Global agricultural trade and land system sustainability: Implications for ecosystem carbon storage, biodiversity, and human nutrition DOI Creative Commons
Thomas Kästner, Abhishek Chaudhary, Simone Gingrich

et al.

One Earth, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 4(10), P. 1425 - 1443

Published: Oct. 1, 2021

Global land systems are increasingly shaped by international trade of agricultural products. An increasing number studies have quantified the implications for single different aspects system sustainability. Bringing together across sustainability dimensions, this review investigates how global flows affected and resulting impacts on food nutrient availability, natural habitat conversion, biodiversity loss, ecosystem carbon storage. We show that effects highly heterogeneous regions commodities, revealing both synergies trade-offs between improved nutrition environmental conservation. For instance, we find while concentration cereal production in North America has spared land, increased demand tropical products induced negatively impacted ecosystems. Based current state knowledge, identify six pathways future research can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding positively meeting goals.

Language: Английский

Beyond organic farming – harnessing biodiversity-friendly landscapes DOI Creative Commons
Teja Tscharntke, Ingo Graß, Thomas Cherico Wanger

et al.

Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 36(10), P. 919 - 930

Published: Aug. 3, 2021

Biodiversity continues to decline rapidly, despite decades of repeated national and international policy efforts. Agricultural intensification is a major driver biodiversity losses, while conversion organic farming has been suggested as key technique halt or reverse this trend.In contrast widespread view, certified agriculture raises local richness species by just third when compared conventional farming. This achieved through waiving synthetic agrochemicals, but leads considerable yield requiring the more land obtain similar yields.Diversifying cropland reducing field size on landscape level can multiply in both without productivity.Complementing such increases heterogeneity with at least 20% seminatural habitat per should be recommendation current frameworks. We challenge appraisal that fundamental alternative for harnessing agricultural landscapes. Certification production largely restricted banning resulting limited benefits high losses ongoing specialisation. In contrast, successful measures enhance include diversifying size, which sustaining yields systems. Achieving landscape-level mosaic natural patches fine-grained diversification promoting large-scale biodiversity. needs urgently acknowledged makers an paradigm shift. decline, implementation conservation conventions, Convention Biological Diversity (1992), UN Decade (2011–2020), many other schemes, had little success [1.Kleijn D. et al.Does farmland contribute halting decline?.Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011; 26: 474-481Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar,2.Pe'er G. al.Adding some green greening: improving EU's ecological focus areas farmers.Conserv. Lett. 2017; 10: 517-530Crossref Scholar]. Agriculture considered main cause global [3.Sánchez-Bayo F. Wyckhuys K.A.G. Worldwide entomofauna: A review its drivers.Biol. Conserv. 2019; 232: 8-27Crossref (919) Scholar, 4.Seibold S. al.Arthropod grasslands forests associated drivers.Nature. 574: 671-674Crossref (306) 5.Lichtenberg E.M. al.A synthesis effects diversified systems arthropod diversity within fields across landscapes.Glob. Chang. Biol. 23: 4946-4957Crossref (123) Scholar], objectives still collide FAO calls higher crop feed world [6.Tscharntke T. al.Global food security, future intensification.Biol. 2012; 151: 53-59Crossref (1050) The model intensification, based agrochemical inputs, large monocultures homogenisation, successfully increased yields, severe ecosystem services, even neighbouring nature reserves Scholar,5.Lichtenberg 6.Tscharntke 7.Kormann U. al.Local management drive trait-mediated nine taxa small grassland fragments.Divers. Distrib. 2015; 21: 1204-1217Crossref (62) Current trends only reversed concerted effort fundamentally redesign landscapes [8.Landis D.A. Designing biodiversity-based services.Basic Appl. 18: 1-12Crossref (262) 9.Grass I. al.Land-sharing/-sparing connectivity services conservation.People Nat. 1: 262-272Google 10.Grass al.Combining land-sparing land-sharing European landscapes.Adv. Res. 2021; 64: 251-303Crossref (14) Scholar]; is, shift agriculture. Certified farming, agrochemicals [11.Seufert V. Ramankutty N. Many shades gray – context-dependent performance agriculture.Sci. Adv. 3e1602638Crossref Scholar] achieve sustainability general particular, often claimed [12.Niggli Sustainability production: challenges innovations.Proc. Nutr. Soc. 74: 83-88Crossref (39) 13.Bosshard A. International Federation Organic Movements IFOAM Guide Landscape Quality Agriculture. IFOAM, 2009Google 14.Geiger al.Persistent negative pesticides biological control potential farmland.Basic 2010; 11: 97-105Crossref (724) However, contribution stop appears exaggerated public perception [15.Hole D.G. benefit biodiversity?.Biol. 2005; 122: 113-130Crossref Scholar,16.Schneider M.K. al.Gains organically farmed are not propagated farm level.Nat. Commun. 2014; 5: 4151Crossref (64) fact, switching from practices [17.Tuck S.L. al.Land-use intensity biodiversity: hierarchical meta-analysis.J. 51: 746-755Crossref (367) so needed produce same amount Scholar,18.Meemken E.-M. Qaim M. agriculture, environment.Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2018; 39-63Crossref (82) Surprisingly, wealth biodiversity-friendly implemented have far poorly adopted [19.Kleijn al.Ecological intensification: bridging gap between science practice.Trends 34: 154-166Abstract (147) 20.Sirami C. al.Increasing enhances multitrophic regions.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 116: 16442-16447Crossref 21.Batary P. al.Landscape-moderated importance hedges conserving bird vs. croplands grasslands.Biol. 143: 2020-2027Crossref (102) 22.Haan N.L. al.Designing arthropod-based North America.Adv. 191-250Crossref (1) 23.Boetzl F.A. multitaxa assessment effectiveness agri-environmental schemes management.Proc. 118: 1-9Crossref (3) Here, we restoring After considering essential propose effective solutions towards friendly ways integrate scales existing well policies. On average, world's crops ~34% abundance ~50% Scholar,24.Bengtsson J. al.The abundance: 42: 261-269Crossref Scholar,25.Smith O.M. al.Landscape context affects systems.Proc. 2020; 117: 2870-2878Crossref (12) plants bees benefitting most arthropods birds smaller degree Benefits also vary type strives environmental benefits, soil fertility biodiversity, prohibits fertilisers, pesticides, genetically modified organisms Scholar,12.Niggli Scholar,26.Mäder al.Soil farming.Science. 2002; 296: 1694-1697Crossref (1744) replacement herbicides mechanical weeding important conservation, because weed cover [27.Roschewitz complexity arable farming.J. 873-882Crossref (283) 28.Clough Y. al.Alpha beta conventionally managed wheat fields.J. 2007; 44: 804-812Crossref (143) 29.Holzschuh al.Agricultural support pollinator diversity.Oikos. 2008; 354-361Crossref 30.Batáry former Iron Curtain drives biodiversity-profit trade-offs German agriculture.Nat. 1279-1284Crossref (69) Practices diversification, fields, manure, low fertiliser input, restoration elements recommended organisations prevalent than farms [31.Fuller R.J. al.Benefits among taxa.Biol. 431-434Crossref (209) Scholar,32.Holzschuh al.Diversity flower-visiting cereal fields: system, composition regional context.J. 41-49Crossref they formal part certification regulations [33.Tscharntke al.Conserving tropical agroforestry scales.Conserv. 8: 14-23Crossref Mainstreaming public, pushed policies NGO activities, play role success, empathy trust schemes. Lastly, products profitable farmers, consumers, governments, pay premium prices Scholar,30.Batáry Scholar,34.Reganold J.P. Wachter J.M. twenty-first century.Nat. Plants. 2016; 2: 1-8Crossref (464) there limitations reduced misconceptions about pesticide use, taxon-specific commercial production. While waste meat consumption security lower additional obstacles [35.Gabriel al.Food comparing agriculture.J. 2013; 50: 355-364Crossref (134) When measured unit necessary defined output (e.g., number kilograms produced) simply hectare wheat), disappear [10.Grass Scholar,36.Kremen Reframing land-sparing/land-sharing debate conservation.Ann. 1355: 52-76Crossref (207) Globally all crops, 19–25% [18.Meemken Vegetables cereals show highest gaps [37.Seufert al.Comparing agriculture.Nature. 485: 229-232Crossref (1006) up 50% decrease [30.Batáry Scholar,35.Gabriel however, fruits oilseed Moreover, it myth principally waive pesticides. Pesticides allowed under labels long derived substances rather ones Widespread insecticides used pyrethrin, chrysanthemum, azadirachtin Asian neem tree. Copper sulfate applied cope fungal bacterial diseases, example, vineyards, orchards, vegetables [38.Nascimbene al.Organic plant vineyard located intensive landscapes.Environ. Manag. 49: 1054-1060Crossref (38) persistent accumulates soils [39.Tamm L. al.Reduktion von Pflanzenschutzmitteln der Schweiz: Beitrag des Biolandbaus.Agrarforschung Schweiz. 52–59Google Natural do much damage [40.Biondi al.Using organic-certified may safer agents: selectivity side 14 predator Orius laevigatus.Chemosphere. 87: 803-812Crossref (305) vast majority rarely treated potatoes, vegetables, hops, grapes, regularly heavily For instance, spraying grapes apples shown less Scholar,39.Tamm Overall, suggests smart application strategies use Integrated Pest Pollinator Management techniques) regardless [14.Geiger Scholar,41.Tscharntke al.When fails pest Five hypotheses.Biol. 204: 449-458Crossref (241) Scholar,42.Müller Impacts sublethal insecticide exposure insects facts knowledge gaps.Basic 30: 1-10Crossref (56) Similarly, harmful overfertilisation occurs mineral manure [43.Klimek al.Additive partitioning respect regime, fertilisation abiotic factors.Basic 9: 626-634Crossref (45) Importantly, spectrum [5.Lichtenberg Scholar,44.Forrest J.R.K. al.Contrasting patterns functional-trait landscape.J. 52: 706-715Crossref noncrop due missing herbicides, whereas mobile, landscape-dependent insect populations Furthermore, applications common great habitats. These habitats hedges, herbaceous boundaries, traditional, uneconomic agroecosystems calcareous orchard meadows [21.Batary Scholar,45.Weibull A.-C. butterflies landscape: system heterogeneity.Ecography. 2000; 743-750Crossref meta-analysis agrienvironment found off-field measures, margins hedgerows, twice in-field [46.Batáry agri-environment management.Conserv. 29: 1006-1016Crossref (419) diversity, butterfly [45.Weibull Increasing hedge length 250 m one 12 species, increasingly intensified, specialised, away idealism enthusiasm original movement (Figure 1). family characterised beginning movement, modern huge monocultures, resembling fields. come sterile greenhouse blocks cultures plastic sheets, covering entire Almeria Province (Spain) heart Europe's where >50% grown proportion increasing over last decade 1.4% 10.3% [47.Dundas Farming "Supersized": An Imperfect Solution Planet?.2019Google Further examples landscape-damaging produced blocks, favourably doubling extending growing seasons, cost [48.Chang greenhouses beyond supply?.Front. Environ. 43-49Crossref above suggest silver bullet Diversifying pollination, Scholar,49.Rosa-Schleich al.Ecological-economic Diversified Systems review.Ecol. 160: 251-263Crossref (41) Scholar,50.Tamburini promotes multiple compromising yield.Sci. 6eaba1715Crossref (Table 1 Table 2). land, particular Europe America, shaped short rotations simplify techniques specialise best-selling products. Diverse dominated after maize maize), three standard sequences wheat, barley, rape [51.Steinmann H.-H. Dobers E.S. Spatio-temporal analysis sequence Northern Germany: implications health protection.J. Plant Dis. Prot. 120: 85-94Crossref (37) Scholar,52.Bennett A.J. al.Meeting demand rotations.Biol. 52-71Crossref (247) Scholar]). simplified deplete soils, promote infestations, resistance applications, risk resource bottlenecks pollinators biocontrol agents [53.Schellhorn N.A. al.Time will tell: continuity bolsters services.Trends 524-530Abstract (133) increase declines [52.Bennett provided mixed pattern alone combined practices, wildflower strips, effectively stability pollination 54.Rundlöf al.Late-season mass-flowering red clover bumble bee queen male densities.Biol. 172: 138-145Crossref 55.Westphal al.Mass flowering improves early colony growth sexual reproduction bumblebees.J. 2009; 46: 187-193Crossref Globally, 15% longer (4.5 instead 3.8 years). Still, average 48% [56.Barbieri farming.Sci. Rep. 7: Diversification multicropping reduce 8–9% [57.Ponisio L.C. al.Diversification gap.Proc. R. B 282: 20141396Crossref could longer, 7-year period [26.Mäder uptake [58.Seufert al.Current contributions system.Agroecosyst. Divers. 2019: 435-452Crossref (7) Instead, trend intensify Scholar,59.Garibaldi L.A. Pérez-Méndez Positive outcomes employment worldwide.Ecol. 164: 106358Crossref (18) Scholar].Table 1Biodiversity scales, illustrated meta-analyses syntheses showing quantified estimatesMeasuresQuantified findingsRefsLocal scaleOff-field vs measuresMeasures areas, roughly enhancing richnes

Language: Английский

Citations

393
Towards better representation of organic agriculture in life cycle assessment DOI
Hayo van Der Werf, Marie Trydeman Knudsen, Christel Cederberg

et al.

Nature Sustainability, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 3(6), P. 419 - 425

Published: March 16, 2020

Language: Английский

Citations

290
Crop genetic erosion: understanding and responding to loss of crop diversity DOI Creative Commons
Colin K. Khoury, Stephen B. Brush, Denise E. Costich

et al.

New Phytologist, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 233(1), P. 84 - 118

Published: Sept. 13, 2021

Summary Crop diversity underpins the productivity, resilience and adaptive capacity of agriculture. Loss this diversity, termed crop genetic erosion, is therefore concerning. While alarms regarding evident declines in have been raised for over a century, magnitude, trajectory, drivers significance these losses remain insufficiently understood. We outline various definitions, measurements, scales sources information on erosion. then provide synthesis evidence changes traditional landraces farms, modern cultivars agriculture, wild relatives their natural habitats resources held conservation repositories. This indicates that marked losses, but also maintenance increases occurred all contexts, extent depending species, taxonomic geographic scale, region, as well analytical approach. discuss steps needed to further advance knowledge around agricultural societal significance, implications, Finally, we propose actions mitigate, stem reverse diversity.

Language: Английский

Citations

253
Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression DOI Creative Commons
Nathan L. Haan, Yajun Zhang, Douglas A. Landis

et al.

Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 35(2), P. 175 - 186

Published: Nov. 5, 2019

Understanding how landscape structure influences pest suppression in crop fields is critical for the design of sustainable agricultural landscapes.New research shows that configuration (spatial arrangement), addition to composition, strongly affects natural enemy and populations, ultimately affecting yield.Natural enemies tend be more abundant fine-grained landscapes (comprising smaller habitat patches) are influenced by connectivity other types.Configuration effects on depend organismal traits relationships between spatial scales at which arthropods disperse those underlying structure.Landscape can affect through multiple indirect effect pathways, need investigation. Arthropod predators parasitoids attack pests, providing a valuable ecosystem service. The amount noncrop surrounding suppression, but synthesis new studies suggests crops habitats similarly important. Natural often comprising patches increase or decrease with habitats. Partitioning organisms has emerged as promising way predict strength direction these effects. Furthermore, our ability configurational will understanding potential among trophic levels relationship arthropod dispersal capability scale structure. In landscapes, predatory parasitic suppress herbivorous an essential service valued billions dollars annually [1Losey J.E. Vaughan M. economic value ecological services provided insects.BioScience. 2006; 56: 311-323Crossref Scopus (954) Google Scholar]. recent decades researchers have begun identify factors driving abundance (see Glossary), effectiveness fields, aim designing managing maximize this [2Gurr G.M. et al.Habitat management populations: progress prospects.Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2017; 62: 91-109Crossref PubMed (210) Scholar, 3Landis D.A. conserve pests agriculture.Ann. 2000; 45: 175-201Crossref (1821) 4Karp D.S. al.Crop exhibit inconsistent responses composition.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2018; 115: E7863-E7870Crossref (191) 5Chaplin-Kramer R. al.A meta-analysis response complexity.Ecol. Lett. 2011; 14: 922-932Crossref (534) Positive outcomes from enhanced could include greater yields, reduced pesticide use, increased diversity landscapes. communities surrounds them: their own, unsuitable some beneficial insects because they usually monocultures undergo frequent disturbance. This means nearby may especially important determining colonize farm fields. Most focused composition (i.e., amounts habitat). general, seminatural provide resources including food, overwintering habitat, nest sites, refuge disturbance, allowing them survive then exploit herbivores accumulate there [3Landis Pest generally thought when surrounded habitat. However, while occurs circumstances, overall inconsistent, varying systems [4Karp Beyond also variation [6Fahrig L. al.Functional heterogeneity animal biodiversity landscapes.Ecol. 101-112Crossref (895) Multiple lines reasoning suggest aspects should suppression. First, since spillover along interfaces [7Rand T.A. al.Spillover edge effects: agriculturally subsidized insect into adjacent habitats.Ecol. 9: 603-614Crossref (404) Scholar], variables such patch size, shape, shared edge, influence far penetrate. Second, require land-cover types benefit complementation [8Dunning J.B. al.Ecological processes populations complex landscapes.Oikos. 1992; 65: 169-175Crossref Evidence now predictor [5Chaplin-Kramer 9Duarte G.T. al.The patterns services: meta-analyses services.Landscape Ecol. 33: 1247-1257Crossref (56) rate publication topic been accelerating. Therefore, here we highlight advances knowledge identifying gaps suggesting frameworks future studies. Thirty-three studies, 70% were published 2014, evidence (Figure 1). All two reported significant least one variable related highly context dependent Supplements S1 S2 supplemental information online details each study). Configuration multifaceted, describing characteristics arrangement) landscape. it difficult encapsulate succinctly quantified using dozens intercorrelated sometimes redundant metrics [10McGarigal K. Marks B.J. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program Quantifying Landscape Structure. US Department Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, 1995Crossref 11Kupfer J.A. ecology biogeography: rethinking post-FRAGSTATS landscape.Prog. Phys. Geog. 2012; 36: 400-420Crossref (164) 12Li H. Wu J. Use misuse indices.Lands. 2004; 19: 389-399Crossref (566) range use obscure broader patterns; therefore, generalize, group three families: (i) grain size; (ii) shape complexity; (iii) connectivity. Landscapes fall spectrum complexity coarse-grained large low density edges small relatively edges. expected because, emerge field margins reach interiors easily. higher cover likely within foraging generalist enemies. Some focus length per unit area) useful index although relate complexity, general used describe size rather than [13Martin E.A. al.Scale-dependent diversity, herbivory, yields.Ecol. App. 2016; 26: 448-462Crossref (58) 14Martin interplay configuration: pathways manage functional agroecosystem across Europe.Ecol. 2019; 22: 1083-1094Crossref (105) 15Elliott N.C. al.Influence within-field aphid predator wheat.Landsc. 1998; 139-252Google 16Elliott al.Predator alfalfa relation aphids, vegetation, matrix.Environ. 2002; 31: 253-260Crossref (69) Others where dominant type, main factor grain. There strong enhance enemies, not always consistent. most comprehensive date, Martin al. Scholar] found varied 35 South Korean various types. Syrphids, parasitoids, wasps, staphylinids densities, dwarfed same insectivorous wasps wheat [17Holzschuh al.How do configuration, organic farming fallow strips bees, parasitoids?.J. Anim. 2010; 79: 491-500Crossref (187) cucumber [18Ulina E.S. al.Does tropical parasitoid host-parasitoid interactions?.Agricult. 21: 318-325Google coccinellids rice [19Dominik C. al.Landscape interactions agroecosystems.J. Appl. 55: 2461-2472Crossref (28) North America, appears similar cereal crops, chrysomelids, nabids, richness [15Elliott results taxa, soybeans grains 20Woltz J.M. Landis Coccinellid configuration.Agric. 2014; 16: 341-349Crossref (27) 21Honek Factors determine adult aphidophagous Coccinellidae (Coleoptera).Zeit. fur Angew. Ent. 1982; 94: 157-168Crossref (41) 22Puech al.Do practices scale?.Landsc. 2015; 30: 125-140Crossref (44) spiders [23Schmidt al.Local landscape-scale spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) activity abundance: implications interactions.Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 272: 86-94Crossref (16) 24Galle management, position drive carabids.J. 63-72Crossref (37) 25Galle al.Small-scale promote spider ground beetle densities offering suitable sites.Landsc. 1435-1446Crossref (22) 26Li X. al.Different epigaeic carabid beetles environmental conditions semi-natural intensively cultivated landscape.Agricult. Ecosys. 264: 54-62Crossref (19) carabids 27Al Hassan D. presence grassy distribution aphids predators?.Agricult. 2013; 15: 24-33Crossref (24) crops. Compelling trends partitioned according traits, particularly mode. Recently, data over 1500 European (49 studies) analyzed together, revealing outside density. pattern held true flying ground-dispersing wind-dispersers. For taxa overwinter was opposite: tended and/or Importantly, masked considered group; only mode [14Martin We herbivores, rates damage, yield. biased toward 1), variously finer-grained 19Dominik 23Schmidt fewer [27Al [28Baillod A.B. al.Landscape-scale temporal cropland biological control aphids.J. 54: 1804-1813Crossref (39) showed no [29Elliott parasitism Lysiphlebus testaceipes (Hymenoptera: Aphidiinae) fields.Environ. 47: 803-811Crossref (10) 30Plecas aphid-parasitoid-hyperparasitoid differentially years.Agriculture 183: 1-10Crossref (68) Europe provides clarity; decreased density, whereas mostly unaffected Only few tested actual Tests predation again mixed detected 31Grez A.A. fields.Biol. Control. 76: 1-9Crossref (25) notable developments linking yields managed conventionally (although damage increased), organically. had yield, depending present. Habitat simple complex. contexts, elements rectangular, others, cover-type boundaries follow tortuous paths, resulting irregular convoluted shapes. Shape feasibly suppression: area interface habitats, Firm yet emerge. Models areas hedgerows would [32Bianchi F.J.J.A. Van Der Werf W. hibernation sites Coccinella septempunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) landscapes: simulation study.Environ. 2003; 32: 1290-1304Crossref (59) indeed study fractal dimension focal experimental broccoli planted either square I-shaped Chile, coccinellid [33Grez Prado E. Effect plant vegetation dynamics prey Brevicoryne brassicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae).Environ. 29: 1244-1250Crossref Similarly, Midwest USA difference linear tallgrass prairie blocks equivalent [34Cox impact soybean catchments.Environ. 43: 1185-1197Crossref agroecosystems Philippines, linyphiid spiders, trichogrammatid increased, several and, overall, neither nor affected More needed whether predictable ways shapes movement subject keen interest debate time [35Haddad N.M. al.Corridor diverse taxa.Ecology. 84: 609-615Crossref (287) 36MacArthur R.H. Wilson E.O. Theory Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, 1967Google simplest form connectivity, relates distance specific its surroundings. clear type abundance, depends utility organism question. woody appear proximity forest: apple orchards, cases, [37Bailey al.Effects isolation fragmented traditional orchards.J. 1003-1013Crossref (86) Scholar]; similarly, ants coffee close forest, although, opposite [38Karungi al.Relating shading hemipteran occurrence coffee.J. 139: 669-678Crossref Finally, cherry trees harbored connected forests, [39Schuepp plant-herbivore-enemy trees.Biol. 71: 56-64Crossref rely irrelevant [40Ferrante al.Predators spill forest fragments maize mosaic central Argentina.Ecol. Evol. 7: 7699-7707Crossref even detrimental. example, sun-grown Brazilian suppressed adapted open case, distances [41Aristizabal N. Metzger J.P. regulates sun farms.J. 21-30Crossref (21) oilseed rape effective isolated forests [42Berger J.S. herbivore-parasitoid rape.J. 91: 1093-1105Crossref (6) know less about herbivores. richness, Effects mixed, increasing coccid pseudococcid bugs decreasing On trees, change arrangement without regard field. if possible that, interconnected another, sustain larger overall. study, syrphid flies [43Haenke drives local fly abundance.J. 51: 505-513Crossref irrigated agroecosystems, flooded impounded vegetated embankments (bunds) harboring physical network bunds mirid tomato surroundings connected; however, orchard opposite, perhaps insecticide [44Aviron colonization protected horticultural cropping systems.Agric. 227: (20) responded positively grasslands winter [45Aviron al.Connectivity cropped vs. mediates biodiversity: case communities.Agric. 268: 34-43Crossref (11) constrained by, correlated with, composition. confounded another many respective disentangle

Language: Английский

Citations

187
Crop cover is more important than rotational diversity for soil multifunctionality and cereal yields in European cropping systems DOI
Gina Garland, Anna Edlinger, Samiran Banerjee

et al.

Nature Food, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 2(1), P. 28 - 37

Published: Jan. 13, 2021

Language: Английский

Citations

185
Agroecology for adaptation to climate change and resource depletion in the Mediterranean region. A review DOI
Eduardo Aguilera, Cipriano Díaz-Gaona,

Raquel García-Laureano

et al.

Agricultural Systems, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 181, P. 102809 - 102809

Published: March 13, 2020

Language: Английский

Citations

162
Organic amendments enhance soil microbial diversity, microbial functionality and crop yields: A meta-analysis DOI

Xiangyang Shu,

Jia He, Zhenghu Zhou

et al.

The Science of The Total Environment, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 829, P. 154627 - 154627

Published: March 17, 2022

Language: Английский

Citations

154
Complex agricultural landscapes host more biodiversity than simple ones: A global meta-analysis DOI Creative Commons
Natalia Estrada-Carmona, Andrea C. Sánchez, Roseline Remans

et al.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 119(38)

Published: Sept. 12, 2022

Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity conservation requires profound structural changes worldwide. Often, discussions are centered on management at the field level. However, a wide and growing body of evidence calls for zooming out targeting policies, research, interventions landscape level halt reverse decline in biodiversity, increase biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services landscapes, improve resilience adaptability these ecosystems. We conducted most comprehensive assessment date complexity effects nondomesticated terrestrial through meta-analysis 1,134 effect sizes from 157 peer-reviewed articles. Increasing composition, configuration, or heterogeneity significatively positively affects biodiversity. More complex host more (richness, abundance, evenness) with potential benefits sustainable production conservation, likely underestimated. The few articles that assessed combined contribution linear (e.g., hedgerows) areal woodlots) elements resulted near-doubling (i.e., level) compared dominant number studies measuring separately. Similarly, positive stronger monitoring least 2 y 1-y efforts. Besides, exist when occurs nonoverlapping highlighting need long-term robustly designed Living harmony nature will require shifting paradigms toward valuing promoting multifunctional agriculture farm levels research agenda untangles landscapes’ contributions people under current future conditions.

Language: Английский

Citations

147
Global synthesis of effects of plant species diversity on trophic groups and interactions DOI
Nian‐Feng Wan,

Xiang-Rong Zheng,

Liwan Fu

et al.

Nature Plants, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 6(5), P. 503 - 510

Published: May 4, 2020

Language: Английский

Citations

140
Contrasting responses of above- and belowground diversity to multiple components of land-use intensity DOI Creative Commons
Gaëtane Le Provost, J. Thiele, Catrin Westphal

et al.

Nature Communications, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 12(1)

Published: June 24, 2021

Abstract Land-use intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss. However, understanding how different components land use drive loss requires the investigation multiple trophic levels across spatial scales. Using data from 150 agricultural grasslands in central Europe, we assess influence local- and landscape-level on more than 4,000 above- belowground taxa, spanning 20 groups. Plot-level land-use intensity strongly negatively associated with aboveground groups, but positively or not Meanwhile, both groups respond to use, drivers: diversity promoted by diverse surrounding land-cover, while related high permanent forest cover landscape. These results highlight role shaping communities, suggest that revised agroecosystem management strategies are needed conserve whole-ecosystem biodiversity.

Language: Английский

Citations

127