Contrasting success in the restoration of plant and phytophagous beetle assemblages of species-rich mesotrophic grasslands

Over the last 60 years changes to the management of species-rich mesotrophic grasslands have resulted in the large-scale loss and degradation of this habitat across Europe. Restoration of such grasslands on agriculturally improved pastures provides a potentially valuable approach to the conservation of these threatened areas. Over a four-year period a replicated block design was used to test the effects of seed addition (green hay spreading and brush harvest collection) and soil disturbance on the restoration of phytophagous beetle and plant communities. Patterns of increasing restoration success, particularly where hay spreading and soil disturbance were used in combination, were identified for the phytophagous beetles. In the case of the plants, however, initial differences in restoration success in response to these same treatments were not followed by subsequent temporal changes in plant community similarity to target mesotrophic grassland. It is possible that the long-term consequences of the management treatments would not be the establishment of beetle and plant communities characteristic of the targets for restoration. Restoration management to enhance plant establishment using hay spreading and soil disturbance techniques would, however, still increase community similarity in both taxa to that of species-rich mesotrophic grasslands, and so raise their conservation value.

Effects of grazing management on beetle and plant assemblages during the re-creation of a flood-plain meadow

Flood-plain meadows (Alopecurus-Sanguisorba grassland) are a floristically rich community of conservation importance throughout Europe. Declines in their distribution due in part to modern farming practices mean they now cover less than 1500 ha in the UK. To investigate the effect of grazing regime during the re-creation of this grassland type, target plant species were sown onto ex-arable land during 1985. Traditional management, based on a July hay cut followed by aftermath grazing was subsequently instigated, and the site was divided into replicated grazing regimes of cattle, sheep and an un-grazed control. Plant and beetle assemblages were sampled and compared to those of target flood-plain meadows and improved grassland communities. Within the re-creation treatments the absence of aftermath grazing reduced beetle abundances and species richness. Assemblages of plants were closest to that of the target flood-plain meadow under sheep grazing, although this differed little from cattle grazing. Beetle species assemblages and functional group structure were, however, closest to the target grassland under cattle grazing. For all taxa the greatest resilience to succession to the target flood-plain meadow occurred when grazing was not part of the management prescription. Although successful re-creation had not been achieved for either the plants or beetles, cutting followed by aftermath cattle grazing has provided the best management to date. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The potential of grass field margin management for enhancing beetle diversity in intensive livestock farms

1. Declining populations of UK grassland flora and fauna have been attributed to intensification of agricultural management practices, including changes in cutting, fertilizer, grazing and drainage regimes. We aimed to develop field margin management practices that could reverse declines in intensively managed grassland biodiversity that would have application in the UK and Europe. Here we focus on one aspect of grassland biodiversity, the beetles. 2. In four intensively managed livestock farms in south-west England, 10-m wide field margins in existing grasslands were managed to create seven treatments of increasing sward architectural complexity. This was achieved through combinations of inorganic (NPK) fertilizer, cattle grazing, and timing and height of cutting. To examine the potential influence of complexity on faunal diversity, beetles were identified to species level from suction samples taken between 2003 and 2005, and their assemblage structure was related to margin management, floral assemblages and sward architecture. 3. Beetle abundance, and species richness and evenness were influenced by margin management treatment and its interaction with year. Correlations with sward architecture and the percentage cover of dominant forbs and grasses were also found. Functional groups of the beetles showed different responses to the management treatments. In particular, higher proportional abundances of seed/flower-feeding guilds were found in treatments not receiving NPK fertilizer. 4. The assemblage structure was shown to respond to margin management treatments, sward architecture and the percentage cover of dominant forbs and grasses. The most extensively managed treatments were characterized by distinct successional trajectories from the control treatment. 5. Synthesis and applications. This study provides management options suitable for use within agri-environment schemes intended to improve faunal diversity associated with intensively managed lowland grasslands. Field margins receiving either no management or a single July silage cut were shown to support greater abundances and species richness of beetles, although subtler modifications of conventional management may also be beneficial, for example the absence of NPK fertilizer while maintaining grazing and silage cutting systems.

Grazing management of calcareous grasslands and its implications for the conservation of beetle communities

Calcareous grasslands are an important habitat for floral and faunal communities in the UK and Europe. Declines due to changes in management, scrub invasion and agricultural improvement have left much of the remnants of this habitat in a degraded and fragmented state. Grazing, by cattle or sheep, is one of the main management practices used to maintain and improve the floral and faunal quality of calcareous grassland. The long-term impacts of different grazing regimes, however, are poorly understood, particularly in terms of the invertebrate communities. This study contrasted the impacts of recently introduced and long-term sheep or cattle grazing on beetle communities present on one of the largest areas of calcareous grassland in Europe, the Salisbury Plain military training Area, UK. No effects of grazing management on beetle abundance, species. richness or evenness were found, but plant diversity and overall percentage cover of grasses did influence beetle diversity. Proportions of the total number of individuals and overall species richness within beetle guilds (predatory, phytophagous, flower/seed feeders, root feeders and foliage feeders) were strongly influenced by both the duration and type of grazing animal. At the species level, beetle community structure showed significant differences between ungrazed, long-term cattle and long-term sheep grazing treatments. Changes in plant community structure were found to influence beetle community structure. The significance of these results is discussed in terms of the long-term impacts of grazing on beetle community structure, and the benefits of different grazing regimes for the conservation management of calcareous grasslands. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Establishing field margins to promote beetle conservation in arable farms

This study investigates the function of non-cropped field margins in arable farming systems for enhancing the biodiversity value of beetle communities. Three different sown seed mixtures were used to establish field margins, a Countryside Stewardship mix, a fine grass and forbs mix and a tussock grass and forbs mix. The structure of beetle communities in the first full year of establishment was found to show no difference between the tussock grass and Countryside Stewardship margins. However, both differed from the fine grass margins, which supported lower overall abundance and species richness of beetles. This was attributed to small-scale architectural differences between species of fine and tussock grasses, rather than differences in plant composition. Body size distributions of beetles showed distinct similarities between the Countryside Stewardship and tussock margins. A greater abundance of large beetles was found in fine grass margins, although in all cases these body size distributions were attributed to a small number of species or a taxonomically distinct group. All three margin types included beetle species of conservation value. The importance of these results was discussed in the context of the value of these seed mixtures for invertebrate conversation. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Effects of seed mixture and management on beetle assemblages of arable field margins

Beetle assemblages and their response to plant community composition and architectural structure were monitored from 2002 to 2006 within arable field margins. Field margins were sown with either tussock grass and forbs, fine grass and forbs or grass only seed mixtures. After an establishment year, field margins were managed using standard sward cuts, scarification, or graminicide application. For predatory beetles, overall density was greatest where tussock grasses were included within the seed mixtures, while the densities of phytophagous beetles were greatest where forbs were present. Unexpectedly, species rarefaction curves suggested that phytophagous beetle species richness was greatest where field margins were established using a grass only seed mixture. The structure of the beetle assemblages, i.e., the relative abundances of individual species, was largely dependent on seed mixture, although margin management also played an important role. The results suggest that field margins established using seed mixtures containing tussock grasses and forbs would be expected to provide the greatest resources for beetles, at least at local scales. However, the use of a single standardised seed mixture for margin establishment would result in a homogenisation of beetle assemblages at a regional scale. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.