The conservation value of farmland ponds: Predicting water beetle assemblages using vascular plants as a surrogate group

Gioria, Margherita; Schaffers, A.P.; Bacaro, Giovanni; Feehan, John

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.007

Cited by 82 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…High alpha and gamma faunal diversity was demonstrated within agricultural ponds in this study (total: 126 mean: 34) which has been demonstrated in previous research (Ruggiero et al, 2008;Gioria et al, 2010;Hassall et al, 2011). In many agricultural landscapes, ponds are not managed (Boothby et al, 1995a) allowing pond succession and the development of a surrounding shrub layer and tree canopy (Sayer et al, 2012).…”

Section: Community Conservation Index (Cci)supporting

confidence: 77%

“…A total of 492 ponds were examined and 13% were reported to support 40 or more macroinvertebrate species, 3% supported 50 or more invertebrate species and 32% contained at least one species on the JNCC scarcity index (Boothby, 1997b). Several Odonata species of special conservation interest were recorded in ball clay ponds, Dorset (Friday, 1988b) and 5 coleopteran species with IUCN Red list status were recorded from agricultural ponds in Ireland (Gioria et al, 2010). Ratcliffe (1977), in the Nature Conservation Review, described ephemeral ponds as an unimportant environment.…”

Section: Ecological Importance Of Pondsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The length of time the pond net sweep was undertaken was proportional to water surface area (Hinden et al, 2005;Armitage et al, 2012) (Table 3.2), up to a maximum of three minutes for larger ponds Gioria et al, 2010). It should be noted that the three minutes refers to the period the net is in the water and does not include the transition between mesohabitats, or emptying the net to allow more of the sample to be collected .…”

Section: Macroinvertebrate Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Landscape-scale studies have highlighted the considerable contribution ponds make to regional biodiversity (greater macroinvertebrate biodiversity than lakes, streams and rivers) although landscape-scale pond research has primarily focussed on agricultural landscapes Davies et al, 2008b;Gioria et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Pawlikiewicz¹,

Jurasz

2017

Annales Zoologici Fennici

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ponds are common and abundant features in nearly all landscapes typical of European lowland landscapes yet research on freshwater biodiversity has traditionally focussed on larger waterbodies such as lakes and rivers. This has led to an increased need to understand and quantify the biodiversity associated with pond habitats to better inform the active conservation and management of these small waterbodies. This thesis examines the aquatic macroinvertebrate biodiversity (alpha, beta and gamma) and conservation value of 95 ponds in Leicestershire, UK, across a variety of urban and rural landscape types and at a range of spatial scales. In addition, the relative importance of local (physicochemical and biological) and spatial (connectivity) variables in structuring macroinvertebrate communities within ponds is investigated. At a regional scale, the greatest macroinvertebrate biodiversity and conservation value was recorded within meadow ponds compared to urban, agricultural and forest ponds. Spatially, ponds were highly physically and biologically heterogeneous. Temporally (seasonally), invertebrate communities were most dissimilar in meadow and agricultural ponds but assemblages were similar in urban and forest ponds. In urban landscapes, park ponds supported a greater diversity of invertebrates than 'other' urban or garden ponds and typically had a greater conservation value. Garden ponds were the most taxon poor of those investigated. Perennial floodplain meadow ponds supported a greater biodiversity of invertebrates compared to ephemeral meadow ponds although conservation value was similar. Despite regular inundation from the River Soar, ephemeral ponds supported distinct communities compared to perennial meadow ponds. Aquatic macrophytes supported a higher diversity of taxa than other pond mesohabitats across all landscapes studied. Physicochemical factors were identified to be the dominant influence on macroinvertebrate assemblages although, a combination of local and spatial factors best explained the variation in community composition at a regional scale and for meadow ponds. Spatial factors were not identified to significantly influence urban pond communities. This study highlights the ecological importance and conservation value of ponds in rural and anthropogenically disturbed landscapes. Recognition of the significant contribution of ponds to freshwater biodiversity at regional and landscape scales is important for future conservation of pond habitats and will help focus and direct conservation strategies to where they are needed most.iv

show abstract

Section: Community Conservation Index (Cci)supporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Ecological Importance Of Pondsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Macroinvertebrate Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Pawlikiewicz¹,

Jurasz

2017

Annales Zoologici Fennici

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In such cases, information about unsurveyed taxa may be inferred from known relationships with either environmental variables or other taxonomic groups (surrogate taxa) (Wolters et al 2006;Gardner 2010;Lewandowski et al 2010). This approach is most beneficial when the diversity of one or more relatively cryptic, inaccessible or hard-toidentify groups can be effectively estimated using data from a more easily surveyed group (Gioria et al 2010;Rodrigues and Brooks 2007). Previous studies of the usefulness of surrogacy have differing conclusions, with some considering surrogate taxa to be a useful tool (Gioria et al 2010;Rodrigues and Brooks 2007), and others cautioning that relationships between taxa are often too weak or too variable to be useful in this way (Carmel and Stoller-Cavari 2006;Andelman and Fagan 2000;Wolters et al 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The value of plantation forests for plant, invertebrate and bird diversity and the potential for cross-taxon surrogacy

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the area of plantation forest expands worldwide and natural, unmanaged forests decline there is much interest in the potential for planted forests to provide habitat for biodiversity. In regions where little semi-natural woodland remains, the biodiversity supported by forest plantations, typically non-native conifers, may be particularly important. Few studies provide detailed comparisons between the species diversity of native woodlands which are being depleted and non-native plantation forests, which are now expanding, based on data collected from multiple taxa in the same study sites. Here we compare the species diversity and community composition of plants, invertebrates and birds in Sitka spruce-(Picea sitchensis-) dominated and Norway spruce-(Picea abies-) dominated plantations, which have expanded significantly in recent decades in the study area in Ireland, with that of oak-and ash-dominated semi-natural woodlands in the same area. The results show that species richness in spruce plantations can be as high as seminatural woodlands, but that the two forest types support different assemblages of species. In areas where non-native conifer plantations are the principle forest type, their role in the provision of habitat for biodiversity conservation should not be overlooked. Appropriate management should target the introduction of semi-natural woodland characteristics, and on the extension of existing semi-natural woodlands to maintain and enhance forest species diversity. Our data show 2 that although some relatively easily surveyed groups, such as vascular plants and birds, were congruent with many of the other taxa when looking across all study sites, the similarities in response were not strong enough to warrant use of these taxa as surrogates of the others. In order to capture a wide range of biotic variation, assessments of forest biodiversity should either encompass several taxonomic groups, or rely on the use of indicators of diversity that are not species based.

show abstract

Macrophytes promote aquatic insect conservation in artificial ponds

Briggs

Pryke

Samways

et al. 2019

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmland ponds promote regional aquatic biodiversity; however, optimally managing these ponds requires knowledge on how the biodiversity differs between ponds across catchments with different land uses. This study investigated the response of macrophytes, both those in the pond and on the bank, as well as dragonfly and water beetle species richness, diversity and composition in artificial ponds, to numerous environmental variables in catchments dominated by three land uses: protected areas (as reference sites), sugarcane‐dominated and forestry‐dominated landscapes, across two seasons. There was a strong association between insect species richness and vegetation cover, particularly sedges (Cyperus spp.) in spring and bulrushes (Typha capensis) in summer. There was also a positive response between insect species richness and sedges up to 70% cover, and bulrushes up to 40% cover, after which there was a decrease. Furthermore, the protected area ponds contained more rare and specialist insect species. Pond size was not a major variable for biodiversity overall. Although there was generally little congruence in composition among the three taxa, dragonflies were a good surrogate for water beetles and floating macrophytes. Well‐vegetated ponds, both in the water and along the margin, are the most suited to promoting biodiversity, as long as the vegetation is not too dense, and not dominated by one plant species. Artificial ponds in production landscapes have great potential for conserving aquatic species, irrespective of land use, as long as there is management for macrophyte density and heterogeneity.

show abstract

The conservation value of farmland ponds: Predicting water beetle assemblages using vascular plants as a surrogate group

Cited by 82 publications

References 43 publications

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

The value of plantation forests for plant, invertebrate and bird diversity and the potential for cross-taxon surrogacy

Macrophytes promote aquatic insect conservation in artificial ponds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About