首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Ecology and Evolution >How much do we really lose?—Yield losses in the proximity of natural landscape elements in agricultural landscapes
【2h】

How much do we really lose?—Yield losses in the proximity of natural landscape elements in agricultural landscapes

机译:我们真正损失了多少?—农业景观中自然景观要素附近的巨大损失

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Natural landscape elements (NLEs) in agricultural landscapes contribute to biodiversity and ecosystem services, but are also regarded as an obstacle for large‐scale agricultural production. However, the effects of NLEs on crop yield have rarely been measured. Here, we investigated how different bordering structures, such as agricultural roads, field‐to‐field borders, forests, hedgerows, and kettle holes, influence agricultural yields. We hypothesized that (a) yield values at field borders differ from mid‐field yields and that (b) the extent of this change in yields depends on the bordering structure.We measured winter wheat yields along transects with log‐scaled distances from the border into the agricultural field within two intensively managed agricultural landscapes in Germany (2014 near Göttingen, and 2015–2017 in the Uckermark).We observed a yield loss adjacent to every investigated bordering structure of 11%–38% in comparison with mid‐field yields. However, depending on the bordering structure, this yield loss disappeared at different distances. While the proximity of kettle holes did not affect yields more than neighboring agricultural fields, woody landscape elements had strong effects on winter wheat yields. Notably, 95% of mid‐field yields could already be reached at a distance of 11.3 m from a kettle hole and at a distance of 17.8 m from hedgerows as well as forest borders.Our findings suggest that yield losses are especially relevant directly adjacent to woody landscape elements, but not adjacent to in‐field water bodies. This highlights the potential to simultaneously counteract yield losses close to the field border and enhance biodiversity by combining different NLEs in agricultural landscapes such as creating strips of extensive grassland vegetation between woody landscape elements and agricultural fields. In conclusion, our results can be used to quantify ecocompensations to find optimal solutions for the delivery of productive and regulative ecosystem services in heterogeneous agricultural landscapes.
机译:农业景观中的自然景观元素(NLE)有助于生物多样性和生态系统服务,但也被视为大规模农业生产的障碍。然而,很少评估非农作物对作物产量的影响。在这里,我们调查了不同的边界结构(如农业道路,田间边界,森林,树篱和水壶洞)如何影响农业产量。我们假设(a)田间边界的单产值不同于中部田间的单产,并且(b)产量变化的程度取决于边界结构。我们测量了沿样带的小麦产量,其与边界的对数刻度距离进入德国两个集约化管理的农业景观中的农业领域(2014年在哥廷根附近,在2015年至2017年在乌克马克) 。然而,取决于边界结构,这种产量损失在不同距离处消失。虽然壶孔的靠近对产量的影响不比邻近的农田大,但木质景观元素对冬小麦的产量影响很大。值得注意的是,距壶孔11.3 m,距树篱和森林边界17.8 m的距离已经达到95%的田间产量。木质景观元素,但不与野外水体相邻。这突显了通过结合农业景观中的不同非农作物(例如在木质景观元素和农田之间创建大量草木植被带)来同时抵消田间边界附近单产损失和增强生物多样性的潜力。总之,我们的结果可用于量化生态补偿,以找到在异质农业景观中提供生产性和调节性生态系统服务的最佳解决方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号