Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Establishing the ecological planning principles from empirical studies in agricultural environments of Taiwan

  • Special Feature: Review
  • Local Landscape Planning and Management in Rural Areas
  • Published:
Landscape and Ecological Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Studies have suggested that the heterogeneity and arrangement of landscape structures are influential to the faunal biodiversity of environments. How does the landscape structure in agricultural landscape arrangements improve the functions of the natural ecosystem? Previous research has uncovered a great amount of information on the relationships between landscape structure and wildlife; however, for landscape designers and planners, such information is site-specific and has limited utilization. Hence, this study aimed to organize and categorize the relationships between environments and biodiversity and transfer this information into design principles in agricultural landscapes. This study attempted to integrate aspects of previous research into a systematic framework. The current study searched literature between 2007 and 2016 from the following journals: Landscape Ecology, Landscape and Urban Planning, and Journal of Applied Ecology. In all, this study collected 58 empirical studies of agricultural environments similar to that of Taiwan and revealed the valuable relationship between wildlife and agricultural environments. The outcomes reviewed from the literature were categorized by semi-natural elements and divided into six sub-categories: forests, hedgerows, grasslands, flowers, water, and heterogeneity of the natural landscape. The landscape attributes that were frequently discussed included patch number, patch area, connectivity, species richness, edge area, distance from semi-natural elements, and complexity. The landscape attributes formed by these elements were organized into a table as a checklist for designers’ convenience. The checklist will help landscape planners and designers to create agricultural landscapes with integral ecosystems.

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

References

  • Alanen EL, Hyvönen T, Lindgren S, Härmä O, Kuussaari M (2011) Differential responses of bumblebees and diurnal Lepidoptera to vegetation succession in long-term set-aside. J Appl Ecol 48(5):1251–1259

    Google Scholar 

  • Albrecht M, Duelli P, Müller C, Kleijn D, Schmid B (2007) The Swiss agri-environment scheme enhances pollinator diversity and plant reproductive success in nearby intensively managed farmland. J Appl Ecol 44(4):813–822

    Google Scholar 

  • Alison J, Duffield SJ, Noordwijk CG, Morecroft MD, Marrs RH, Saccheri IJ, Hodgson JA (2016) Spatial targeting of habitat creation has the potential to improve agri-environment scheme outcomes for macro-moths. J Appl Ecol 53(6):1814–1822

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey D, Schmidt-Entling MH, Eberhart P, Herrmann JD, Hofer G, Kormann U, Herzog F (2010) Effects of habitat amount and isolation on biodiversity in fragmented traditional orchards. J Appl Ecol 47(5):1003–1013

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair R (2004) The effects of urban sprawl on birds at multiple levels of biological organization. Ecol Soc 9(5):2

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough Y, Kruess A, Tscharntke T (2007a) Local and landscape factors in differently managed arable fields affect the insect herbivore community of a non-crop plant species. J Appl Ecol 44(1):22–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough Y, Holzschuh A, Gabriel D et al (2007b) Alpha and beta diversity of arthropods and plants in organically and conventionally managed wheat fields. J Appl Ecol 44(4):804–812

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole LJ, Brocklehurst S, Elston DA, McCracken DI (2012) Riparian field margins: can they enhance the functional structure of ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages in intensively managed grassland landscapes? J Appl Ecol 49(6):1384–1395

    Google Scholar 

  • Concepción ED, Díaz M, Baquero RA (2008) Effects of landscape complexity on the ecological effectiveness of agri-environment schemes. Landsc Ecol 23(2):135–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Concepción ED, Díaz M, Kleijn D et al (2012) Interactive effects of landscape context constrain the effectiveness of local agri-environmental management. J Appl Ecol 49(3):695–705

    Google Scholar 

  • Dainese M, Montecchiari S, Sitzia T, Sigura M, Marini L (2017) High cover of hedgerows in the landscape supports multiple ecosystem services in Mediterranean cereal fields. J Appl Ecol 54(2):380–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorresteijn I, Teixeira L, Von Wehrden H, Loos J, Hanspach J, Stein JAR, Fischer J (2015) Impact of land cover homogenization on the Corncrake (Crex crex) in traditional farmland. Landsc Ecol 30(8):1483–1495

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas DJ, Vickery JA, Benton TG (2009) Improving the value of field margins as foraging habitat for farmland birds. J Appl Ecol 46(2):353–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Dramstad W, Olson JD, Forman RT (1996) Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land-use planning. Island Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois GF, Vignon V, Delettre YR, Rantier Y, Vernon P, Burel F (2009) Factors affecting the occurrence of the endangered saproxylic beetle Osmoderma eremita (Scopoli, 1763) (Coleoptera: Cetoniidae) in an agricultural landscape. Landsc Urban Plan 91(3):152–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchamp JE, Swihart RK (2008) Shifts in bat community structure related to evolved traits and features of human-altered landscapes. Landsc Ecol 23(7):849–860

    Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P (1997) Biodiversity evaluation in agricultural landscapes: an approach at two different scales. Agr Ecosyst Environ 62(2):81–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Duflot R, Aviron S, Ernoult A, Fahrig L, Burel F (2015) Reconsidering the role of ‘semi-natural habitat’ in agricultural landscape biodiversity: a case study. Ecol Res 30(1):75–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65(1):169–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekroos J, Rundlöf M, Smith HG (2013) Trait-dependent responses of flower-visiting insects to distance to semi-natural grasslands and landscape heterogeneity. Landsc Ecol 28(7):1283–1292

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L, Baudry J, Brotons L et al (2011) Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol Lett 14(2):101–112

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forman RT (1995) Land mosaic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman RT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey-Ehrenbold A, Bontadina F, Arlettaz R, Obrist MK (2013) Landscape connectivity, habitat structure and activity of bat guilds in farmland-dominated matrices. J Appl Ecol 50(1):252–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes-Montemayor E, Goulson D, Park KJ (2011) The effectiveness of agri-environment schemes for the conservation of farmland moths: assessing the importance of a landscape-scale management approach. J Appl Ecol 48(3):532–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné SA, Fahrig L (2007) Effect of landscape context on anuran communities in breeding ponds in the National Capital Region, Canada. Landsc Ecol 22(2):205–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelling M, Macdonald DW, Mathews F (2007) Are hedgerows the route to increased farmland small mammal density? Use of hedgerows in British pastoral habitats. Landsc Ecol 22(7):1019–1032

    Google Scholar 

  • Haenke S, Scheid B, Schaefer M, Tscharntke T, Thies C (2009) Increasing syrphid fly diversity and density in sown flower strips within simple vs. complex landscapes. J Appl Ecol 46(5):1106–1114

    Google Scholar 

  • Haenke S, Kovács-Hostyánszki A, Fründ J, Batáry P, Jauker B, Tscharntke T, Holzschuh A (2014) Landscape configuration of crops and hedgerows drives local syrphid fly abundance. J Appl Ecol 51(2):505–513

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrickx F, Maelfait JP, Van Wingerden W et al (2007) How landscape structure, land-use intensity and habitat diversity affect components of total arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes. J Appl Ecol 44(2):340–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann JD, Bailey D, Hofer G, Herzog F, Schmidt-Entling MH (2010) Spiders associated with the meadow and tree canopies of orchards respond differently to habitat fragmentation. Landsc Ecol 25(9):1375–1384

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiron M, Berg Å, Eggers S et al (2015) The relationship of bird diversity to crop and non-crop heterogeneity in agricultural landscapes. Landsc Ecol 30(10):2001–2013

    Google Scholar 

  • Holzschuh A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kleijn D, Tscharntke T (2007) Diversity of flower-visiting bees in cereal fields: effects of farming system, landscape composition and regional context. J Appl Ecol 44(1):41–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Inclán DJ, Cerretti P, Gabriel D et al (2015) Organic farming enhances parasitoid diversity at the local and landscape scales. J Appl Ecol 52(4):1102–1109

    Google Scholar 

  • Jauker F, Diekötter T, Schwarzbach F, Wolters V (2009) Pollinator dispersal in an agricultural matrix: opposing responses of wild bees and hoverflies to landscape structure and distance from main habitat. Landsc Ecol 24(4):547–555

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C, M'Gonigle LK (2015) Small-scale restoration in intensive agricultural landscapes supports more specialized and less mobile pollinator species. J Appl Ecol 52(3):602–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiss KA, Klinkhamer PGL (2005) Genotype by environment interactions in the nectar production of Echium vulgare. Funct Ecol 19(3):454–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham R, Crane M, Michael D, Montague-Drake R (2007) Farmland bird responses to intersecting replanted areas. Landsc Ecol 22(10):1555–1562

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod CJ, Blackwell G, Benge J (2012) Reduced pesticide toxicity and increased woody vegetation cover account for enhanced native bird densities in organic orchards. J Appl Ecol 49(3):652–660

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel N, Burel F, Legendre P, Butet A (2007) Role of habitat and landscape in structuring small mammal assemblages in hedgerow networks of contrasted farming landscapes in Brittany, France. Landsc Ecol 22(8):1241–1253

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne RJ, Bennett LP (2007) Biodiversity and ecological value of conservation lands in agricultural landscapes of southern Ontario, Canada. Landsc Ecol 22(5):657–670

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira F, Russo D (2007) Modelling the impact of agricultural abandonment and wildfires on vertebrate diversity in Mediterranean Europe. Landsc Ecol 22(10):1461–1476

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortelliti A, Amori G, Capizzi D, Cervone C, Fagiani S, Pollini B, Boitani L (2011) Independent effects of habitat loss, habitat fragmentation and structural connectivity on the distribution of two arboreal rodents. J Appl Ecol 48(1):153–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossman HL, Panter CJ, Dolman PM (2015) Modelling biodiversity distribution in agricultural landscapes to support ecological network planning. Landsc Urban Plan 141:59–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Öckinger E, Smith HG (2007) Semi-natural grasslands as population sources for pollinating insects in agricultural landscapes. J Appl Ecol 44(1):50–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortega-Álvarez R, MacGregor-Fors I (2009) Living in the big city: effects of urban land-use on bird community structure, diversity, and composition. Landsc Urban Plan 90(3):189–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Power EF, Stout JC (2011) Organic dairy farming: impacts on insect–flower interaction networks and pollination. J Appl Ecol 48(3):561–569

    Google Scholar 

  • Puech C, Poggi S, Baudry J, Aviron S (2015) Do farming practices affect natural enemies at the landscape scale? Landsc Ecol 30(1):125–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn JE, Johnson RJ, Brandle JR (2014) Identifying opportunities for conservation embedded in cropland anthromes. Landsc Ecol 29(10):1811–1819

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford JQ, Bennett AF (2007) The relative importance of landscape properties for woodland birds in agricultural environments. J Appl Ecol 44(4):737–747

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid N, McDonald RA, Montgomery W (2007) Mammals and agri-environment schemes: hare haven or pest paradise? J Appl Ecol 44(6):1200–1208

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedinger V, Renner M, Rundlöf M, Steffan-Dewenter I, Holzschuh A (2014) Early mass-flowering crops mitigate pollinator dilution in late-flowering crops. Landsc Ecol 29(3):425–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Riffell SK, Monroe AP, Martin JA, Evans KO, Burger LW, Smith MD (2015) Response of non-grassland avian guilds to adjacent herbaceous field buffers: testing the configuration of targeted conservation practices in agricultural landscapes. J Appl Ecol 52(2):300–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-San Pedro A, Simonetti JA (2015) The relative influence of forest loss and fragmentation on insectivorous bats: does the type of matrix matter? Landsc Ecol 30(8):1561–1572

    Google Scholar 

  • Rundlöf M, Bengtsson J, Smith HG (2008) Local and landscape effects of organic farming on butterfly species richness and abundance. J Appl Ecol 45(3):813–820

    Google Scholar 

  • Šálek M, Kreisinger J, Sedláček F, Albrecht T (2010) Do prey densities determine preferences of mammalian predators for habitat edges in an agricultural landscape? Landsc Urban Plan 98(2):86–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheper J, Bommarco R, Holzschuh A et al (2015) Local and landscape-level floral resources explain effects of wildflower strips on wild bees across four European countries. J Appl Ecol 52(5):1165–1175

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt MH, Roschewitz I, Thies C, Tscharntke T (2005) Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground-dwelling farmland spiders. J Appl Ecol 42(2):281–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjödin NE, Bengtsson J, Ekbom B (2008) The influence of grazing intensity and landscape composition on the diversity and abundance of flower-visiting insects. J Appl Ecol 45(3):763–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Suárez RP, Zaccagnini ME, Babbitt KJ et al (2016) Anuran responses to spatial patterns of agricultural landscapes in Argentina. Landsc Ecol 31(10):2485–2505

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift MJ, Izac AM, van Noordwijk M (2004) Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes—are we asking the right questions? Agr Ecosyst Environ 104(1):113–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson SJ, Watson DM, Luck GW, Spooner PG (2014) Effects of landscape composition and connectivity on the distribution of an endangered parrot in agricultural landscapes. Landsc Ecol 29(7):1249–1259

    Google Scholar 

  • Winqvist C, Bengtsson J, Aavik T et al (2011) Mixed effects of organic farming and landscape complexity on farmland biodiversity and biological control potential across Europe. J Appl Ecol 48(3):570–579

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuczyński A (2016) Farmland bird diversity in contrasting agricultural landscapes of southwestern Poland. Landsc Urban Plan 148:108–119

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology, R.O.C. (106-2410-H-002-173-MY3).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, National Taiwan University, No. 138 Sec. 4 Keelong Road, Taipei, 10673, Taiwan

    Chia-Ching Wu & Chun-Yen Chang

Authors
  1. Chia-Ching Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chun-Yen Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chun-Yen Chang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, CC., Chang, CY. Establishing the ecological planning principles from empirical studies in agricultural environments of Taiwan. Landscape Ecol Eng 16, 233–247 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-020-00418-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-020-00418-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation