Early succession arthropod community changes on experimental passion fruit plant patches along a land-use gradient in Ecuador |
| |
| Authors: | Adenir V Teodoro Andrea Muñoz Teja Tscharntke Alexandra-Maria Klein Jason M Tylianakis |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Crop Sciences, Section Agroecology, University of Göttingen, Waldweg 26, D-37073 Göttingen, Germany;2. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Chemistry, Section Ecosystem Functioning, University of Lüneburg, Germany;1. Department of Forest Protection and Wildlife Management, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 3, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic;2. Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Sciences, Masaryk University, Kotla?ská 2, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic;3. Department of Zoology, Fisheries, Hydrobiology and Apiculture, Faculty of Agronomy, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic;1. Centre for Agri-Environmental Research, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, United Kingdom;2. School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, United Kingdom;3. Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom;4. Plant Breeding Methodology, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany;5. Embrapa Amazônia Oriental, Travessa Enéas Pinheiro, Marco, Belém CEP 66095-903, Pará, Brazil;6. University of Basel, Department of Environmental Sciences, Botany, Schönbeinstrasse 6, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland;7. Wageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen UR, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands;8. Lendület Ecosystem Services Research Group, Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, 2163 Vácrátót, Hungary;9. Depto. Biología de Organismos y Sistemas, Universidad de Oviedo, and Unidad Mixta de Investigación en Biodiversidad (CSIC-Uo-PA), C/Catedrático Rodrigo Uría s/n, E-33006 Oviedo, Asturias, Spain;10. School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom;11. Agroecology Lab, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe CP 264/2, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium;12. Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden;13. Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;14. Department of Animal Ecology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32, D-35392 Giessen, Germany;15. Department of Biology, Lund University, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden;p. Functional Agrobiodiversity, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany;q. Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany;r. Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation Group, Wageningen University, Droevendaalsesteeg 3a, 6708PB Wageningen, The Netherlands;s. Lendület Ecosystem Services Research Group, Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Alkotmány str. 2-4, 2163 Vácrátót, Hungary;t. School of Science & the Environment, University of Worcester, Worcester, United Kingdom;u. Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), Apdo. 13, E-33300 Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain;v. Environment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, United Kingdom;w. General Zoology, Institute for Biology, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Hoher Weg 8, D-06120 Halle (Saale), Germany;x. Molecular Evolution and Animal Systematics, Institute for Biology, Leipzig University, Talstraße 33, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany;y. Life Sciences Center, Vilnius University, Saul?tekio al. 7, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania;z. Agency for Environment and Energy Canton Basel-City, Hochbergerstr. 157, 4019 Basel, Switzerland;11. Agroecology, Dept. of Crop Sciences, University of Göttingen, Grisebachstrasse 6, 37077 Göttingen, Germany;12. Plant Ecology and Ecosystems Research, University of Goettingen, Untere Karspüle 2, 37073 Göttingen, Germany;13. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom;14. Department of Plant Sciences University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;15. National Institute of Agricultural Botany, Cambridge, UK;1. Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Silkeborg, Denmark;2. HabitatVision, Solsortevej 7, Rønde, Denmark;3. Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, Copenhagen O, Denmark |
| |
| Abstract: | Many tropical landscapes are today characterized by small forest patches embedded in an agricultural mosaic matrix. In such highly fragmented landscapes, agroforests have already been recognized as refuges for biodiversity but few studies have investigated the potential of non-forested land-use types to contribute to overall biodiversity of functionally important taxa in the tropics. This study experimentally investigated species richness, abundance, and community similarity of arthropods on Yellow Passion fruit plants, planted in standardized patches in 30 sites along a land-use intensity gradient. The gradient comprised all major land-use types of the area: forest fragments, abandoned coffee agroforests, coffee agroforests managed under shade trees, pastures, and rice fields in Coastal Ecuador. We found a total of 2123 individuals belonging to 242 species. Overall arthropod species richness increased with light intensity and leaf-surface area and decreased with land-use intensity: forest fragments and abandoned coffee agroforests harboured significantly more species than rice or pastures. Overall diversity in managed coffee agroforests was intermediate between the intensively managed and more natural habitats. However, the three most abundant taxa of arthropods (ants, spiders, and beetles) had the highest number of species in managed coffee agroforests, while ant abundance was highest in abandoned coffee agroforests and spider abundance highest in managed coffee agroforests. Analyses of community similarity revealed that open (pasture, and rice) and shaded (forest, abandoned and managed coffee agroforests) land-use types had distinct arthropod communities. In conclusion, although open agricultural land-use types tend to have fewer species in lower numbers, all land-use types contribute to overall biodiversity of the agricultural matrix because of distinct communities in shaded vs. non-shaded land-use types. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
