Ecosystem services provided by wildlife in the Pampas region, Argentina

Highlights

• Birds and mammals of the Pampas region provide a wide variety of Ecosystem Services.

• Most of the benefits are obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes.

• Few studies represent provisioning and cultural services.

• Most of the species providing Ecosystem Services are considered agricultural plagues.

Abstract

The expansion and intensification of human activities in the Argentinean Pampas have affected birds and mammals that inhabit the agroecosystems, threatening their populations and aggravating their conflicts with humans. On the other hand, they play different roles in the provision of Ecosystem Services (ES). Therefore, identifying and understanding the relationships between species and humans, and the delivery of ES is crucial for sustainable management of the environment. The objectives of this study were to identify ecological functions of birds and mammals and its conflicts with human activities reported by previous articles in the Pampas region; and to link these ecological functions as indicators of the potential ES provided by these species. We performed two systematic and structured searches of articles using Scopus bibliographic database, one for the ecological functions and the second one for conflicts. From the first search, we found 145 studies and 34% of them reported ecological functions, 78% were about birds and the rest about mammals. The Regulation and Maintenance ES were the most reported type and involved the provision of nutrients and pest control, with birds of prey and carnivorous mammals as the most mentioned groups. Provisioning ES were related to the provision of leather from legal hunting and genetic material, and Cultural ES were associated to species conservation. From the conflict search, we found 23 studies that mentioned negative interactions in the Pampas region, mostly with birds and associated to agricultural production damages. Many species mentioned as important ES providers, are also involved in conflicts, causing some discomfort to people. Therefore, the integration of wildlife, with its benefits and damages, could be a powerful argument to achieve the coexistence of wildlife into a landscape shaped by anthropogenic activities.

Introduction

Natural ecosystems have been increasingly threatened by anthropogenic factors (urbanization, mining, deforestation, chemical and light pollution, introduction of exotic species) all around the world (Borges et al., 2019). In particular, the expansion and intensification of agricultural activities have reduced wildlife natural habitats (Foley et al., 2005). Many of these species are been persecuted and killed by ranchers claiming them as “agricultural pests” (Abba et al., 2009, Pedrana et al., 2014, Pedrana et al., 2015, Soler et al., 2004) and others suffered from indirect effects of agricultural practices, such as poisoning or the loss and/or fragmentation of their habitats (Bilenca et al., 2012, Ogada, 2014, Ripple et al., 2015).

Wildlife species are an essential part of an ecosystem, playing different roles in the provision of Ecosystem Services (ES), defined as the benefits that humanity can obtain from a natural process of the ecosystem (Balvanera et al., 2006, Díaz et al., 2005, Green and Elmberg, 2014, Whelan et al., 2008). Consequently, the anthropogenic changes in the quality and availability of natural habitats are threatening these benefits (MEA, 2005).

There is an extensive bibliography that recognizes a great amount of ES provided by birds and mammals (Clark et al., 2016, Gaston et al., 2018, Lacher et al., 2019, Whelan et al., 2008). These groups comprise a great diversity of species with very different habitat behaviors and requirements, fulfilling important roles in the ecosystems (Davidson et al., 2012, Green and Elmberg, 2014, Sarasola et al., 2016, Whelan et al., 2008, Williams et al., 2018). These groups of animals are related to the three types of ES defined by the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Provisioning; Regulation and Maintenance; and Cultural (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2013).

As Provisioning ES, birds and mammals are harvested for human consumption and subjected to sport and subsistence hunting. In addition, their feathers and leather are used for clothing and accessories (Buij et al., 2017; Green and Elmberg, 2014). Many studies highlight the role of birds and mammals in Regulation and Maintenance ES. For example, frugivorous and nectarivorous bat and lemur species regulate forest floral diversity through their role as seed dispersers and pollinators (Dew and Wright, 1998). Also, large aggregations of birds contribute to the input and nutrient flow of an ecosystem (Whelan et al., 2008), and many insectivorous and carnivorous animals (raptors, bats and carnivorous mammals) predate on detrimental special for local agriculture and livestock (Dew and Wright, 1998, Donázar et al., 2016). Finally, burrowing mammals help water filtrarion and soil mixing by building their dens (Davidson et al., 2012) and increase the organic and inorganic nutrients available in the soil, providing a better quality fodder for cattle (Villarreal et al., 2008). Lastly, birds and mammals can provide Cultural ES, by being a source of inspiration for photography and art, spiritual and cultural heritage. Also their presence encourages environmental education and eco-tourism (Dew and Wright, 1998, Green and Elmberg, 2014).

A large proportion of the Earth’s terrestrial surface is influenced by agriculture; therefore, its contribution to biodiversity is critical in long-term conservation of wildlife populations (Batáry et al., 2011, Tallis et al., 2009). In general, agroecosystems are managed to optimize provisioning ES, such as food, fiber and fuel. However, these benefits depend upon regulating ES, which are threatened by human activities (Foley et al., 2005, MEA, 2005, Rey Benayas and Bullock, 2012). Well-managed agricultural landscapes comprehend all types of services (MEA, 2005, Müller et al., 2019) and the interaction with natural areas is of great importance to achieve food security and maintain environmental integrity and resilience (Poppy et al., 2014).

Considering the huge impact that birds and mammals have on the human well-being, it is important to recognize the ES provided by these groups in agroecosystems. For this, it is useful to recognize key “ecosystem services providers”. Understanding their ecology, how animals select their resources (food and habitat) and their responses to environmental changes, could help to identify the ES provided by them, which are of importance for agricultural production and environmental integrity (Zaccagnini et al., 2011). On the other hand, it is important to take into account the negative interactions between them and people as well, because conflicts are one of the main threats that species are facing nowadays (Dickman, 2010). Therefore, having a clear identification and understanding of these relationships is crucial for the sustainable management of the environment (Birkhofer et al., 2018).

The Pampas region in Argentina is a temperate grassland ecosystem and one of the richest agricultural areas of the world for grain and beef production (Baldi et al., 2006, Bilenca and Miñarro, 2004, Soriano et al., 1991). Several areas of the original grasslands were replaced by sown pastures for livestock and croplands, with a particular expansion of soybean within the last decades (Aizen et al., 2009, Grau et al., 2005). This reduction of natural habitats has increased the overlapping between species of birds and mammals and the anthropogenic activities, threatening wildlife populations (Azpiroz et al., 2012, Codesido et al., 2011). Consequently, these changes have negatively affected the potential ES that these species could provide, even before they are identified and valued. Therefore, it is important to identify the different ES provided by birds and mammals and their conflicts to help achieve an integration between conservation and agriculture production.

The aim of this study was to identify which species are key “ecosystem services providers” of the Pampas region and highlight their potential ES provided by them. The specific objectives were: 1) to identify ecological functions of birds and mammals and their conflicts with human-activities in the Pampas region reported by previous articles; and 2) to link these ecological functions with potential ES provided by these species.