Adding value to the urban lawnscape: insect abundance and diversity in grass-free lawns

Insect diversity may be declining even more rapidly than in plants and vertebrates, particularly in areas where indigenous habitats are replaced by an anthropogenic one. The most common component of anthropogenic greenspace is the ornamental lawn. Intensively managed and offering limited habitat opportunities for both plants and insects, lawns are biodiversity poor and ecologically insensitive. An alternative lawn format that positively influences biodiversity and reduces management requirements would be a useful tool in eco-friendly urban greenspace management. In investigating the potential for a forb-only alternative to the grass lawn we sampled both trial grass-free lawn formats and turf lawns to identify any influence that lawn composition and grass-free lawn specific mowing regimes might have on the abundance and diversity of insect families. In addition to the mowing regimes, both the composition and origin of lawn flora were found to significantly influence insect abundance and diversity and these factors rarely interacted. Native-only and mixed origin grass-free lawns hosted greater numbers of adult insects than found in turf and an equivalent diversity of insect families, however the mowing regime applied was distinct from traditional turf lawn management by being substantially less intensive and our results suggest that there is the potential for even greater abundance and diversity via the grass-free format that may offer additional resources to insectivorous garden species such as birds. When the composition of grass-free lawns included native forbs the diversity of insect families was found be sufficiently different from turf lawns to form distinct assemblages and in so doing contribute to beta diversity within urban greenspace. In sum, grass-free lawns may be a useful and aesthetically appropriate tool for adding value to the generally biodiversity poor urban lawnscape.

Creating and implementing a biodiversity recording app for teaching and research in environmental studies

This case study reports on the development of a bespoke mobile recording app for collating records of biodiversity sightings on a University campus. This innovative project was achieved through a multi-disciplinary partnership of staff and students. It is hoped that the app itself will benefit lecturers by streamlining data collection during teaching and learning activities, whilst engaging students and highlighting the wealth of diversity available on campus

Conservation assessments and Red Listing of the endemic Moroccan flora (monocotyledons)

Morocco constitutes an important centre of plant diversity and speciation in the Mediterranean Basin. However, numerous species are threatened by issues ranging from human activities to global climatic change. In this study, we present the conservation assessments and Red Listing of the endemic Moroccan monocotyledons according to International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) criteria and categories. For each species, we include basic taxonomic information, local names and synonyms, uses, a distribution map, extent of occurrence, area of occupancy, population size and trend, a description of habitats and ecological requirements, and a discussion of the threats affecting the species and habitats. We assessed the threatened status of the endemic Moroccan monocotyledons at the species level (59 species) using the IUCN Red List criteria and categories (Version 3.1). This study shows the high extinction risk to the Moroccan monocotyledon flora, with 95% of threatened species (20% Critically Endangered, 50% Endangered, 25% Vulnerable) and only 5% not threatened (2% Near Threatened and 3% Least Concern). The flora is thus of conservation concern, which is poorly recognized, both nationally and internationally. The study presents the first part and so far the only national IUCN Red Data List for a large group of Moroccan plants, and thus provides an overview of the threatened Moroccan flora. This IUCN Red List is an important first step towards the recognition of the danger to Moroccan biodiversity hotspots, conservation of threatened species and the raising of public awareness at national and international levels.

Where is the UK's pollinator biodiversity? The importance of urban areas for flower-visiting insects

Insect pollinators provide a crucial ecosystem service, but are under threat. Urban areas could be important for pollinators, though their value relative to other habitats is poorly known. We compared pollinator communities using quantified flower-visitation networks in 36 sites (each 1 km2) in three landscapes: urban, farmland and nature reserves. Overall, flower-visitor abundance and species richness did not differ significantly between the three landscape types. Bee abundance did not differ between landscapes, but bee species richness was higher in urban areas than farmland. Hoverfly abundance was higher in farmland and nature reserves than urban sites, but species richness did not differ significantly. While urban pollinator assemblages were more homogeneous across space than those in farmland or nature reserves, there was no significant difference in the numbers of rarer species between the three landscapes. Network-level specialization was higher in farmland than urban sites. Relative to other habitats, urban visitors foraged from a greater number of plant species (higher generality) but also visited a lower proportion of available plant species (higher specialization), both possibly driven by higher urban plant richness. Urban areas are growing, and improving their value for pollinators should be part of any national strategy to conserve and restore pollinators.

Social and ecological drivers of success in agri-environment schemes: the roles of farmers and environmental context

1. Agri-environment schemes remain a controversial approach to reversing biodiversity losses, partly because the drivers of variation in outcomes are poorly understood. In particular, there is a lack of studies that consider both social and ecological factors. 2. We analysed variation across 48 farms in the quality and biodiversity outcomes of agri-environmental habitats designed to provide pollen and nectar for bumblebees and butterflies or winter seed for birds. We used interviews and ecological surveys to gather data on farmer experience and understanding of agri-environment schemes, and local and landscape environmental factors. 3. Multimodel inference indicated social factors had a strong impact on outcomes and that farmer experiential learning was a key process. The quality of the created habitat was affected positively by the farmer’s previous experience in environmental management. The farmer’s confidence in their ability to carry out the required management was negatively related to the provision of floral resources. Farmers with more wildlife-friendly motivations tended to produce more floral resources, but fewer seed resources. 4. Bird, bumblebee and butterfly biodiversity responses were strongly affected by the quantity of seed or floral resources. Shelter enhanced biodiversity directly, increased floral resources and decreased seed yield. Seasonal weather patterns had large effects on both measures. Surprisingly, larger species pools and amounts of semi-natural habitat in the surrounding landscape had negative effects on biodiversity, which may indicate use by fauna of alternative foraging resources. 5. Synthesis and application. This is the first study to show a direct role of farmer social variables on the success of agri-environment schemes in supporting farmland biodiversity. It suggests that farmers are not simply implementing agri-environment options, but are learning and improving outcomes by doing so. Better engagement with farmers and working with farmers who have a history of environmental management may therefore enhance success. The importance of a number of environmental factors may explain why agri-environment outcomes are variable, and suggests some – such as the weather – cannot be controlled. Others, such as shelter, could be incorporated into agri-environment prescriptions. The role of landscape factors remains complex and currently eludes simple conclusions about large-scale targeting of schemes.

Intensive agriculture reduces soil biodiversity across Europe

Soil biodiversity plays a key role in regulating the processes that underpin the delivery of ecosystem goods and services in terrestrial ecosystems. Agricultural intensification is known to change the diversity of individual groups of soil biota, but less is known about how intensification affects biodiversity of the soil food web as a whole, and whether or not these effects may be generalized across regions. We examined biodiversity in soil food webs from grasslands, extensive, and intensive rotations in four agricultural regions across Europe: in Sweden, the UK, the Czech Republic and Greece. Effects of land-use intensity were quantified based on structure and diversity among functional groups in the soil food web, as well as on community-weighted mean body mass of soil fauna. We also elucidate land-use intensity effects on diversity of taxonomic units within taxonomic groups of soil fauna. We found that between regions soil food web diversity measures were variable, but that increasing land-use intensity caused highly consistent responses. In particular, land-use intensification reduced the complexity in the soil food webs, as well as the community-weighted mean body mass of soil fauna. In all regions across Europe, species richness of earthworms, Collembolans, and oribatid mites was negatively affected by increased land-use intensity. The taxonomic distinctness, which is a measure of taxonomic relatedness of species in a community that is independent of species richness, was also reduced by land-use intensification. We conclude that intensive agriculture reduces soil biodiversity, making soil food webs less diverse and composed of smaller bodied organisms. Land-use intensification results in fewer functional groups of soil biota with fewer and taxonomically more closely related species. We discuss how these changes in soil biodiversity due to land-use intensification may threaten the functioning of soil in agricultural production systems.

Biogeochemical cycles and biodiversity as key drivers of ecosystem services provided by soils

Soils play a pivotal role in major global biogeochemical cycles (carbon, nutrient and water), while hosting the largest diversity of organisms on land. Because of this, soils deliver fundamental ecosystem services, and management to change a soil process in support of one ecosystem service can either provide co-benefits to other services or can result in trade-offs. In this critical review, we report the state-of-the-art understanding concerning the biogeochemical cycles and biodiversity in soil, and relate these to the provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural ecosystem services which they underpin. We then outline key knowledge gaps and research challenges, before providing recommendations for management activities to support the continued delivery of ecosystem services from soils. We conclude that although there are knowledge gaps that require further research, enough is known to start improving soils globally. The main challenge is in finding ways to share knowledge with soil managers and policy-makers, so that best-practice management can be implemented. A key element of this knowledge sharing must be in raising awareness of the multiple ecosystem services underpinned by soils, and the natural capital they provide. The International Year of Soils in 2015 presents the perfect opportunity to begin a step-change in how we harness scientific knowledge to bring about more sustainable use of soils for a secure global society.

A sustainable agricultural landscape for Australia: A review of interlacing carbon sequestration, biodiversity and salinity management in agroforestry systems

Transformation of the south-western Australian landscape from deep-rooted woody vegetation systems to shallow-rooted annual cropping systems has resulted in the severe loss of biodiversity and this loss has been exacerbated by rising ground waters that have mobilised stored salts causing extensive dry land salinity. Since the original plant communities were mostly perennial and deep rooted, the model for sustainable agriculture and landscape water management invariably includes deep rooted trees. Commercial forestry is however only economical in higher rainfall (>700 mm yr−1) areas whereas much of the area where biodiversity is threatened has lower rainfall (300–700 mm yr−1). Agroforestry may provide the opportunity to develop new agricultural landscapes that interlace ecosystem services such as carbon mitigation via carbon sequestration and biofuels, biodiversity restoration, watershed management while maintaining food production. Active markets are developing for some of these ecosystem services, however a lack of predictive metrics and the regulatory environment are impeding the adoption of several ecosystem services. Nonetheless, a clear opportunity exists for four major issues – the maintenance of food and fibre production, salinisation, biodiversity decline and climate change mitigation – to be managed at a meaningful scale and a new, sustainable agricultural landscape to be developed.

Biogeochemical cycles and biodiversity as key drivers of ecosystem services provided by soils

Soils play a pivotal role in major global biogeochemical cycles (carbon, nutrient, and water), while hosting the largest diversity of organisms on land. Because of this, soils deliver fundamental ecosystem services, and management to change a soil process in support of one ecosystem service can either provide co-benefits to other services or result in trade-offs. In this critical review, we report the state-of-the-art understanding concerning the biogeochemical cycles and biodiversity in soil, and relate these to the provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural ecosystem services which they underpin. We then outline key knowledge gaps and research challenges, before providing recommendations for management activities to support the continued delivery of ecosystem services from soils. We conclude that, although soils are complex, there are still knowledge gaps, and fundamental research is still needed to better understand the relationships between different facets of soils and the array of ecosystem services they underpin, enough is known to implement best practices now. There is a tendency among soil scientists to dwell on the complexity and knowledge gaps rather than to focus on what we do know and how this knowledge can be put to use to improve the delivery of ecosystem services. A significant challenge is to find effective ways to share knowledge with soil managers and policy makers so that best management can be implemented. A key element of this knowledge exchange must be to raise awareness of the ecosystems services underpinned by soils and thus the natural capital they provide. We know enough to start moving in the right direction while we conduct research to fill in our knowledge gaps. The lasting legacy of the International Year of Soils in 2015 should be for soil scientists to work together with policy makers and land managers to put soils at the centre of environmental policy making and land management decisions.

Biodiversity and resilience of ecosystem functions

Accelerating rates of environmental change and the continued loss of global biodiversity threaten functions and services delivered by ecosystems. Much ecosystem monitoring and management is focused on the provision of ecosystem functions and services under current environmental conditions, yet this could lead to inappropriate management guidance and undervaluation of the importance of biodiversity. The maintenance of ecosystem functions and services under substantial predicted future environmental change (i.e., their ‘resilience’) is crucial. Here we identify a range of mechanisms underpinning the resilience of ecosystem functions across three ecological scales. Although potentially less important in the short term, biodiversity, encompassing variation from within species to across landscapes, may be crucial for the longer-term resilience of ecosystem functions and the services that they underpin.

Supporting local diversity of habitats and species on farmland: a comparison of three wildlife-friendly schemes

Restoration and maintenance of habitat diversity have been suggested as conservation priorities in farmed landscapes, but how this should be achieved and at what scale are unclear. This study makes a novel comparison of the effectiveness of three wildlife-friendly farming schemes for supporting local habitat diversity and species richness on 12 farms in England. The schemes were: (i) Conservation Grade (Conservation Grade: a prescriptive, non-organic, biodiversity-focused scheme), (ii) organic agriculture and (iii) a baseline of Entry Level Stewardship (Entry Level Stewardship: a flexible widespread government scheme). Conservation Grade farms supported a quarter higher habitat diversity at the 100-m radius scale compared to Entry Level Stewardship farms. Conservation Grade and organic farms both supported a fifth higher habitat diversity at the 250-m radius scale compared to Entry Level Stewardship farms. Habitat diversity at the 100-m and 250-m scales significantly predicted species richness of butterflies and plants. Habitat diversity at the 100-m scale also significantly predicted species richness of birds in winter and solitary bees. There were no significant relationships between habitat diversity and species richness for bumblebees or birds in summer. Butterfly species richness was significantly higher on organic farms (50% higher) and marginally higher on Conservation Grade farms (20% higher), compared with farms in Entry Level Stewardship. Organic farms supported significantly more plant species than Entry Level Stewardship farms (70% higher) but Conservation Grade farms did not (10% higher). There were no significant differences between the three schemes for species richness of bumblebees, solitary bees or birds. Policy implications. The wildlife-friendly farming schemes which included compulsory changes in management, Conservation Grade and organic, were more effective at increasing local habitat diversity and species richness compared with the less prescriptive Entry Level Stewardship scheme. We recommend that wildlife-friendly farming schemes should aim to enhance and maintain high local habitat diversity, through mechanisms such as option packages, where farmers are required to deliver a combination of several habitats.

Declining resilience of ecosystem functions under biodiversity loss

The composition of species communities is changing rapidly through drivers such as habitat loss and climate change, with potentially serious consequences for the resilience of ecosystem functions on which humans depend. To assess such changes in resilience, we analyse trends in the frequency of species in Great Britain that provide key ecosystem functions-specifically decomposition, carbon sequestration, pollination, pest control and cultural values. For 4,424 species over four decades, there have been significant net declines among animal species that provide pollination, pest control and cultural values. Groups providing decomposition and carbon sequestration remain relatively stable, as fewer species are in decline and these are offset by large numbers of new arrivals into Great Britain. While there is general concern about degradation of a wide range of ecosystem functions, our results suggest actions should focus on particular functions for which there is evidence of substantial erosion of their resilience.

Biodiversity and green open space

Biodiversity has been defined as the totality of genes, species, and ecosystems that inhabit the earth with the field contributing to many aspects of our lives and livelihoods by providing us with food, drink, medicines and shelter, as well as contributing to improving our surrounding environment. Benefits include providing life services through improved horticultural production, improving the business and service of horticulture as well as our environment, as well as improving our health and wellbeing, and our social and cultural relationships. Threats to biodiversity can include fragmentation, degradation and deforestation of habitat, introduction of invasive and exotic species, climate change and extreme weather events, over-exploitation of our natural resources, hybridisation, genetic pollution/erosion and food security issues and human overpopulation. This chapter examines a series of examples that provide the dual aims of biodiversity conservation and horticultural production and service; namely organic horticultural cropping, turf management, and nature-based tourism, and ways of valuing biological biodiversity such as the payment of environmental services and bio-prospecting. Horticulture plays a major role in the preserving of biodiversity.