Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes.

By L. Fahrig, Jacques Baudry, Lluís Brotons, Françoise Burel, T. O. Crist, REBECCA J. Fuller, Clélia Sirami, G. Siriwardena, Jean-Louis Martin. Ecology Letters, 2011

1,714 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7dc3fcf9aa44061b1520954d0541f0a7c08e7cde

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Bird functional diversity enhances insectivory at forest edges: a transcontinental experiment (2014, background): “As a result, multiscale discontinuities in habitat structure created by spatial heterogeneity appear often critical to the conservation of both taxonomic and functional diversity in mosaic production landscapes (Tews et al., 2004; Najera & Simonetti, 2010; Fahrig et al., 2011).”
Optimizing agri-environment schemes for biodiversity, ecosystem services or both? (2014, background): “We provide a conceptual framework for the spatial allocation of different AES based on a few fundamental ecological principles, given an increased pressure to increase agricultural production, and to achieve this with ecological intensification (Bommarco et al., 2013; Doré et al., 2011; Fahrig et al”
Maintenance of tree phylogenetic diversity in a highly fragmented rain forest (2012, background): “Because a large proportion of global biodiversity is located in fragmented landscapes, biodiversity protection largely depends on maintaining biodiversity in these spatially heterogeneous landscapes (Fahrig et al. 2010).”
Ecological Responses to Habitat Fragmentation Per Se (2017, background): “In fact, several studies have found positive relationships between landscape configurational heterogeneity (sensu Fahrig & Nuttle 2005, Fahrig et al. 2011) and biodiversity in agricultural landscapes (Concepción et al. 2012, Flick et al. 2012, Lindsay et al. 2013, Fahrig et al. 2015).”
Avian pest control in vineyards is driven by interactions between bird functional diversity and landscape heterogeneity (2017, background): “…biodiversity and associated ecosystem services are lower in more complex, heterogeneous landscapes (i.e. with a high proportion of semi-natural habitats) or in extremely simplified landscapes (i.e. only croplands) than in landscapes of intermediate compositional heterogeneity (Fahrig et al. 2011).”
A species-centered approach for uncovering generalities in organism responses to habitat loss and fragmentation (2014, positive): “…’ asserts that the deﬁ nition and mapping of cover types on a landscape should be based on the expected functions they serve (e.g. provision of food, nesting sites, dispersal routes) to the species of interest; thus, the description of a landscape is species-speciﬁ c (Fahrig et al. 2011).”
Configurational landscape heterogeneity shapes functional community composition of grassland butterflies (2015, background): “Functional maps, which are based on the relative importance of land cover types for a species or group, may offer an alternative that is ecologically more meaningful (Fahrig et al. 2011).”
Impact of landscape composition and configuration on forest specialist and generalist bird species in the fragmented Lacandona rainforest, Mexico (2015, background): “In forested landscapes, variations in species responses to forest fragmentation and inter-patch isolation may be related to differences in the amount of old-growth forest cover in the landscape (Villard and Metzger, 2014) and to differences in matrix composition (Fahrig et al., 2011).”
Optimizing landscape selection for estimating relative effects of landscape variables on ecological responses (2013, background): “Minimizing these correlations at the site selection stage of a study increases the precision of the estimates, thus increasing the statistical power to detect effects of the landscape predictors (McGarigal and Cushman 2002; Fahrig et al. 2011).”
Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes ‐ eight hypotheses (2012, background): “Given the highly dynamic nature of many land-use systems, how can functionally important populations be effectively and sustainably protected? Can land-use heterogeneity be increased in agricultural landscapes by optimizing crop composition and configuration, based on a given amount of natural habit”
Landscape‐level crop diversity benefits biological pest control (2018, background): “However, correlations between crop diversity and semi- natural habitat often impede our ability to infer causal relationships (Fahrig et al., 2011, 2015).”
Linking plant phenology to conservation biology (2016, background): “Fragmented and spatially isolated habitat patches can remain connected and ecologically functional if their populations maintain ecological interactions and gene flow among individuals across the landscape (D'Eon et al., 2002; Fahrig et al., 2011).”
A systematic map of research exploring the effect of greenspace on mental health (2020, background): “However, crosssectional studies have identified that “quality” of the greenspace such as amenities or species composition, have the potential to change interaction and therefore influence mental health benefits (e.g., Francis et al., 2012).”
Agricultural intensification drives landscape‐context effects on host–parasitoid interactions in agroecosystems (2012, neutral): “To date, there have been few studies that have successfully disentangled the drivers of landscape effects on species communities and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes (Fahrig et al. 2011).”