The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground‐dwelling farmland spiders
Open accessAbstract
Summary: The distribution and abundance of animals are influenced by factors at both local and wider landscape scales. Natural enemies of pests in arable fields often immigrate from the surrounding landscape, and are also influenced by local management practices. Thus, landscape diversification and farming methods may both enhance farmland biodiversity, but their relative roles and possible interactions have been little explored. The relationships of ground‐dwelling spiders (Araneae) to landscape features and to organic agriculture were studied in 12 pairs of organic vs. conventional fields of winter wheat Triticum aestivum along a gradient of landscape complexity. High percentages of non‐crop habitats in the landscape increased local species richness of spiders from 12 to 20 species, irrespective of local management. This indicates that larger species pools are sustained in complex landscapes, where there is higher availability of refuge and overwintering habitats. Organic agriculture did not increase the number of spider species, but enhanced spider density by 62%. Additionally, spider density was positively related to the percentage of non‐crop habitats in the surrounding landscape, but only in conventional fields. Synthesis and applications. The species richness of ground‐dwelling spiders in crop fields was linked to large‐scale landscape complexity, while spider densities responded to local management practices. Organic agriculture benefits farmland spiders and augments the numbers of predatory spiders, thereby contributing to pest control. However, measures to conserve species richness must also take landscape‐scale factors into account. Complex landscapes including perennial non‐crop habitats should be preserved or restored to achieve high levels of spider diversity.
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
Cites
ter Braak, C. J. F., & Šmilauer, P. (2002) · Cited by 9,306
Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key?
Benton, T. G., Vickery, J. A., & Wilson, J. D. (2003) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00011-9 · Cited by 3,205
Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture
Landis, D. A., Wratten, S. D., & Gurr, G. M. (2000) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.45.1.175 · Cited by 3,100
Community Diversity: Relative Roles of Local and Regional Processes
Ricklefs, R. E. (1987) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.235.4785.167 · Cited by 2,386
Does organic farming benefit biodiversity?
Hole, D. G., Perkins, A. J., Wilson, J. D., Alexander, I. H., Grice, P. V., & Evans, A. D. (2005) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2004.07.018 · Cited by 1,597
Can Generalist Predators be Effective Biocontrol Agents?
Symondson, W. O. C., Sunderland, K. D., & Greenstone, M. H. (2002) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145240 · Cited by 1,535
Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies
Moran, M. D. (2003) · Oikos · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12010.x · Cited by 1,484 · cited 1×
“overall probability of the observed frequency of outcomes falling below the nominal significance level a = 0-05 with Bernoulli equations (Moran 2003).”
BackgroundEcological impacts of arable intensification in Europe
Stoate, C., Boatman, N. D., Borralho, R. J., Carvalho, C. R., Snoo, G. R. D., & Eden, P. (2001) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1006/jema.2001.0473 · Cited by 1,297
Zobel, M. (1997) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(97)01096-3 · Cited by 998
Managing Tropical Rice Pests Through Conservation of Generalist Natural Enemies and Alternative Prey
Settle, W. H., Ariawan, H., Astuti, E. T., Cahyana, W., Hakim, A. L., Hindayana, D., & Lestari, A. S. (1996) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/2265694 · Cited by 876
Cited by
Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—Ecosystem service management
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan‐Dewenter, I., & Thies, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x · Cited by 4,455
Self-citationA meta-analysis of crop pest and natural enemy response to landscape complexity
Chaplin‐Kramer, R., O’Rourke, M. E., Blitzer, E. J., & Kremen, C. (2011) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01642.x · Cited by 1,037
Gomiero, T., Pimentel, D., & Paoletti, M. G. (2011) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352689.2011.554355 · Cited by 915
Conservation biological control and enemy diversity on a landscape scale
Tscharntke, T., Bommarco, R., Clough, Y., Crist, T. O., Kleijn, D., Rand, T. A., Tylianakis, J. M., Nouhuys, S. V., & Vidal, S. (2007) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2007.08.006 · Cited by 776
Self-citationHabitat Management to Suppress Pest Populations: Progress and Prospects
Gurr, G. M., Wratten, S. D., Landis, D. A., & You, M. (2017) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-031616-035050 · Cited by 699
Metadata
- Authors
- SCHMIDT, M. H., ROSCHEWITZ, I., THIES, C., & TSCHARNTKE, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-04
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 281-287
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W1500701742
- Cited by
- 416
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 10.92
- 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: Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground‐dwelling farmland spiders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01014.x
- The paper
- SCHMIDT, M. H., ROSCHEWITZ, I., THIES, C., & TSCHARNTKE, T. (2005). Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground‐dwelling farmland spiders. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01014.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.