Cited by 741Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesAvian ecology and behavior

Indicators for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: a pan‐European study

Open access
Billeter, R., Liira, J., Bailey, D., Bugter, R., Arens, P., Augenstein, I., Aviron, S., Baudry, J. +32 more·2008·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Summary: In many European agricultural landscapes, species richness is declining considerably. Studies performed at a very large spatial scale are helpful in understanding the reasons for this decline and as a basis for guiding policy. In a unique, large‐scale study of 25 agricultural landscapes in seven European countries, we investigated relationships between species richness in several taxa, and the links between biodiversity and landscape structure and management. We estimated the total species richness of vascular plants, birds and five arthropod groups in each 16‐km 2 landscape, and recorded various measures of both landscape structure and intensity of agricultural land use. We studied correlations between taxonomic groups and the effects of landscape and land‐use parameters on the number of species in different taxonomic groups. Our statistical approach also accounted for regional variation in species richness unrelated to landscape or land‐use factors. The results reveal strong geographical trends in species richness in all taxonomic groups. No single species group emerged as a good predictor of all other species groups. Species richness of all groups increased with the area of semi‐natural habitats in the landscape. Species richness of birds and vascular plants was negatively associated with fertilizer use. Synthesis and applications. We conclude that indicator taxa are unlikely to provide an effective means of predicting biodiversity at a large spatial scale, especially where there is large biogeographical variation in species richness. However, a small list of landscape and land‐use parameters can be used in agricultural landscapes to infer large‐scale patterns of species richness. Our results suggest that to halt the loss of biodiversity in these landscapes, it is important to preserve and, if possible, increase the area of semi‐natural habitat.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01393.x

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Semi Natural Habitat (%SNH) indicator is strongly correlated with the presence of useful species of different taxa (e.g., bees, bugs) at the landscape scale.

    “It is relevant for nature conservation and connectivity among natural areas, and it is strongly correlated with the presence of useful species of di erent taxa (e.g., bees, bugs) at the landscape scale [31].”

    From An Actor-Oriented Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework to Support a Transition towards Sustainable Agricultural Systems Based on Crop Diversification (2020) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Correlations with Landscape and Land-Use Indicators section reports that the area of semi-natural habitat was positively associated with the combined species richness of five arthropod taxa; the Biodiversity Assessment section identifies bees and true bugs among them. The paper measures species richness, not the presence of particular useful species, and does not establish that the species counted were useful. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Using particular, single taxa as indicators for biodiversity does not necessarily represent biodiversity as a whole and can therefore be misleading.

    “Our findings are in line with Billeter et al. 26, who argued that using particular, single taxa as indicators for biodiversity does not necessarily represent biodiversity as a whole and can therefore be misleading.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Westrich, P. (1996) Habitat requirements of Central European bees and the problems of partial habitats. The Conservation of Bees (eds A. Matheson, S.L. Buchmann, C. O'Toole, P. Westrich & I. H. Williams), pp. 1-16. Academic Press, London.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Billeter, R., Liira, J., Bailey, D., Bugter, R., Arens, P., Augenstein, I., Aviron, S., Baudry, J., Bukacek, R., Burel, F., Cerny, M., De Blust, G., De Cock, R., Diekötter, T., Dietz, H., Dirksen, J., Dormann, C., Durka, W., Frenzel, M., Hamersky, R., Hendrickx, F., Herzog, F., Klotz, S., Koolstra, B., Lausch, A., Le Coeur, D., Maelfait, J. P., Opdam, P., Roubalova, M., Schermann, A., Schermann, N., Schmidt, T., Schweiger, O., Smulders, M. J. M., Speelmans, M., Simova, P., Verboom, J., Van Wingerden, W. K. R. E., Zobel, M., & Edwards, P. J.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • University of Tartu (EE)
  • Agroscope (CH)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (DE)
  • Ecosystèmes, Biodiversité, Evolution (FR)
  • Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Institute of Forest Ecosystem Research (CZ)
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
  • Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic (CZ)
  • Research Institute for Nature and Forest (BE)
  • Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (FR)
Corresponding author
Billeter, R.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-10-05
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
141-150
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2112151272
Cited by
741
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 37
FWCI
24.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften digital collection (Zurich University of Applied Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • Stichting Nederlands Oogheelkundig Onderzoek
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
Keywords
biodiversity indicators, agricultural landscapes, species richness, landscape structure, land use intensity, semi-natural habitats, vascular plants, farmland birds, arthropods, fertilizer use, biogeographical variation, European agriculture

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