Back

Converting cropping systems into seasonal habitat functionality reveals the hump-shaped responses of carabid beetles to agricultural management

Muneret, L.; Ricci, B.; Vialatte, A.; Aviron, S.; Ducourtieux, C.; Biju-Duval, L.; Petit, S.

2022-03-01 ecology
10.1101/2022.02.26.480658 bioRxiv
Show abstract

O_LIUnderstanding effects on the huge diversity of cropping systems on local biodiversity is challenging but necessary to implement agroecological systems. Through a functional approach, the translation of cropping systems into resource and disturbance gradients is promising to decipher the relationship between cropping systems and biodiversity but has never been implemented for arthropods. C_LIO_LITo investigate contributions of resource and disturbance gradients arising from cropping systems vs environmental context (regional effect, meteorological conditions and landscape characteristics) on beneficial arthropod communities, we used a dataset collected in 60 crop fields from three French areas over a five-years period. It includes all farmers interventions, crop sequences, meteorological data, landscape composition and carabid samplings. C_LIO_LIWe found that the environmental context contributed to about 75% of explained carabid variations on average, while resource and disturbance gradients contributed to about 25% of explained carabid variations. The resource and disturbance gradients were particularly important in winter and spring preceding the spring-summer period to determine carabid variations. C_LIO_LIMoreover, we identified thresholds above which resource and disturbance gradients start being beneficial or detrimental for carabids. For example, a Treatment Frequency Index above 2.07 in spring decreased the total activity density of carabids during the spring-summer period. C_LIO_LISynthesis and application. While implementing for the first time a functional approach to understand the effects of different facets of cropping systems on arthropods, our study also allows us to identify periods and thresholds above which specific practices affect carabids. The identification of such thresholds can guide the provision of recommendations for policy, stakeholders and farmers about how to reduce cropping systems impact on arthropods. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.4%
2
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.3%
3
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.7%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.8%
5
Ecological Applications
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
7
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.5%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.7%
9
Basic and Applied Ecology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
10
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
11
Insects
36 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.0%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.7%
13
Journal of Environmental Management
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
16
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
17
Landscape Ecology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.6%
18
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
19
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
20
Forest Ecology and Management
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
21
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.9%
22
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
23
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
24
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
25
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
26
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.7%
27
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%