Krzysztof Kujawa

Conservation of farmland birds faces different challenges in Western and Central-Eastern Europe

Abstract. Birds are commonly used as an example of the strongly declining farmland biodiversity in Europe. The populations of many species have been shown to suffer from intensification of management, reduction of landscape heterogeneity, and habitat loss and fragmentation. These conditions particularly dominate farmland in the economically well developed countries of Western Europe. Currently, the farmland environment in Central-Eastern Europe is generally more extensive than in Western Europe and a larger proportion of people still live in rural areas; thus generating different conditions for birds living in agricultural areas. Furthermore, the quasi-subsistence farming in much of Central-Eastern Europe has resulted in agricultural landscapes that are generally more complex than those in Western Europe. To protect declining bird populations living in farmland, detailed knowledge on both species and communities is necessary. However, due to scientific tradition and availability of funding, the majority of studies have been carried out in Western Europe. In consequence this provokes a question: are findings obtained in western conditions useful to identify the fate of farmland bird biodiversity in Central-Eastern Europe? Therefore, the major goal of this paper is to highlight some local and regional differences in biodiversity patterns within EU farmland by comparing intensive agricultural landscapes with more extensive ones. More specifically, we aim to outline differences in agricultural landscapes and land use history in the two regions, use farmland birds to provide examples of the differences in species dynamics and species-habitat interactions between the two regions, and discuss possible social and ecological drivers of the differences in the context of biodiversity conservation. Factors governing spatio-temporal dynamics of farmland bird populations may differ in intensive and extensive landscapes as illustrated here using the Grey Partridge Perdix perdix and the Red-backed Shrike Lanius collurio as examples. The unevenness of farmland bird studies distribution across Europe was also presented. We call for more emphasis on pluralism in furthering both pan-European research on farmland bird ecology and conservation strategies. We also highlight some features specific to Central-Eastern Europe that merit consideration for the more efficient conservation of farmland birds and farmland biodiversity across Europe.

Does Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Affect Bird Species Richness and Abundance in an Agricultural Landscape

Abstract. The aim of the study (carried out 25 km south of Poznań, western Poland) was to determine the impact of Red Fox on bird abundance on farmland. Bird abundance was studied in the years 1999–2000 and 2005–2007 in three categories of sampling plots: 1) in small woods — with or without active fox dens, 2) along transects — starting from dens and running across arable land, and 3) around points — located at dens and far from them. Thus, variability in bird density was analyzed in relation to the presence/absence of Red Fox (in woods) and to the intensity of Red Fox penetration of crops (approximated by distance from a den). Two groups of bird species were distinguished with respect to their vulnerability to Red Fox predation pressure: 1) potential fox prey, i.e. species nesting on the ground and in low vegetation; and 2) birds not threatened by foxes, i.e. species nesting in tree holes and in tall vegetation. To investigate the relationships between bird distribution and Red Fox dens in woods, a step-wise multiple regression of bird density and species number on woodland structure was first performed. The residuals derived from the model were used to evaluate the impact of foxes by analyzing the differences between woods with and without active dens. Neither the species number nor the bird density differed significantly between woods with and without active dens. The differences in bird density observed between years in woods with or without active dens were not significant, either. No relationship between bird density in crop fields and distance from fox dens was found. The results are contrary to those of earlier studies and show that Red Fox does not affect farmland bird distribution, diversity and abundance, at least in the short term.

Impact of Land-Use and Climate on Biodiversity in an Agricultural Landscape

The term “biodiversity” was used for the first time by wildlife scientist and conservationist [1] in a lay book advocating nature conservation. The term was not adopted by more then decade. In 1980 use of the term by Thomas Lovejoy in the Foreword to the book “Conservation Biology” [2] credited with launching the field of conservation biology introduced the term to the scientific community. There are many definitions of biodiversity. One of them, formulated in Millennium Ecosystem Assessment [3] reads: ” Biodiversity is the variability among living organisms from all sources, including terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems”. Biodiversity forms the foundation of the vast array of ecosystem services that critically contribute to human well-being. Biodiversity is important in human-managed as well as natural ecosystems. Decisions humans make that influence biodiversity affect the well-being of themselves and others [3].

Restoration of subalpine species-rich grasslands: short-term vs long-term changes in the density and diversity of above-ground insects

ABSTRACT Due to decrease in the area of extensively managed, semi-natural grasslands, that contribute to high biodiversity level preservation, the conversion of highly productive meadows to extensively managed, species-rich grasslands is now regarded as an important task for nature conservation. The aim of this long-term study was to assess the significance of restoration measures for diversity and trophic structure of above-ground insect community. That study challenges some weaknesses of previous studies as it was conducted with the use of suction trap enabling quantitative analyses of the changes in most insect taxa, and in a long time-span (1992–2005) in a set of permanent plots. The study area was located in a subalpine zone in Bavaria, near Laufen (Germany). The restoration process was initiated in 1996 by a cessation of fertilization and reduction of number of mowing to 1–2 per year. The changes in insect density and diversity (number of families) were monitored in ten restored and two reference plots with the aid of a suction trap. The changes in the insect community recorded during 14 years support findings from other studies that response of insect community to restoration process is usually slow on average. The short-term comparison in 2004–2005 between the restored and reference plots show that the first ones were characterized by more diverse (in term of family number) insect communities (as a whole as well as in guilds of predatory and parasitic species). From the other side, the long-term trend analysis shows that since 1998–2000 insect diversity and abundance was declining. Also trophic structure is fluctuating without clearly defined trend. These findings are in line with the results of the analyses of taxonomic composition similarity. They did not support the expectations neither that difference between initial and current taxonomical composition in a restored plot increases in time (mainly because of incoming new species), nor that spatial heterogeneity of insect assemblages should increase. However, spatio-temporal insect interactions between sample plots (located close to each other), linked to high movement ability of many insect taxa, could mask the changes in insect community caused by restoration.