Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 47–62 | Cite as

Adding ecological value to the urban lawnscape. Insect abundance and diversity in grass-free lawns

  • Lionel S. SmithEmail author
  • Moth E. J. Broyles
  • Helen K. Larzleer
  • Mark D. E. Fellowes
Original Paper


Insect diversity may be declining even more rapidly than in plants and vertebrates, particularly in areas where indigenous habitats are replaced by an anthropogenic one. The most common component of anthropogenic greenspace is the ornamental lawn. Intensively managed and offering limited habitat opportunities for both plants and insects, lawns are biodiversity poor and ecologically insensitive. An alternative lawn format that positively influences biodiversity and reduces management requirements would be a useful tool in eco-friendly urban greenspace management. In investigating the potential for a forb-only alternative to the grass lawn we sampled both trial grassfree lawn formats and turf lawns to identify any influence that lawn composition and grass-free lawn specific mowing regimes might have on the abundance and diversity of insect families. In addition to the mowing regimes, both the composition and origin of lawn flora were found to significantly influence insect abundance and diversity and these factors rarely interacted. Native-only and mixed origin grass-free lawns hosted greater numbers of adult insects than found in turf and an equivalent diversity of insect families, however the mowing regime applied was distinct from traditional turf lawn management by being substantially less intensive and our results suggest that there is the potential for even greater abundance and diversity via the grass-free format that may offer additional resources to insectivorous garden species such as birds. When the composition of grass-free lawns included native forbs the diversity of insect families was found be sufficiently different from turf lawns to form distinct assemblages and in so doing contribute to beta diversity within urban greenspace. In sum, grass-free lawns may be a useful and aesthetically appropriate tool for adding value to the generally biodiversity poor urban lawnscape.


Urban biodiversity Created vegetation Novel ecosystems Urban gardening Arthropods 



The authors would like to thank Timothy Latter for insect collection and the Royal Horticultural Society of Great Britain, the Garden Centre Association’s Dick Allen Scholarship Fund, Mr Simon Bass and the Finnis-Scott Foundation for kindly supporting this study.

Supplementary material

10531_2014_788_MOESM1_ESM.tif (1.6 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 1649 kb)
10531_2014_788_MOESM2_ESM.tif (1.7 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 1705 kb)
10531_2014_788_MOESM3_ESM.tif (1.6 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (TIFF 1662 kb)
10531_2014_788_MOESM4_ESM.tif (650 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (TIFF 650 kb)
10531_2014_788_MOESM5_ESM.docx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (DOCX 11 kb)


  1. Agrawal AA, Lau JA, Hambäck PA (2006) Community heterogeneity and the evolution of interactions between plants and insect herbivores. Q Rev Biol 81:349–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andow DA (1991) Vegetational diversity and arthropod population response. Annu Rev Entomol 36:561–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anon (2010a) Botanical Society of the British Isles. Online database.
  4. Anon (2010b) Ecological Flora of the British Isles. Online database.
  5. Anon (2011a) National Soil Resources Institute. Accessed 03 Feb 2011
  6. Anon (2011b) Online Atlas of the British and Irish Flora. Online database. Accessed 14 Feb 2011
  7. Anon (2011c) Winter 2010/11 Online report. Accessed 12 May 2011
  8. Barnhart SK (1998) Estimating available pasture forage. Accessed 21 Nov 2010
  9. Borman FH, Balmori D, Geballe TG (2001) Redesigning the American lawn. a search for environmental harmony. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  10. Burkard Manufacturing Ltd. Woodcock Hill Industrial Estate, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, WD3 1PJ, England.Google Scholar
  11. Cassola F, Pearson DL (2000) Global patterns of tiger beetle species richness (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): their use in conservation planning. Biol Conserv 95:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chinery M (1993) Insects of Britain and Northern Europe. Harper Collins, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Cizek O, Zamecnik J, Tropek R, Kocarek P, Konvicka M (2012) Diversification of mowing regime increases arthropods diversity in species-poor cultural hay meadows. J Insect Conserv 16:215–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dallwitz MJ & Watson L (2003) onwards British Insects. Accessed 17 July 2014
  15. Davies ZG, Fuller RA, Loram A, Irvine KN, Sims V, Gaston KJ (2009) A national scale inventory of resource provision for biodiversity within domestic gardens. Biol Conserv 142:761–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis BNK (1978) Urbanisation and the diversity of insects. In: Mound LA, Waloff N (eds) Diversity of insect faunas. Blackwell Scientific, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Dunnet N, Hitchmough J (2004) The dynamic landscape: design, ecology and management of naturalistic urban planting. Taylor & Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions. Methuen and Co, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fenner M, Palmer L (1998) Grassland management to promote diversity: creation of a patchy sward by mowing and fertiliser regimes. Field Stud 9:313–324Google Scholar
  20. Gaston KJ, Warren PH, Thompson K, Smith RN (2005) Urban domestic gardens (IV): the extent of the resource and its associated features. Biodivers Conserv 14:3327–3349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2010) Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol 25:90–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goodwin H (1975) The history of the british flora., A factual basis for phytogeographyCambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Haddad NM, Crutsinger GM, Gross K, Haarstad J, Knops JMH, Tilman D (2010) Plant species loss decreases arthropod diversity and shifts trophic structure. Ecol Lett 12:1029–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Helden AJ, Leather SR (2004) Biodiversity on urban roundabouts: Hemiptera, management and the species—area relationship. Basic Appl Ecol 5:367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hitchmough JD (2008) New approaches to ecologically based, designed urban plant communities in Britain: do these have any relevance in the United States? Cities Environ (CATE) 1:10Google Scholar
  26. Hooper DU, Chapin FS III, Ewel JJ, Hector A, Inchausti P, Lavorel S, Lawton JH, Lodge DM, Loreau M, Naeem S, Schmid B, Setälä H, Symstad AJ, Vandermeer J, Wardle DA (2005) Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol Monogr 75:3–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Humbert JY, Ghazoul J, Sauter G, Walter T (2010) Impact of different meadow mowing techniques on field invertebrates. J Appl Entomol 134:592–599Google Scholar
  28. Hutchinson GE (1959) Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? Am Nat 93:145–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ignatieva ME, Stewart GH (2009) Homogeneity of urban biotopes and similarity of landscape design language in former colonial cities. In: Mcdonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Breuste JH (eds) Ecology of cities and towns : a comparative approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 399–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Isaacs R, Tuell J, Fiedler A, Gardiner M, Landis D (2008) Maximizing arthropod-mediated ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes: the role of native plants. Front Ecol Environ 7:196–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Isbell F, Calcagno V, Hector A, Connolly J, Harpole WS, Reich PB, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Schmid B, Tilman D, Van Ruijven J, Weigelt A, Wilsey BJ, Zavaleta ES, Loreau M (2011) High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477:199–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jo H, Mcpherson GE (1995) Carbon storage and flux in urban residential greenspace. J Environ Manag 45:109–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keane RM, Crawley MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol 17:164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Knops JMH, Tilman D, Haddad NM, Naeem S, Mitchell CE, Haarstad J, Ritchie ME, Howe KM, Reich PB, Siemann E, Groth J (1999) Effects of plant species richness on invasion dynamics, disease outbreaks, insect abundances and diversity. Ecol Lett 2:286–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kremen C, Colwell R, Erwin T, Murphy D, Noss RA, Sanjayan M (1993) Terrestrial arthropod assemblages: their use in conservation planning. Conserv Biol 7:796–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Matteson KC, Langellotto GA (2011) Small scale additions of native plants fail to increase beneficial insect richness in urban gardens. Insect Conserv Divers 4:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mcintyre NE (2000) Ecology of urban arthropods: a review and a call to action. Ann Entomol Soc Am 93:825–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mcintyre NE, Rango J, Fagan WF, Faeth SH (2001) Ground arthropod community structure in a heterogeneous urban environment. Landsc Urb Plan 52:257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Minitab 2012 Minitab 16 Statistical Software. Minitab Inc.Google Scholar
  40. Moog D, Poschlod P, Kahmen S, Schreiber KF (2002) Comparison of species composition between different grassland management treatments after 25 years. Appl Veg Sci 5:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morris MG (1981) Responses of grassland invertebrates to management by cutting. III. Adverse effects on Auchenorhyncha. J Appl Ecol 18:107–123Google Scholar
  42. Morris MG (2000) The effects of structure and its dynamics on the ecology and conservation of arthropods in British grasslands. Biol Conserv 95:129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Morris MG, Lakhani KH (1979) Responses of grassland invertebrates to management by cutting. I. Species diversity of Hemiptera. J Appl Ecol 16:77–98Google Scholar
  44. Müller N (1990) Lawns in German cities: a phytosociological comparison. In: Sukopp H (ed) Urban ecology. SPB Academic Publishing, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  45. Murdoch WW, Evans FC, Peterson CH (1972) Diversity and pattern in plants and insects. Ecology 53:819–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Owen DF (1983) Urban entomology: interdisciplinary perspectives. In: Frankie GW, Koehler CS (eds) Effects of contrived plant diversity and permanent succession on insects in English suburban gardens. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Owen J (2010) Wildlife of a garden: a thirty year study. Royal Horticultural Society, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  48. Owen J, Owen DF (1975) Suburban Gardens: England’s most important nature reserve? Environ Conserv 2:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Parr TW, Way JM (1988) Management of roadside vegetation:the long term effects of cutting. J Appl Ecol 25:1073–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pyle R, Bentzien M, Opler P (1981) Insect conservation. Annu Rev Entomol 26:233–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pyšek P (1998) Alien and native species in Central European urban floras: a quantitative comparison. J Biogeogr 25:155–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Raupp MJ, Shrewsbury PM, Herms DA (2010) Ecology of herbivorous arthropods in urban landscapes. Annu Rev Entomol 55:19–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rayburn E, Lozier J (2003) A falling plate meter for estimating pasture forage mass. Accessed 21 Dec 2010
  54. Robbins P, Sharp Julie (2003) The lawn-chemical economy and its discontents. Antipode 35:955–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ryser P, Langenauer R, Gigon A (1995) Species richness and vegetation structure in a limestone grassland after 15 years management with six biomass removal regimes. Folia Geobotanica 30:157–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Samways MJ, Caldwell P, Osborn R (1996) Ground-living invertebrate assemblages in native, planted and invasive vegetation in South Africa. Agric Ecosyst Environ 59:19–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sattler T, Obrist MK, Duelli P, Moretti M (2011) Urban arthropod communities: added value or just a blend of surrounding biodiversity? Landsc Urb Plan 103:347–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schaffers AP, Raemakers IP, Sýkora KV, Ter Braak CJF (2008) Arthropod assemblages are best predicted by plant species composition. Ecology 89:782–794PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scherber C, Eisenhauer N, Weisser WW, Schmid B, Voigt W, Fischer M, Schulze E-D, Roscher C, Weigelt A, Allan E, Beßler H, Bonkowski M, Buchmann N, Buscot F, Clement LW, Ebeling A, Engels C, Halle S, Kertscher I, Klein A-M, Koller R, König S, Kowalski E, Kummer V, Kuu A (2010) Bottom-up effects of plant diversity on multitrophic interactions in a biodiversity experiment. Nature 468:553–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Seastedt T, Crossley D (1984) The influence of arthropods on ecosystems. Bioscience 34:157–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shannon CE (2001) A mathematical theory of communication. ACM SIGMOBILE Mob Comput Commun Rev 5:3–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Siemann E, Tilman D, Haarstad J, Ritchie M (1998) Experimental tests of the dependence of arthropod diversity on plant diversity. Am Nat 152:738–750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smith LS, Fellowes MDE (2013) Towards a lawn without grass: the journey of the imperfect lawn and its analogues. Stud Hist Gard Des Landsc 33:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Smith LS, Fellowes MDE (2014a) The influence of species number on productivity, ground coverage and floral performance in grass-free lawns. Landsc Ecol Eng. doi: 10.1007/s11355-014-0264-9 Google Scholar
  65. Smith LS, Fellowes MDE (2014b) The grass-free lawn: floral performance and management implications. Urb For Urb Green (in press)Google Scholar
  66. Smith LS, Fellowes MDE (2014c) The grass-free lawn: management and species choice for optimum ground cover and plant diversity. Urb For Urb Green 13:433–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith RM, Gaston KK, Warren PH, Thompson K (2006a) Urban domestic gardens (VIII): environmental correlates of invertebrate abundance. Biodivers Conserv 15:2515–2545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Smith RM, Thompson K, Hodgson JG, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2006b) Urban domestic gardens (IX): composition and richness of the vascular plant flora, and implications for native biodiversity. Biol Conserv 129:312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sørensen T (1948) A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species and its application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. Biol skr 5:1–34Google Scholar
  70. Stampfli A, Zeiter M (1999) Plant species decline due to abandonment of meadows cannot easily be reversed by mowing: a case study from the southern Alps. J Veg Sci 10:151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sukopp H (1990) Plants and plant communities in urban environments. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  72. Tallamy DW (2004) Do alien plants reduce insect biomass? Conserv Biol 18:1689–1692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tallamy DW, Ballard M, D’amico V (2010) Can alien plants support generalist insect herbivores? Biol Invasions 12:2285–2292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thomas J, Telfer MG, Roy DB, Preston CD, Greenwood J, Asher J, Fox R, Clarke RT, Lawton JH (2004) Comparative losses of British butterflies, birds, and plants and the global extinction crisis. Science 303:1879–1881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thompson K (2014) Where do camels belong?: the story and science of invasive species. Profile Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  76. Thompson K, Austin KC, Smith RM, Warren PH, Angold PG, Gaston KJ (2003) Urban domestic gardens (I): putting small-scale plant diversity in context. J Veg Sci 14:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zechmeister H, Schmitzberger I, Steurer B, Peterseil J, Wrbka T (2003) The influence of land-use practices and economics on plant species richness in meadows. Biol Conserv 114:165–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zerbe S, Maurer U, Schmitz S, Sukopp H (2003) Biodiversity in Berlin and its potential for nature conservation. Landsc Urb Plan 62:139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lionel S. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • Moth E. J. Broyles
    • 1
  • Helen K. Larzleer
    • 1
  • Mark D. E. Fellowes
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations