pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Plantation vs. natural forest: matrix quality determines pollinator abundance in crop fields - PubMed

Plantation vs. natural forest: matrix quality determines pollinator abundance in crop fields

Hisatomo Taki et al. Sci Rep. 2011.

Abstract

In terrestrial ecosystems, ecological processes and patterns within focal patches frequently depend on their matrix. Crop fields (focal patches) are often surrounded by a mosaic of other land-use types (matrix), which may act as habitats for organisms and differ in terms of the immigration activities of organisms to the fields. We examined whether matrix quality affects wild pollinator abundance in crop fields, given that the species (Apis cerana) generally nest in the cavities of natural trees. We examined fields of a pollination-dependent crop surrounded by plantations and natural forests, which comprised the matrix. Our analysis revealed a clear positive effect of the natural forest on the pollinator abundance, but the plantation forest had little effects. These indicate that agricultural patches are influenced by their matrix quality and the resulting crop pollinator abundance, suggesting the importance of matrix management initiatives such as forest restoration surrounding agricultural fields to improve crop production.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spatial effects modeled by the spatial regression model.

(a) Spatial correlation was depicted using the spatial decay function: exp[-(φdij)], where φ = 1.01 (estimated median value). (b) Spatial random effects of each site are indicated by relative circle size.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Wild honeybees (Apis cerana) visiting buckwheat flowers (Fagopyrum esculentum).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ricketts T. H. The matrix matters: Effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am. Nat. 158, 87–99 (2001). - PubMed
    1. Vandermeer J. & Carvajal R. Metapopulation dynamics and the quality of the matrix. Am. Nat. 158, 211–220 (2001). - PubMed
    1. Prevedello J. A. & Vieira M. V. Does the type of matrix matter? A quantitative review of the evidence. Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 1205–1223, 10.1007/s10531-009-9750-z (2010).
    1. Tscharntke T., Klein A. M., Kruess A., Steffan-Dewenter I. & Thies C. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters 8, 857–874 (2005).
    1. Donald P. F. & Evans A. D. Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri-environment schemes. Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 209–218, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01146.x (2006).

Publication types

MeSH terms