Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reducing management intensity and isolation as promising tools to enhance ground-dwelling arthropod diversity in urban grasslands

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urbanisation is a growing global phenomenon having multiple ecological consequences. However, the effects of urbanisation on biodiversity remain ambiguous, and some evidence exists that cities provide valuable secondary habitats for many species, possibly mitigating regional biodiversity loss. Therefore, the value of urban sites for biodiversity depends on local habitat conditions and the configuration of the surrounding landscape. We aimed to disentangle the effects of local habitat parameters (management, plant diversity) and urban matrix variables (urbanisation, isolation) on carabid beetle and spider diversity and traits in informal urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Habitat management and isolation were the most important influences on carabid beetle and spider species and trait compositions. Spider communities of irregular managed sites contained 2.5 times more species of conservation concern than extensive (regular) managed sites. Moreover, irregular managed sites contained larger species (both for carabid beetles and spiders) and affected the hunting mode of spiders. Isolated sites tended to have lower spider species richness and number of spider species of conservation concern. Moreover, isolated sites were characterised by small, mobile and herbivorous carabid beetles. In contrast, urbanisation and local plant diversity had no effect on carabid beetles and spiders. We conclude that urban grasslands within residential areas – even if not targeted for conservation plans – can provide important habitats for conserving biodiversity, including species of conservation concern. Reducing the intensity of habitat management and increasing the connectivity of urban grassland sites can promote diverse arthropod communities and should therefore be considered in urban planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alaruikka D, Kotze DJ, Matveinen K, Niemelä J (2002) Carabid beetle and spider assemblages along a forested urban-rural gradient in southern Finland. J Insect Conserv 6:195–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronson MFJ, Lepczyk CA, Evans KL, Goddard MA, Lerman SB, Macivor JS, Nilon CH, Vargo T (2017) Biodiversity in the city: key challenges for urban green space management. Front Ecol Environ 15:189–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bang C, Faeth SH (2011) Variation in arthropod communities in response to urbanization: seven years of arthropod monitoring in a desert city. Landsc Urban Plan 103:383–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell JR, Bohan DA, Shaw EM, Weyman GS (2005) Ballooning dispersal using silk: world fauna, phylogenies, genetics and models. Bull Ent Res 95:69–114

  • Beninde J, Veith M, Hochkirch A (2015) Biodiversity in cities needs space: a meta-analysis of factors determining intra-urban biodiversity variation. Ecol Lett 18:581–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz S (2010) Ground spider assemblages as indicators for habitat structure in inland sand ecosystems. Biodivers Conserv 19:2565–2595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz S, Hannig K, Schirmel J (2013) Losing uniqueness – shifts in carabid species composition during dry grassland and heathland succession. Anim Conserv 16:661–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkman CE, Gardiner MM (2015) Spider assemblages within greenspaces of a deindustrialized urban landscape. Urban Ecosyst 18:793–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardoso P, Pekár S, Jocque R, Coddington JA (2011) Global patterns of guild com-position and functional diversity of spiders. PLoS ONE 6:e21710

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Croci S, Butet A, Georges A, Aguejdad R, Clergeau P (2008) Small urban woodlands as biodiversity conservation hot-spot: a multi-taxon approach. Landsc Ecol 23:1171–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dray S, Legendre P (2008) Testing the species traits-environment relationships: the fourth-corner problem revisited. Ecology 89:3400–3412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dray S, Dufour AB, Chessel D (2007) The ade4 package-II: two-table and K-table methods. R News 7:47–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert S, Möller M, Buchholz S (2017) Grasshopper diversity of urban wastelands is primarily boosted by habitat factors. Insect Conserv Diver 10:248–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egerer MH, Arel C, Otoshi MD, Quistberg RD, Bichier P, Philpott SM (2017) Urban arthropods respond variably to changes in landscape context and spatial scale. J Urban Ecology 2017:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Elek Z, Lövei GL (2007) Patterns in ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages along an urbanisation gradient in Denmark. Acta Oecol 32:104–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer LK, von der Lippe M, Kowarik I (2013a) Urban land use types contribute to grassland conservation: the example of berlin. Urban For Urban Green 12:263–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer LK, von der Lippe M, Rillig MC, Kowarik I (2013b) Creating novel urban grasslands by reintroducing native species in wasteland vegetation. Biol Conserv 159:119–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer LK, von der Lippe M, Kowarik I (2013c) Urban grassland restoration: which plant traits make desired species successful colonizers? Appl Veg Sci 16:272–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer LK, Eichfeld J, Kowarik I, Buchholz S (2016) Disentangling urban habitat and matrix effects on wild bee species. PeerJ 4:e2729. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2729

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Foelix R (2010) Biology of spiders. Oxford University Press

  • Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression, Second Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage

  • Gerisch M, Agostinelli V, Henle K, Dziock F (2012) More species, but all do the same: contrasting effects of flood disturbance on ground beetle functional and species diversity. Oikos 121:508–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunnarsson B, Federsel LM (2014) Bumblebees in the city: abundance, species richness and diversity in two urban habitats. J Insect Conserv 18:1185–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajek AE (2004) Natural enemies: an introduction to biological control. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley DJ, Koivula MJ, Spence JR, Pelletier R, Ball GE (2007) Effects of urbanization on ground beetle assemblages (Coleoptera, Carabidae) of grassland habitats in western Canada. Ecography 30:673–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ, Higgs E, Harris JA (2009) Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration. Trends Ecol Evol 24:599–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg K, Homburg N, Schäfer F, Schuldt A, Assmann T (2014) Carabids.org – a dynamic online database of ground beetle species traits (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Insect Conserv Diver 7:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ives CD, Lentini PE, Threlfall CG, Ikin K, Shanahan DF, Garrard GE, Bekessy SA, Fuller RA, Mumaw L, Rayner L, Rowe R, Valentine LE, Kendal D (2016) Cities are hotspots for threatened species. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones EL, Leather SR (2012) Invertebrates in urban areas: a review. Eur J Entomol 109:463–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kielhorn K-H (2005) Rote Liste und Gesamtartenliste der Laufkäfer (Coleoptera: Carabidae) von Berlin. In: Der Landesbeauftragte für Naturschutz und Landschaftspflege / Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung (Ed.): Rote Listen der gefährdeten Pflanzen und Tiere von Berlin. CD-ROM

  • Knop E (2016) Biotic homogenization of three insect groups due to urbanization. Glob Chang Biol 22:228–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowarik I (2011) Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut 159:1974–1983

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Galzin R, Harmelin-Vivien ML (1997) Relating behavior to habitat: solutions to the fourth-corner problem. Ecology 78:547–562

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Holoyak M, Mouquet N, Amarasekare P, Chase JM, Hoopes MF, Holt RD, Shurin JB, Law R, Tilman D, Loreau M, Gonzalez A (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe EC, Threlfall CG, Wilder SM, Hochuli DF (2018) Environmental drivers of spider community composition at multiple scales along an urban gradient. Biodivers Conserv 27:829–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIvor JS, Lundholm J (2011) Insect species composition and diversity on intensive green roofs and adjacent level-ground habitats. Urban Ecosyst 14:225–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magura T, Horváth R, Tóthmérész B (2010a) Effects of urbanization on ground-dwelling spiders in forest patches in Hungary. Landsc Ecol 25:621–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magura T, Lövei GL, Tóthmérész B (2010b) Does urbanization decrease diversity in ground beetle (Carabidae) assemblages? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:16–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, McGill BJ (Eds.) (2011) Biological diversity: Frontiers in measurement and assessment. Oxford University Press

  • Melliger RL, Rusterholz H-P, Baur B (2017) Habitat- and matrix-related differences in species diversity and trait richness of vascular plants, Orthoptera and Lepidoptera in an urban landscape. Urban Ecosyst 20:1095–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merckx T, Souffreau C, Kaiser A, Baardsen LF, Backeljau T, Bonte D, Brans KI, Cours M, Dahirel M, Debortoli N, De Wolf K, Engelen JMT, Fontaneto D, Gianuca AT, Govaert L, Hendrickx F, Higuti J, Lens L, Martens K, Matheve H, Matthysen E, Piano E, Sablon R, Schön I, Van Doninck K, De Meester L, Van Dyck H (2018) Body-size shifts in aquatic and terrestrial urban communities. Nature 558:113–116

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miranda AC, Schielzeth H, Sonntag T, Partecke J (2013) Urbanization and its effects on personality traits: a result of microevolution or phenotypic plasticity? Glob Chang Biol 19:2634–2644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møller AP (2009) Successful city dwellers: a comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the western Palearctic. Oecologia 159:849–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman CE, Bowen LT, Kilgo JC, Sorenson CE, Hanula JL, Horn S, Ulyshen MD (2007) Seasonal diets of insectivorous birds using canopy gaps in a bottomland forest. J Field Ornithol 78:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moretti M, Dias ATC, De Bello F, Altermatt F, Chown SL, Azcárate FM, Bell JR, Fournier B, Hedde M, Hortal J, Ibanez S, Öckinger E, Sousa JP, Ellers J, Berg MP (2017) Handbook of protocols for standardized measurement of terrestrial invertebrate functional traits. Funct Ecol 31:558–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Motzfeld G (2006) Band 2, Adephaga 1: Carabidae (Laufkäfer). In: Freude H, Harde KW, Lohse GA, Klausnitzer B (Eds.) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas. Spektrum-Verlag, Heidelberg/Berlin

  • Nentwig W, Blick T, Gloor D, Hänggi A, Kropf C (2016) Spiders of Europe. Online at: https://araneae.nmbe.ch/. Accessed 30 Nov 2016

  • Nielsen AB, van den Bosch M, Maruthaveeran S, Konijnendijk van den Bosch C (2014) Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: a review of empirical evidence. Urban Ecosyst 17:305–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J, Kotze J (2009) Carabid beetle assemblages along urban to rural gradients: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 92:65–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noreika N, Pajunen T, Kotze DJ (2015) Urban mires as hotspots of epigaeic arthropod diversity. Biodivers Conserv 24:2991–3007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J, Guillaume Blanchet F, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H (2017). vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.4–3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan

  • O'Sullivan OS, Holt AR, Warren PH, Evan KL (2017) Optimising UK urban road verge contributions to biodiversity and ecosystem services with cost-effective management. J Environ Manag 191:162–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philpott SM, Cotton J, Bichier P, Friedrich RL, Moorhead LC, Uno S, Valdez M (2014) Local and landscape drivers of arthropod abundance, richness, and trophic composition in urban habitats. Urban Ecosyst 17:513–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piano E, de Wolf K, Bona F, Bonte D, Bowler DE, Isaia M, Lens L, Merckx T, Mertens D, van Kerckvoorde M, de Meester L, Hendrickx F (2017) Urbanization drives community shifts towards thermophilic and dispersive species at local and landscape scales. Glob Chang Biol 23:2554–2564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platen R, von Broen B (2005) Gesamtartenliste und Rote Liste der Webspinnen und Weberknechte (Arachnida: Araneae, Opiliones) des Landes Berlin. In: Der Landesbeauftragte für Naturschutz und Landschaftspflege / Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung (Ed.) Rote Listen der gefährdeten Pflanzen und Tiere von Berlin. CD-ROM

  • Prugh LR, Hodges KE, Sinclair ARE, Brashares JS (2008) Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:20770–20775

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL: http://www.R-project.org/

  • Riechert SE, Lockley T (2003) Spiders as biological control agents. Annu Rev Entomol 29:299–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saari S, Richter S, Higgins M, Oberhofer M, Jennings A, Faeth SH (2016) Urbanization is not associated with increased abundance or decreased richness of terrestrial animals - dissecting the literature through meta-analysis. Urban Ecosyst 19:1251–1264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sattler T, Duelli P, Obrist MK, Arlettaz R, Moretti M (2010) Response of arthropod species richness and functional groups to urban habitat structure and management. Landsc Ecol 25:941–954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sattler T, Obrist MK, Duelli P, Moretti M (2011) Urban arthropod communities: added value or just a blend of surrounding biodiversity? Landsc Urban Plan 103:347–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirmel J, Thiele J, Entling MH, Buchholz S (2016) Trait composition and functional diversity of spiders and carabids in linear landscape elements. Agric Ecosyst Environ 235:318–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seress G, Lipovits A, Bókony V, Czúni L (2014) Quantifying the urban gradient: a practical method for broad measurements. Landsc Urban Plan 131:42–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soga M, Kanno N, Yamaura Y, Koike S (2013) Patch size determines the strength of edge effects on carabid beetle assemblages in urban remnant forests. J Insect Conserv 17:421–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamburini G, Pevere I, Fornasini N, De Simone S, Sigura M, Boscutti ML (2016) Conservation tillage reduces the negative impact of urbanisation on carabid communities. Insect Conserv Diver 9:438–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury JJ, Levey DJ, Haddad NM, Sargent S, Orrock JL, Weldon A, Danielson BJ, Brinkerhoff J, Damschen EI, Townsend P (2002) Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:12923–12926

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turrini A, Knop E (2015) A landscape ecology approach identifies important drivers of urban biodiversity. Glob Chang Biol 21:1652–1667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senatsverwaltung für Umwelt, Verkehr und Klimaschutz (2016a) Berlin Environmental Atlas - 05.08 Biotopes. Online at: https://fbinter.stadt-berlin.de/fb/index.jsp?loginkey=showMap&mapId=k_fb_berlinbtk@senstadt

  • Senatsverwaltung für Umwelt, Verkehr und Klimaschutz (2016b) Berlin Environmental Atlas - 04.05 Urban Climate Zones. Online at: https://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/umweltatlas/eka405.htm

  • Varet M, Burel F, Pétillon J (2014) Can urban consilidation limit local biodiversity erosion? Responses from carabid beetle and spider assemblages in western France. Urban Ecosyst 17:123–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venn S, Kotze DJ (2014) Benign neglect enhances urban habitat heterogeneity: responses of vegetation and carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) to the cessation of mowing of park lawns. Eur J Entomol 111:703–714

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn S, Rokala K (2007) Morphological responses to disturbance in wing-polymorphic carabid species (Coleoptera Carabidae) of managed urban grasslands. Baltic J Coleopterol 7:51–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn SJ, Kotze DJ, Lassila T, Niemelä JK (2013) Urban dry meadows provide valuable habitat for granivorous and xerophylic carabid beetles. J Insect Conserv 17:747–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergnes A, Chantepie S, Robert A, Clergeau P (2013) Are urban green spaces suitable for woodland carabids? First insights from a short-term experiment. J Insect Conserv 17:671–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergnes A, Pellissier V, Lemperiere G, Rollard C, Clergeau P (2014) Urban densification causes the decline of ground-dwelling arthropods. Biodivers Conserv 23:1859–1877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove DS (2010) Endangered species management: the US experience. In: Sodhi NS, Ehrlich PR (Eds.) Conservation biology for all. Oxford University Press

  • Wilkinson DM (1999) The disturbing history of intermediate disturbance. Oikos 84:145–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer Science + Business Media, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt for permission to collect carabids and spiders and the Bezirksamt Marzahn-Hellersdorf, Abteilung für Ökologische Stadtentwicklung and Stadt und Land Wohnbauten for providing study sites. We also thank Stefan Siegl for conducting field work. Finally, we give thanks to Julia Eichfeld, Leonie Fischer and Moritz von der Lippe for sharing site data and providing valuable information on study sites. Finally, we appreciate the effort of two anonymous reviewers whose recommendations significantly improved this text. SB was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research BMBF within the Collaborative Project “Bridging in Biodiversity Science-BIBS” (funding number 01LC1501A-H).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology, Ecosystem Science/Plant Ecology, Technische Universität Berlin, 12165, Berlin, Germany

    Sascha Buchholz

  2. Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), 14195, Berlin, Germany

    Sascha Buchholz

  3. Bismarckstraße 5, 45731, Waltrop, Germany

    Karsten Hannig

  4. Zoological Institute and Museum, University of Greifswald, Loitzer Str. 26, 17489, Greifswald, Germany

    Maria Möller

  5. Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany

    Jens Schirmel

Authors
  1. Sascha Buchholz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karsten Hannig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Möller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jens Schirmel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sascha Buchholz.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 286 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buchholz, S., Hannig, K., Möller, M. et al. Reducing management intensity and isolation as promising tools to enhance ground-dwelling arthropod diversity in urban grasslands. Urban Ecosyst 21, 1139–1149 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-018-0786-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-018-0786-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation