The representation and functional composition of carabid and staphylinid beetles in different field boundary types at a farm-scale

被引:29
作者
Griffiths, Georgianne J. K.
Winder, Linton
Holland, John M.
Thomas, C. F. George
Williams, Eirene
机构
[1] Univ Plymouth Seale Hayne, Sch Biol Sci, Newton Abbot TQ12 6NQ, Devon, England
[2] Univ S Pacific, Sch Pure & Appl Sci, Dept Biol, Suva, Fiji
[3] Game Conservancy Trust, Fordingbridge, Hants, England
基金
英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
biodiversity; functional diversity; complementarity; dispersal; heterogeneity;
D O I
10.1016/j.biocon.2006.09.016
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
At the farm-scale, hedgerow, degraded hedgerow and fence field boundary types were sampled for overwintering carabid and staphylinid beetles. Distinct beetle assemblages were evident and the structural and botanical characteristics of the boundary types were good explanatory factors of the differences. Each field boundary type supported unique species not found elsewhere; nine species were contributed by hedgerows alone and six species each from degraded hedgerows and fences. Using a systematic complementary site selection method we determined that all field boundary types were of equal importance for full representation of carabid and staphylinid species at the farm-scale. Additionally, fence habitats supported generalist predators of crop pests in greatest densities, whilst degraded hedgerows were most valuable in providing refuge to species vulnerable to disturbance and habitat fragmentation. Contrary to expectation, woodland species were not more evident in hedgerows than either degraded boundaries or fence habitat. This study provides empirical evidence that some components of biodiversity and sustainable farming are best maintained by retaining habitat heterogeneity, including features currently considered of limited conservation value. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:145 / 152
页数:8
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   CATCHES IN PITFALL TRAPS IN RELATION TO MEAN DENSITIES OF CARABID BEETLES [J].
BAARS, MA .
OECOLOGIA, 1979, 41 (01) :25-46
[2]  
Barr C.J., 1993, Countryside Survey 1990-Main Report
[3]   Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? [J].
Benton, TG ;
Vickery, JA ;
Wilson, JD .
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2003, 18 (04) :182-188
[4]   Comparative biodiversity along a gradient of agricultural landscapes [J].
Burel, F ;
Baudry, J ;
Butet, A ;
Clergeau, P ;
Delettre, Y ;
Le Coeur, D ;
Dubs, F ;
Morvan, N ;
Paillat, G ;
Petit, S ;
Thenail, C ;
Brunel, E ;
Lefeuvre, JC .
ACTA OECOLOGICA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 1998, 19 (01) :47-60
[5]   TIME LAGS BETWEEN SPATIAL PATTERN CHANGES AND SPECIES DISTRIBUTION CHANGES IN DYNAMIC LANDSCAPES [J].
BUREL, F .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 1993, 24 (1-4) :161-166
[6]   Landscape structure effects on carabid beetles spatial patterns in western France [J].
Burel, Francoise .
LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 1989, 2 (04) :215-226
[7]  
CHIVERTON PA, 1988, ENTOMOL EXP APPL, V47, P173, DOI 10.1007/BF00367484
[8]   Habitat establishment on arable land: assessment of an agri-environment scheme in England, UK [J].
Critchley, CNR ;
Allen, DS ;
Fowbert, JA ;
Mole, AC ;
Gundrey, AL .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2004, 119 (04) :429-442
[9]  
Curry D, 2002, FARMING FOOD SUSTAIN
[10]  
*DEFRA, 2006, COUNTR STEW SCH