Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A network approach for analyzing arthropod diversity and natural patches prioritization in a fragmented agroecosystem

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Natural habitat patches can mitigate the negative effects of agriculture on biodiversity. Local communities within natural patches are connected by dispersal and affected by multi-scale processes. Network theory enables to analyze metacommunity structures of different groups of species, such as common and rare species, and provides tools to prioritize the habitat patches.

Objectives

We ask what are the local and landscape determinants of common and rare species diversities and whether the relative importance of the patches within the networks is similar for common and rare species.

Methods

We sampled arthropod communities within natural patches in a fragmented agroecosystem of the Southern Judea Lowlands, Israel. We classified Coleoptera, Araneae, and Hemiptera taxa into common and rare species and constructed a metacommunity network for each group of species.

Results

For Coleoptera and Hemiptera the association of patch connectivity is stronger with rare species than with common species diversities, suggesting that landscape determinants are more dominant in shaping rare than common species assemblages. Moreover, the spatial scale at which patch connectivity affects common and rare species differs between taxa. By comparing the relative importance of patches within the networks, we found a high correlation between common and rare species in each taxon. However, several patches diverge from this trend of similarity.

Conclusions

This study emphasizes the importance of multi-scale determinants in shaping ecological communities at agroecosystems and stresses that common and rare species are distinctive groups of species that should receive explicit consideration in conservation management and planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

References

  • Anderson DR (2008) Model based inference in the life sciences: a primer on evidence. Springer Science & Business Media, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton K (2020) MuMIn: multi-model inference. R Package version 1.43.17. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MuMIn/index.html

  • Bell JR, Bohan DA, Shaw EM, Weyman GS (2005) Ballooning dispersal using silk: world fauna, phylogenies, genetics and models. Bull Entomol Res 95:69–114

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blitzer EJ, Dormann CF, Holzschuh A et al (2012) Spillover of functionally important organisms between managed and natural habitats. Agric Ecosyst Environ 146:34–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonte D, Vandenbroecke N, Lens L, Maelfait JP (2003) Low propensity for aerial dispersal in specialist spiders from fragmented landscapes. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 270:1601–1607

    Google Scholar 

  • Borthagaray AI, Barreneche JM, Abades S, Arim M (2014) Modularity along organism dispersal gradients challenges a prevailing view of abrupt transitions in animal landscape perception. Ecography (Cop) 37:564–571

    Google Scholar 

  • Borthagaray AI, Berazategui M, Arim M (2015) Disentangling the effects of local and regional processes on biodiversity patterns through taxon-contingent metacommunity network analysis. Oikos 124:1383–1390

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown GR, Matthews IM (2016) A review of extensive variation in the design of pitfall traps and a proposal for a standard pitfall trap design for monitoring ground-active arthropod biodiversity. Ecol Evol 6:3953–3964

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardoso P, Ekar S, Jocque R, Coddington JA (2011) Global patterns of guild composition and functional diversity of spiders. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021710

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2015) PRIMER v7: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-EPlymouth

  • Cornwell WK, Ackerly DD (2010) A link between plant traits and abundance: evidence from coastal California woody plants. J Ecol 98:814–821

    Google Scholar 

  • Csardi G, Nepusz T (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. Int J Complex Syst. https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1087.2009.02191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dainese M, Martin EA, Aizen MA et al (2019) A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci Adv 5:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale MRT, Fortin M (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:21–38

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bie T, De Meester L, Brendonck L et al (2012) Body size and dispersal mode as key traits determining metacommunity structure of aquatic organisms. Ecol Lett 15:740–747

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Economo EP, Keitt TH (2010) Network isolation and local diversity in neutral metacommunities. Oikos 119:1355–1363

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlén J, Eriksson O (2000) Dispersal limitation and patch occupancy in forest herbs. Ecology 81:1667–1674

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrada E, Bodin O (2008) Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. Ecol Appl 18:1810–1825

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eycott AE, Stewart GB, Buyung-Ali LM et al (2012) A meta-analysis on the impact of different matrix structures on species movement rates. Landsc Ecol 27:1263–1278

    Google Scholar 

  • Fall A, Fortin MJ, Manseau M, O’Brien D (2007) Spatial graphs: principles and applications for habitat connectivity. Ecosystems 10:448–461

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2017) The future of food and agriculture—trends and challenges. FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Farina A (2006) Principles and methods in landscape ecology: towards a science of the landscape, vol 3. Springer Science & Business Media, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Brosi B, Daily GC et al (2008) Should agricultural policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly farming? Front Ecol Environ 6:380–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher RJ, Didham RK, Banks-Leite C et al (2018) Is habitat fragmentation good for biodiversity? Biol Conserv 226:9–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox J, Weisberg S (2019) An R companion to applied regression, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144:44–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ (2008) Biodiversity and extinction: the importance of being common. Prog Phys Geogr 32:73–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Kunin WE (1997) Rare-common differences: an overview. In: Kunin WE, Gaston KJ (eds) The biology of rarity: causes and consequences of rare-common differences. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 12–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavish Y, Ziv Y (2016) Joint effect of habitat identity and spatial distance on spiders’ community similarity in a fragmented transition zone. PLoS ONE 11:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavish-Regev E, Lubin Y, Coll M (2008) Migration patterns and functional groups of spiders in a desert agroecosystem. Ecol Entomol 33:202–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Giladi I, Ziv Y, May F, Jeltsch F (2011) Scale-dependent determinants of plant species richness in a semi-arid fragmented agro-ecosystem. J Veg Sci 22:983–996

    Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ (1991) Metapopulation models: the rescue effect, the propagule rain, and the core-satellite hypothesis. Am Nat 138:768–776

    Google Scholar 

  • Green RE, Cornell SJ, Scharlemann JPW, Balmford A (2005) Farming and the fate of wild nature. Science 307:550–555

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guzman LM, Germain RM, Forbes C et al (2019) Towards a multi-trophic extension of metacommunity ecology. Ecol Lett 22:19–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2010) Multivariate data analysis. Pearson, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Halstead KE, Alexander JD, Hadley AS et al (2019) Using a species-centered approach to predict bird community responses to habitat fragmentation. Landsc Ecol 34:1919-1935.5

    Google Scholar 

  • Heikkinen MW, MacMahon JA (2004) Assemblages of spiders on models of semi-arid shrubs. J Arachnol 32:313–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera LP, Sabatino MC (2017) Landscape connectivity and the role of small habitat patches as stepping stones : an assessment of the grassland biome in South America. Biodivers Conserv 26:3465–3479

    Google Scholar 

  • Holyoak M, Leibold MA, Mouquet N et al (2005) Metacommunities: spatial dynamics and ecological communities. In: A framework for large scale community ecology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishiyama N, Akasaka T, Nakamura F (2014) Mobility-dependent response of aquatic animal species richness to a wetland network in an agricultural landscape. Aquat Sci 76:437–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson HB, Fahrig L (2012) What size is a biologically relevant landscape? Landsc Ecol 27:929–941

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson HB, Fahrig L (2015) Are ecologists conducting research at the optimal scale? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 24:52–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain M, Flynn DFB, Prager CM et al (2014) The importance of rare species: a trait-based assessment of rare species contributions to functional diversity and possible ecosystem function in tall-grass prairies. Ecol Evol 4:104–112

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jeanneret P, Lüscher G, Schneider MK et al (2021) An increase in food production in Europe could dramatically affect farmland biodiversity. Commun Earth Environ 2:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Keitt TH, Urban DL, Milne BT (1997) Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Ecol. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00015-010104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunin WE, Gaston KJ (1993) The biology of rarity: patterns, causes and consequences. Trends Ecol Evol 8:298–301

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Chase JM (2018) Metacommunity ecology, vol 59. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N et al (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613

    Google Scholar 

  • Leitão RP, Zuanon J, Villéger S et al (2016) Rare species contribute disproportionately to the functional structure of species assemblages. Proc R Soc B. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.0084

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lennon JJ, Beale CM, Reid CL et al (2011) Are richness patterns of common and rare species equally well explained by environmental variables? Ecography (Cop) 34:529–539

    Google Scholar 

  • Logue B, Mouquet N, Peter H (2011) Empirical approaches to metacommunities : a review and comparison with theory. Trends Ecol Evol 26:482–491

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, McGill BJ (eds) (2011) Biological diversity: frontiers in measurement and assessment. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Markham J (2014) Rare species occupy uncommon niches. Sci Rep 4:63–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin EA, Dainese M, Clough Y et al (2019) The interplay of landscape composition and configuration: new pathways to manage functional biodiversity and agroecosystem services across Europe. Ecol Lett 22:1083–1094

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • May F, Giladi I, Ristow M et al (2013) Plant functional traits and community assembly along interacting gradients of productivity and fragmentation. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 15:304–318

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill BJ (2010) Matters of scale. Science 328:575–576

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGill BJ, Etienne RS, Gray JS et al (2007) Species abundance distributions: moving beyond single prediction theories to integration within an ecological framework. Ecol Lett 10:995–1015

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miguet P, Jackson HB, Jackson ND et al (2016) What determines the spatial extent of landscape effects on species? Landsc Ecol 31:1177–1194

    Google Scholar 

  • Myneni RB, Hall FG, Sellers PJ, Marshak AL (1995) Interpretation of spectral vegetation indexes. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 33:481–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbold T, Hudson LN, Hill SLL et al (2015) Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520:45–50

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Öckinger E, Lindborg R, Sjödin NE, Bommarco R (2012) Landscape matrix modifies richness of plants and insects in grassland fragments. Ecography (Cop) 35:259–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandit SN, Kolasa J, Cottenie K (2009) Contrasts between habitat generalists and specialists: an empirical extension to the basic metacommunity framework. Ecology 90:2253–2262

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-hortal L, Saura S (2006) Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landsc Ecol 21:959–967

    Google Scholar 

  • Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E et al (1996) A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 49:1373–1379

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

  • Raven PH, Wagner DL (2021) Agricultural intensification and climate change are rapidly decreasing insect biodiversity. PNAS 118:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayfield B, Fortin MJ, Fall A (2011) Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. Ecology 92:847–858

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Resh VH, Bêche LA, McElravy EP (2005) How common are rare taxa in long-term benthic macroinvertebrate surveys? J North Am Benthol Soc 24:976–989

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE (1987) Community diversity: relative roles of local and regional processes. Science 235:167–171

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotem G, Ziv Y (2016) Crop diversity and rotation may increase dispersal opportunities of reptiles in a heterogeneous agroecosystem. Agric Ecosyst Environ 235:32–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotem G, Ziv Y, Giladi I, Bouskila A (2013) Wheat fields as an ecological trap for reptiles in a semiarid agroecosystem. Biol Conserv 167:349–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotem G, Giladi I, Bouskila A, Ziv Y (2020) Scale-dependent correlates of reptile communities in natural patches within a fragmented agroecosystem. Landsc Ecol 35:2339–2355

    Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landsc Urban Plan 83:91–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Torne J (2009) Conefor Sensinode 2. 2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ Model Softw 24:135–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Rubio L (2010) A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography (Cop) 33:523–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Bodin O, Fortin M-J (2014) Stepping stones are crucial for species ’ long-distance dispersal and range expansion through habitat networks. J Appl Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloerke B, Crowley J, Cook D et al (2018) Ggally: extension to ggplot2. R Package version 1.4.0. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/GGally/index.html

  • Schmidt MH, Clough Y, Schulz W et al (2006) Capture efficiency and preservation attributes of different fluids in pitfall traps. J Arachnol 34:191–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Siqueira T, Bini LM, Roque FO et al (2012) Common and rare species respond to similar niche processes in macroinvertebrate metacommunities. Ecography (Cop) 35:183–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan LL, Michalska-Smith MJ, Sperry KP et al (2021) Consequences of ignoring dispersal variation in network models for landscape connectivity. Conserv Biol 35:944–954

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sunderland KD, DeSnoo GR, Dinter A et al (1995) Density estimation of invertebrate predators in agroecosystems. In: Arthropod natural enemies in arable land I:-density, spatial heterogeneity and dispersal. Aarhus University Press, Aarhus, pp 133–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571–573

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsang TPN, Bonebrake TC (2017) Contrasting roles of environmental and spatial processes for common and rare urban butterfly species compositions. Landsc Ecol 32:47–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A et al (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8:857–874

    Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Clough Y, Wanger TC et al (2012) Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biol Conserv 151:53–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban D, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82:1205–1218

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Robert S (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12:260–273

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyck H, Baguette M (2005) Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: routine or special movements? Basic Appl Ecol 6:535–545

    Google Scholar 

  • van Schalkwyk J, Pryke JS, Samways MJ (2019) Contribution of common vs. rare species to species diversity patterns in conservation corridors. Ecol Indic 104:279–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Violle C, Enquist BJ, McGill BJ et al (2012) The return of the variance: intraspecific variability in community ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 27:244–252

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weiher E, Freund D, Bunton T et al (2011) Advances, challenges and a developing synthesis of ecological community assembly theory. Philos Trans R Soc B 366:2403–2413

    Google Scholar 

  • Wezel A (ed) (2017) Agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture: principles, applications, and making the transition. World Scientific, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Winfree R, Fox JW, Williams NM et al (2015) Abundance of common species, not species richness, drives delivery of a real-world ecosystem service. Ecol Lett 18:626–635

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock BA (2005) Pitfall trapping in ecological studies. In: Leather S (ed) Insect sampling in forest ecosystems. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 37–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaacobi G, Ziv Y, Rosenzweig ML (2007) Effects of interactive scale-dependent variables on beetle diversity patterns in a semi-arid agricultural landscape. Landsc Ecol 22:687–703

    Google Scholar 

  • Zabel F, Delzeit R, Schneider JM et al (2019) Global impacts of future cropland expansion and intensification on agricultural markets and biodiversity. Nat Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10775-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ziv Y (1998) The effect of habitat heterogeneity on species diversity patterns: a community-level approach using an object-oriented landscape simulation model (SHALOM). Ecol Model 111:135–170

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank I. Giladi, S. Pilosof and three anonymous reviewers for the insightful comments. We are grateful to E. Gavish-Regev, Z. Ganem, and M. Shemesh for the dedicated taxonomic work. This work was supported by the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development [Grant Number 16-16-0004].

Funding

This work was supported by the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development [Grant Number 16-16-0004].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Spatial Ecology Lab, Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O.B. 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel

    Matan Markfeld, Guy Rotem & Yaron Ziv

Authors
  1. Matan Markfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guy Rotem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yaron Ziv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by MM. The first draft of the manuscript was written by MM and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matan Markfeld.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent of participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 2304 kb)

Supplementary file2 (XLSX 26 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markfeld, M., Rotem, G. & Ziv, Y. A network approach for analyzing arthropod diversity and natural patches prioritization in a fragmented agroecosystem. Landsc Ecol 37, 1527–1541 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-022-01438-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-022-01438-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation