Artificial agri‐environment scheme ponds do not replicate natural environments despite higher aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate richness and abundance

Marina Reyne,Myles Nolan,Henry Mcguiggan,Ferdia Marnell,Mark Emmerson,Aurélie Aubry,Neil Reid,Jani Heino

doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13738

Abstract

Abstract Farmland ponds are a highly threatened freshwater habitat which has undergone dramatic losses during the last 200 years due to land drainage schemes and agricultural intensification. Agri‐environment schemes (AES) incentivize farmers to adopt farming methods to benefit biodiversity, yet there are a paucity of data evaluating the success of artificially created AES ponds as analogues of natural ponds in an attempt to recreate lost environments. We examined variation in environmental parameters and aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate communities between 38 natural ponds and 91 artificial ponds that were created in south‐west Ireland (n = 129). Artificial ponds in agricultural grassland did not replicate natural ponds in adjacent semi‐natural habitats differing significantly in size, pH, conductivity, productivity (indicated by submerged and emergent plant cover including algae) and surrounding vegetation structure that is, sward height. These differences significantly influenced aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate community structure with a suite of indicator taxa in both natural and artificial ponds. The conservation value of artificial ponds in agricultural grasslands should not be underestimated as they had 43% higher aquatic species richness and 33% higher aquatic species abundance than natural ponds in adjacent semi‐natural habitats. Synthesis and applications. We demonstrate that artificial agri‐environment scheme ponds created in agricultural grasslands, whilst not direct analogues of natural ponds in adjacent semi‐natural habitats, do fulfil a role in preserving high local biodiversity albeit representing a different community of species. Creation of ponds in farmland as well as in adjacent natural habitats could provide a wider range of environmental conditions and richer associated macroinvertebrate communities, increasing landscape connectivity and further enhancing regional biodiversity.

Highlights

Agricultural intensification raises concerns about biodiversity loss and degradation in associated ecosystem service delivery (Smith, Renwick, Bartley, & Buddemeier, 2002; Deacon, Samways, & Pryke, 2018)
We demonstrate that artificial agri-environment scheme ponds created in agricultural grasslands, whilst not direct analogues of natural ponds in adjacent semi-natural habitats, do fulfil a role in preserving high local biodiversity albeit representing a different community of species
Created Agri-environment schemes (AES) ponds constructed in agricultural grassland, whilst not direct analogues of natural ponds in adjacent non-agricultural habitats within the same landscape, do appear to fulfil an important role in preserving local biodiversity despite differences in community structure

Summary

Introduction

Agricultural intensification raises concerns about biodiversity loss and degradation in associated ecosystem service delivery (Smith, Renwick, Bartley, & Buddemeier, 2002; Deacon, Samways, & Pryke, 2018). Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aim to reverse the negative consequences of converting natural habitats to agriculture by compensating farmers for financial losses associated with modifying agricultural practises to benefit biodiversity (Weibull, Ostman, & Granqvist, 2003; Whittingham, 2011). Agri-environmental schemes have become key to environmental and agricultural policy and are one of the main mechanisms by which wildlife conservation projects are financed (Batáry, Dicks, Kleijn, & Sutherland, 2015). AES yield mixed outcomes with most lacking adequate monitoring resulting in a paucity of data through which success was assessed (Kleijn, & Sutherland, 2003). Most of the successful AES have focused on terrestrial taxonomic groups, for example, birds (Batáry et al, 2015). While some work has been done on lotic systems (e.g. Jones et al, 2017), little is known on the impact of AES on freshwater ponds and associated aquatic biodiversity

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Conclusion