You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Quantifying the impact of environmental factors on arthropod communities in agricultural landscapes across organizational levels and spatial scales

  1. O. SCHWEIGER1,*,
  2. J. P. MAELFAIT2,
  3. W. VAN WINGERDEN3,
  4. F. HENDRICKX2,
  5. R. BILLETER4,
  6. M. SPEELMANS2,
  7. I. AUGENSTEIN5,
  8. B. AUKEMA6,
  9. S. AVIRON7,
  10. D. BAILEY7,
  11. R. BUKACEK8,
  12. F. BUREL9,
  13. T. DIEKÖTTER5,
  14. J. DIRKSEN3,
  15. M. FRENZEL1,
  16. F. HERZOG7,
  17. J LIIRA10,
  18. M. ROUBALOVA11,
  19. R. BUGTER3

Article first published online: 3 OCT 2005

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01085.x

Issue

Journal of Applied Ecology

Journal of Applied Ecology

Volume 42, Issue 6, pages 1129–1139, December 2005

Additional Information

How to Cite

SCHWEIGER, O., MAELFAIT, J. P., VAN WINGERDEN, W., HENDRICKX, F., BILLETER, R., SPEELMANS, M., AUGENSTEIN, I., AUKEMA, B., AVIRON, S., BAILEY, D., BUKACEK, R., BUREL, F., DIEKÖTTER, T., DIRKSEN, J., FRENZEL, M., HERZOG, F., LIIRA, J., ROUBALOVA, M. and BUGTER, R. (2005), Quantifying the impact of environmental factors on arthropod communities in agricultural landscapes across organizational levels and spatial scales. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42: 1129–1139. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01085.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    UFZ, Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, D-06210 Halle, Germany;

  2. 2

    Institute of Nature Conservation, Kliniekstraat 25, 1070 Brussels and Terrestrial Ecology Unit (TEREC), Department Biology, Ghent University, KL Ledeganckstraat 35, 9000 Gent, Belgium;

  3. 3

    Alterra Green World Research, Landscape Centre, PO Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, the Netherlands;

  4. 4

    ETH Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Geobotanical Institute, Zürichbergstr. 38, CH-8044 Zurich, Switzerland;

  5. 5

    UFZ, Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, Department of Applied Landscape Ecology, Permoserstr. 15, D-04318 Leipzig, Germany;

  6. 6

    Plant Protection Service, Section Entomology, PO Box 9102, 6700 HC Wageningen, the Netherlands;

  7. 7

    Agroscope FAL Reckenholz, Swiss Federal Research Station for Agroecology and Agriculture, Reckenholzstrasse 191, CH-8046 Zurich, Switzerland;

  8. 8

    Nature Conservation Authority, Department of Informatics, Nuselská 39, CZ-14000, Praha 4, Czech Republic;

  9. 9

    UMR Ecobio, Université de Rennes 1, Avenue du Général Leclerc, 35042, Rennes, Cedex, France;

  10. 10

    Institute of Botany and Ecology, University of Tartu, Lai 40, Tartu, EE51005, Estonia; and

  11. 11

    Institute of Forest Ecosystem Research, 254 01 Jílové u Prahy 1544, Czech Republic

* Oliver Schweiger, UFZ, Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, D-06210 Halle, Germany (fax +49 34555 85329; e-mail oliver.schweiger@ufz.de).

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 23 NOV 2005
  2. Article first published online: 3 OCT 2005
  3. Received 17 December 2004; final copy received 14 June 2005 Editor: Paul Giller

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (302K)

Keywords:

  • biodiversity;
  • community structure;
  • functional groups;
  • landscape structure;
  • partial canonical correspondence analysis;
  • variation partitioning

Summary

  • 1
    In landscapes influenced by anthropogenic activities, such as intensive agriculture, knowledge of the relative importance and interaction of environmental factors on the composition and function of local communities across a range of spatial scales is important for maintaining biodiversity.
  • 2
    We analysed five arthropod taxa covering a broad range of functional aspects (wild bees, true bugs, carabid beetles, hoverflies and spiders) in 24 landscapes (4 × 4 km) across seven European countries along gradients of both land-use intensity and landscape structure. Species–environment relationships were examined in a hierarchical design of four main sets of environmental factors (country, land-use intensity, landscape structure, local habitat properties) that covered three spatial scales (region, landscape, local) by means of hierarchical variability partitioning using partial canonical correspondence analyses.
  • 3
    Local community composition and the distribution of body size classes and trophic guilds were most affected by regional processes, which highly confounded landscape and local factors. After correcting for regional effects, factors at the landscape scale dominated over local habitat factors. Land-use intensity explained most of the variability in species data, whereas landscape characteristics (especially connectivity) accounted for most of the variability in body size and trophic guilds.
  • 4
    Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that management effort should be focused on land-use intensity and habitat connectivity in order to enhance diversity in agricultural landscapes. Since these factors are largely independent, specific conservation programmes may be developed with regards to socio-economic and agri-environmental requirements. Changes in either of these factors will enhance diversity but will also result in specific effects on local communities related to dispersal ability and the resource use of species.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (302K)