The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Grazing Intensity and the Diversity of Grasshoppers, Butterflies, and Trap‐Nesting Bees and Wasps
Open accessAbstract
Abstract: The maintenance of grasslands as distinct habitats depends on regular management, usually through grazing or mowing, but their species diversity is known to decline with increasing management intensity. The reduction of management intensity can be a useful tool for the long‐term conservation of the biological diversity of grasslands. We analyzed floral and faunal diversity on intensively and extensively (unintensively) grazed pastures and on 5‐ to 10‐year‐old ungrazed grasslands in northern Germany. Each of the three grassland habitats differing in grazing intensity was replicated six times. We related diverse taxa such as grasshoppers, butterfly adults and lepidopteran larvae, and trap‐nesting solitary bees and wasps to vegetation structure. There was an increase of species richness and abundance from pastures to ungrazed grasslands. The percentage of parasitism of the most abundant trap‐nesting species, the digger‐wasp ( Trypoxylon figulus ), was also higher on ungrazed grasslands. Decreased grazing on pastures enhanced species richness for adult butterflies only, whereas the abundance of adult butterflies, solitary bees and wasps, and their natural enemies increased. Although the differences in insect diversity between pastures and ungrazed grassland could be attributed to a greater vegetation height and heterogeneity ( bottom‐up effects) on ungrazed areas, the differences between intensively and extensively grazed pastures could not be explained by changes in vegetation characteristics. Hence, intensive grazing appeared to affect the insect communities through the disruption of plant‐insect interactions. A mosaic of extensively grazed grassland and grassland left ungrazed for a few years may be a good means by which to maintain biodiversity and the strength of trophic interactions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Natural climate solutions for the United States
Fargione, J. E., Bassett, S., Boucher, T., Bridgham, S. D., Conant, R. T., Cook-Patton, S. C., Ellis, P. W., Falcucci, A., Fourqurean, J. W., Gopalakrishna, T., et al. (2018) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat1869 · Cited by 588
Effects of large herbivores on grassland arthropod diversity
van Klink, R., van der Plas, F., van Noordwijk, C. G. E. (., WallisDeVries, M. F., & Olff, H. (2015) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12113 · Cited by 332
Le Féon, V., Schermann-Legionnet, A., Delettre, Y., Aviron, S., Billeter, R., Bugter, R., Hendrickx, F., & Burel, F. (2010) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2010.01.015 · Cited by 307
Effects of grassland abandonment, restoration and management on butterflies and vascular plants
Öckinger, E., Eriksson, A. K., & Smith, H. G. (2006) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.06.009 · Cited by 261
Effects of vineyard management on biodiversity at three trophic levels
Bruggisser, O. T., Schmidt-Entling, M. H., & Bacher, S. (2010) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.03.034 · Cited by 186
Metadata
- Authors
- Kruess, A., & Tscharntke, T.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1570-1580
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W1975687652
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Grazing Intensity and the Diversity of Grasshoppers, Butterflies, and Trap‐Nesting Bees and Wasps. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01334.x
- The paper
- Kruess, A., & Tscharntke, T. (2002). Grazing Intensity and the Diversity of Grasshoppers, Butterflies, and Trap‐Nesting Bees and Wasps. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01334.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.