‐caused loss of vertebrate and invertebrate animals, defaunation, is increasing, and potentially affects plant community structure of diverse grassland ecosystems world‐wide. We experimentally simulated defaunation using size‐selective fences to progressively exclude large‐, medium‐ and small‐sized mammals, and invertebrates from two subalpine vegetation types in the Swiss National Park (SNP): intensively grazed short‐grass and moderately grazed tall‐grass vegetation. We assessed plant community properties yearly from 2009 to 2013, and examined treatment effects on plant community structure in the two grassland types. In the short‐grass vegetation, the exclusion of large mammals increased total plant biomass, while the exclusion of large and medium‐sized mammals increased total, grass and forb biomass compared to when all animals had access. These increases became stronger when invertebrates were also excluded. The exclusion of all mammals and invertebrates increased biomass of grasses by 205%, forbs by 100% and total plant biomass by 118% compared to when all animals had access, hence enhancing relative biomass of grasses from 43.6% to 60%, changing plant species composition and lowering richness of forbs by 16%, the number of plant families by 13% and family‐level Shannon diversity by 23%. In contrast to these significant community‐level responses found in the short‐grass vegetation, there was no evidence that the size‐selective exclusion of animals altered the plant community structure of the tall‐grass vegetation. The contrasting results were due to the difference in plant community composition prior to our experiment, which were related to differences in quantity and quality of forage and in grazing intensities of herbivores between the two grassland types. Synthesis. Our results showed that different‐sized animals, in particular large mammals and invertebrates, contributed to maintain the plant community structure in the short‐grass vegetation, highlighting the importance of multiple, functionally different animal groups for ecosystem functioning and stability. In contrast to the short‐grass vegetation, we could not detect such a top‐down control by animals in the tall‐grass vegetation. Our results suggest that potential defaunation effects on grassland plant community structure depend on the degree of grazing pressure release and grassland vegetation type.

show abstract

“…Funke 1973), in recent years often to evaluate ecosystems using a mean individual biomass index (MIB) (e.g, Jelaska et al 2011) or in connection with insect extinction as a result of the findings that insect biomass has decreased drastically over the last 30 years (Hallmann et al 2017). The carabid biomass has also been used to determine food resources for birds or to determine the influence of birds or mammals on the above-ground community (Wang et al 2018). The method obtaining biomass values for carabids varies between investigations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can carabid biomasses be estimated from pitfall traps?

Irmler¹

2022

AngCar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass estimations are currently needed to explain the insect decline of the past 30 years. As pitfall trapping is the most frequently performed method in carabid studies, it is necessary to question whether this method is appropriate for biomass studies. The results of pitfall trapping have often been accepted without considering the limits of the method. They were assumed to correspond to species density, although many studies in the past found that pitfall trapping could not be used to describe density or biomass. Ecosystem analysis is mainly based on area-related data, while pitfall trap data reflect a combination of density and activity that, moreover, varies depending on species composition and ecosystem structure. The present study is based on investigations performed in two large ecosystem projects in Schleswig-Holstein. The data were obtained from determination of density and from pitfall trapping, and the results of the two methods were compared. According to the present study, results from measures of density and from pitfall trapping were weakly related only for intermediate-large species. For small species no significant relationships were found. In general, small species were under-estimated and large species were over-estimated when the pitfall trap method was used. In particular, there were major differences in the composition of the carabid assemblages between the two methods. Results of pitfall trap studies mostly showed a dominance of large species, while in reality small species usually dominate in ecosystems. Concerning biomass estimation this fact is mainly responsible for the different results of the two methods. In the present study no relationship was found between biomass derived from the density measuring method and pitfall traps. In contrast, biomass derived from pitfall trapping mainly represented the biomass of the largest dominant species, which, however, has only a small effect on the area-related biomass.

show abstract

Progressively excluding mammals of different body size affects community and trait structure of ground beetles

Cited by 11 publications

References 69 publications

Carabid activity‐density increases with forest vegetation diversity at different spatial scales

Carabid activity‐density increases with forest vegetation diversity at different spatial scales

Size‐selective exclusion of mammals and invertebrates differently affects grassland plant communities depending on vegetation type

Can carabid biomasses be estimated from pitfall traps?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About