Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions
Agricultural intensification is a major cause of biodiversity declines. Agri-environment schemes (AES) have been introduced in many countries as an attempt to counteract the negative effects of intensive agriculture by providing financial incentives for farmers to adopt environmentally-sensitive agr...
Published in: | Biological Conservation |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Other Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
2011
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3303 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3303/1/fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf |
id |
ftunivstirling:oai:dspace.stir.ac.uk:1893/3303 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
University of Stirling: Stirling Digital Research Repository |
op_collection_id |
ftunivstirling |
language |
English |
topic |
Agricultural intensification Conservation management Nocturnal insects Landscape Pipistrellus spp woodland Bats Scotland Effects of habitat modification on Agriculture Environmental aspects Scotland Forest management Scotland |
spellingShingle |
Agricultural intensification Conservation management Nocturnal insects Landscape Pipistrellus spp woodland Bats Scotland Effects of habitat modification on Agriculture Environmental aspects Scotland Forest management Scotland Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa Goulson, Dave Park, Kirsty Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
topic_facet |
Agricultural intensification Conservation management Nocturnal insects Landscape Pipistrellus spp woodland Bats Scotland Effects of habitat modification on Agriculture Environmental aspects Scotland Forest management Scotland |
description |
Agricultural intensification is a major cause of biodiversity declines. Agri-environment schemes (AES) have been introduced in many countries as an attempt to counteract the negative effects of intensive agriculture by providing financial incentives for farmers to adopt environmentally-sensitive agricultural practices. We surveyed 18 pairs of AES and conventionally-managed farms in central Scotland (United Kingdom) to evaluate the effects of specific AES management prescriptions (field margins, hedgerows, species-rich grasslands and water margins) on foraging bats and nocturnal insects. In addition, we assessed the importance of habitat in the wider landscape at several spatial scales on foraging bats and their insect prey. Pipistrellus pygmaeus and Pipistrellus pipistrellus were the most commonly recorded species, accounting for 98% of total bat activity levels. Overall levels of bat activity and the abundance of their insect prey (mainly Diptera and Trichoptera) were lower (by 40–50%) on farms participating in AES than on non-participating farms. Differences in insect abundance were also significant when we compared specific AES management prescriptions with equivalent conventionally-managed features. The surrounding landscape influenced bat activity; fragmentation metrics related to woodland configuration were the most important landscape characteristics influencing bat activity levels. However, the two Pipistrelle species responded differently to the surrounding landscape, P. pipistrellus being strongly influenced by the landscape at large scales (e.g. within 2 km of the monitoring site) and P. pygmaeus being most influenced by the landscape at smaller scales (within 500 m of the monitoring site). Insect abundance was positively affected by the percentage cover of semi-natural environment within 500 m of trapping sites. We suggest that the implementation of the four common AES management prescriptions assessed in this study does not benefit Pipistrelle bats nor other bat species foraging on similar prey. ... |
author2 |
People's Trust for Endangered Species / Mammals Biological and Environmental Sciences orcid:0000-0002-5550-9432 orcid:0000-0001-6080-7197 |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa Goulson, Dave Park, Kirsty |
author_facet |
Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa Goulson, Dave Park, Kirsty |
author_sort |
Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa |
title |
Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
title_short |
Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
title_full |
Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
title_fullStr |
Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
title_full_unstemmed |
Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
title_sort |
pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions |
publisher |
Elsevier |
publishDate |
2011 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3303 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3303/1/fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf |
genre |
Pipistrellus pipistrellus |
genre_facet |
Pipistrellus pipistrellus |
op_relation |
Fuentes-Montemayor E, Goulson D & Park K (2011) Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions. Biological Conservation, 144 (9), pp. 2233-2246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 Assessing the effectiveness of farm woodland creation schemes for bats 0 http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3303 doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 WOS:000294030900014 2-s2.0-79960927821 834152 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3303/1/fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf |
op_rights |
The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author; you can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. http://www.rioxx.net/licenses/under-embargo-all-rights-reserved 2999-12-31 [fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf] The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository therefore there is an embargo on the full text of the work. |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 |
container_title |
Biological Conservation |
container_volume |
144 |
container_issue |
9 |
container_start_page |
2233 |
op_container_end_page |
2246 |
_version_ |
1800736799264342016 |
spelling |
ftunivstirling:oai:dspace.stir.ac.uk:1893/3303 2024-06-02T08:13:20+00:00 Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa Goulson, Dave Park, Kirsty People's Trust for Endangered Species / Mammals Biological and Environmental Sciences orcid:0000-0002-5550-9432 orcid:0000-0001-6080-7197 2011-09 application/pdf http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3303 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3303/1/fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf en eng Elsevier Fuentes-Montemayor E, Goulson D & Park K (2011) Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions. Biological Conservation, 144 (9), pp. 2233-2246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 Assessing the effectiveness of farm woodland creation schemes for bats 0 http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3303 doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 WOS:000294030900014 2-s2.0-79960927821 834152 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3303/1/fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author; you can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. http://www.rioxx.net/licenses/under-embargo-all-rights-reserved 2999-12-31 [fuentes-montemayor2011b.pdf] The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository therefore there is an embargo on the full text of the work. Agricultural intensification Conservation management Nocturnal insects Landscape Pipistrellus spp woodland Bats Scotland Effects of habitat modification on Agriculture Environmental aspects Scotland Forest management Scotland Journal Article VoR - Version of Record 2011 ftunivstirling https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.05.015 2024-05-07T04:30:11Z Agricultural intensification is a major cause of biodiversity declines. Agri-environment schemes (AES) have been introduced in many countries as an attempt to counteract the negative effects of intensive agriculture by providing financial incentives for farmers to adopt environmentally-sensitive agricultural practices. We surveyed 18 pairs of AES and conventionally-managed farms in central Scotland (United Kingdom) to evaluate the effects of specific AES management prescriptions (field margins, hedgerows, species-rich grasslands and water margins) on foraging bats and nocturnal insects. In addition, we assessed the importance of habitat in the wider landscape at several spatial scales on foraging bats and their insect prey. Pipistrellus pygmaeus and Pipistrellus pipistrellus were the most commonly recorded species, accounting for 98% of total bat activity levels. Overall levels of bat activity and the abundance of their insect prey (mainly Diptera and Trichoptera) were lower (by 40–50%) on farms participating in AES than on non-participating farms. Differences in insect abundance were also significant when we compared specific AES management prescriptions with equivalent conventionally-managed features. The surrounding landscape influenced bat activity; fragmentation metrics related to woodland configuration were the most important landscape characteristics influencing bat activity levels. However, the two Pipistrelle species responded differently to the surrounding landscape, P. pipistrellus being strongly influenced by the landscape at large scales (e.g. within 2 km of the monitoring site) and P. pygmaeus being most influenced by the landscape at smaller scales (within 500 m of the monitoring site). Insect abundance was positively affected by the percentage cover of semi-natural environment within 500 m of trapping sites. We suggest that the implementation of the four common AES management prescriptions assessed in this study does not benefit Pipistrelle bats nor other bat species foraging on similar prey. ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Pipistrellus pipistrellus University of Stirling: Stirling Digital Research Repository Biological Conservation 144 9 2233 2246 |