Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biodiversity: Function and Assessment in Agricultural Areas: A Review

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sustainable Agriculture

Abstract

Biodiversity has become a central concept in agronomical research since the Rio de Janeiro summit in 1992. Agricultural areas include a unique biological diversity which is the basis of human activities. Conservation of this biodiversity in agricultural and protected areas is therefore fundamental and requires an operational approach. Biodiversity is a complex entity which can be spread over several levels (genes, species, ecosystems and ecological processes) and can be related to three main functions: (a) patrimonial functions, (b) agronomical functions and (c) ecological functions. The patrimonial function concerns conservation of aesthetic of landscape and threatened species. Biodiversity function according to relationships with agricultural activities describes the biotic and abiotic stress resistance, and the production of cultivated ecosystems. Biodiversity is also involved in ecological functioning by the existence of typical habitats with particular species. The relevance of assessment tools is required in order to understand and evaluate the impact of farm practices on the different compartments of biodiversity at the patch scale to the landscape scale. Different methods, like direct measurements with biodiversity indexes, biotic indicators and models are described and their suitability and limits are discussed.

Résumé – Biodiversité fonction et évaluation dans l’espace agricole

Depuis le sommet de Rio de Janeiro en 1992, la biodiversité est devenue un concept incontournable pour la recherche agronomique. Les espaces agricoles contiennent une diversité biologique particulière qui est à la base de nombreuses activités humaines. La conservation de cette biodiversité dans les espaces agricoles et les surfaces protégées est donc fondamentale et nécessite une approche opérationnelle. La biodiversité est une entité complexe qui peut être abordée à différents niveaux hiérarchiques (gènes, espèces, écosystème et processus écologiques) et être reliée à trois fonctions d’intérêt majeur: (i) fonctions patrimoniales, (ii) fonctions agronomiques et (iii) fonctions écologiques. Les fonctions patrimoniales incluent le rôle du paysage et des espèces possédant un statut de protection. La fonction agronomique concerne les résistances aux stress biotiques et abiotiques, et les capacités de production des surfaces cultivées. La dimension écologique se traduit par l’existence d’habitats et d’espèces typiques impliqués dans le fonctionnement des écosystèmes. Des outils d’évaluation pertinents sont indispensables pour comprendre et évaluer l’impact des pratiques agricoles sur la biodiversité. Différentes méthodes de caractérisation de la biodiversité, comme les mesures directes par le calcul d’indices de diversité, l’utilisation de bio-indicateurs et la construction de modèles sont décrites et leurs avantages et leurs limites sont discutées.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alabouvette C, Backhouse D, Steinberg C, Donovan NJ, Edel-Hermann V, Burgess LW, Microbial diversity in soil – effects on crop health, In: Managing soil quality: challenges in modern agriculture, Schjonning P, Elmholt S, Christensen BT (Eds), CABI, Wallingford, UK, 2004, pp. 121–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altieri MA, The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 74 (1999) 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong D, Focal and surrogates species: getting the language right, Conservation Biology, 16 (2002) 285–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arriaza M, Canas-Ortega JF, Canas-Madueno JA, Ruiz-Aviles P, Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning, 69 (2004) 115–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur LM, Daniel TC, Boster RS, Scenic assessment: an overview, Landscape and Urban Planning, 4 (1977) 109–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bai Y, Abouguendia Z, Redmann RE, Relationship between plant species diversity and grassland condition, Journal of Range Management, 54 (2001) 177–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron M, Wratten SD, BJD, A four year investigation into efficacy of domiciles for enhancement of bumblebee populations, Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 2 (2000) 141–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bataillon T, Bonnin I, David J, et al., Understanding dynamics of genetic diversity in highly selfing plant populations: experimental insights from Arabidopsis thaliana, Medicago truncata and Triticum durum, 4ème Colloque National, Genetic inheritance: the diversity and the resource. La Châtre (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengtsson J, Which species? What kind of diversity? Which ecosystem function? Some problems in studies of relations between biodiversity and ecosystem function, Applied Soil Ecology, 10 (1998) 191–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bootsma MC, Barendregt A, van Alphen JCA, Effectiveness of reducing external nutrient load entering a eutrophicated shallow lake ecosystem in the Naardermeer nature reserve, the Netherlands, Biological Conservation, 90 (1999) 193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosshard A, What does objectivity mean for analysis, valuation and implementation in agricultural landscape planning? A practical and epistemological approach to the search for sustainability in ‘agriculture’ * 1, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 63 (1997) 133–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breuste JH, Decision making, planning and design for the conservation of indigenous vegetation within urban development, Landscape and Urban Planning, 68 (2004) 439–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs DJ, France J, Landscape evaluation: a comparative study, Journal of Environment and Management, 10 (1980) 263–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brundtland G, Our common future, In: World Commision on Environment and Development, Oxford, Oxford University Press (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchin S, Martin B, Dupont D, Bornard A, Achilleos C, Influence of the composition of Alpine highland pasture on the chemical, rheological and sensory properties of cheese, The Journal of Dairy Research, 66 (1999) 579–588.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Buchs W, Biotic indicators for biodiversity and sustainable agriculture–introduction and background, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchs W, Biodiversity and agri-environmental indicators–general scopes and skills with special reference to the habitat level, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 35–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burel F, Baudry J, Ecologie du paysage: concepts, méthodes et applications, Editions Tec & Doc, Paris (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burel F, Baudry J, Species diversity in changing agricultural landscapes: a case study in the Pays d’Auge. France, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 55 (1995) 193–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns J, Defining goals and conditions for a sustainable world, Environmental Health Perspectives, 105 (1997) 1164–1170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Caro T, Focal species, Conservation Biology, 14 (2000) 1569–1570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpino S, Mallia S, La Terra S, Melilli C, Licitra G, Acree TE, Barbano DM, Van Soest PJ, Composition and aroma compounds of Ragusano cheese: native pasture and total mixed rations, Journal of Dairy Science, 87 (2004) 816–830.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CBD, http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp?lg = 0& a = cbd-07 (1992).

  • CBD, http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp (1992).

  • Chiarucci A, Maccherini S, De Dominicis V, Evaluation and monitoring of the flora in a nature reserve by estimation methods, Biological Conservation, 101 (2001) 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CNRS, Les Bocages: histoire, écologie, économie, In: Rennes: Table ronde CNRS “Aspects physiques, biologiques et humains des écosystèmes bocagers des régions tempérées humides” INRA, ENSA et Université de Rennes (1976) 586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquhoun M, An exploration into the use of Goethean science as a methodology for landscape assessment: the Pishwanton Project, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 63 (1997) 145–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CORINE-Land-Cover, http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/publi/landscape/index.htm~(2000).

  • Cornu A, Carnat A-P, Martin B, Coulon J-B, Lamaison J-L, Berdagué J-L, Solid-phase microextraction of volatile components from natural grassland plants, J. Agric. Food Chem, 49 (2001) 203–209.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crossley JDA, Coleman DC, Hendrix PF, The importance of the fauna in agricultural soils: Research approaches and perspectives, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 27 (1989) 47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Rochambeau H, Verrier E, Bidanel J, et al., Implementation of tools to describe the genetic variability in selected animal domectic populations and drawing up management rules: practical application to milking sheep and to pig breeds, 4ème Colloque National, Genetic inheritance: the diversity and the resource. La Châtre (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ruiter P, Griffiths B, Moore J, Biodiversity and stability in soil ecosystems: patterns, processes and the effects of disturbance, In: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives, Loreau MNS, Inchausti P (Eds), Orford University Press, Oxford (2002), pp. 102–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ruiter P, Neutel A-M, Moore J, Modelling food webs and nutrient cycling in agro-ecosystems, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9 (1994) 378–283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doring TF, Hiller A, Wehke S, Schulte G, Broll G, Biotic indicators of carabid species richness on organically and conventionally managed arable fields, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 133–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorioz J-M, Fleury P, Coulon J-B, Martin B, La composante milieu physique dans l’effet terroi pour la production fromagère: quelques réflexions à partir du cas des fromages des Alpes du Nord, Courrier de l’environnement de l’INRA 2000 Juin (2000), 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P, Obrist MK, In search of the best correlates for local organismal biodiversity in cultivated areas, Biodiversity and Conservation, 7 (1998) 297–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P, Obrist MK, Biodiversity indicators: the choice of values and measures, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ejrnaes R, Bruun HH, Gradient analysis of dry grassland vegetation in Denmark, Journal of Vegetation Science, 11 (2000) 573–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Europe Co, http://www.coe.int/t/e/Cultural_Co-operation/ Environment/Landscape/(2000).

  • Fang W, Peng SL, Development of species diversity in the restoration process of establishing a tropical man-made forest ecosystem in China, Forest Ecology and Management, 99 (1997) 185–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman R, Land mosaics: the ecology of landscapes and regions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freyer B, Reisner Y, Zuberbühler D, Potential impact model to assess agricultural pressure to landscape ecological functions, Ecological Modelling, 130 (2000) 121–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fustec E, Lefeuvre Jea, Fonctions et valeurs des zones humides, Dunod, Paris (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston K, Biodiversity. A Biology of Numbers and Difference, London, UK (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber S, Latouche-Hallé C, Lourmas M, et al., Direct measures of gene flow in forest, 4ème Colloque National, Genetic inheritance: the diversity and the resource. La Châtre (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Girardin P, Bockstaller C, Van der Werf H, Evaluation of relationship between the environment and agricultural practices – the AGRO-ECO method, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20 (2000) 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girardin P, Bockstaller C, Van der Werf H, Indicators: tools to evaluate the environmental impacts of farming systems, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 13 (1999) 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giraudoux P, Delattre P, Habert M, et al., Population dynamics of fossorial water vole (Arvicola terrestris scherman): a land use and landscape perspective, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 66 (1997) 47–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gounot M, Méthodes d’etudes et d’inventaire de la végétation pastorale et prairiale, Fourrages, 4 (1960) 46–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths BEA, Ecosystem response of pasture soil communities to fumigation-induced microbial diversity reductions: an examination of the biodiversity-ecosystem function relationship, Oikos, 90 (2000) 279–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths BEA, An examination of the biodiversity-ecosystem function relationship in arable soil microbial communities, Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 33 (2001) 1713–1722.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Edwards Jr TC, Hastie T, Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene, Ecological Modelling, 157 (2002) 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurr GM, Wratten SD, Luna JM, Multifunction agricultural biodiversity: pest management and other benefits, Basic and Applied Ecology, 4 (2003) 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill TCJ, Walsh KA, Harris JA, Moffett BF, Using ecological diversity measures with bacterial communities, FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 43 (2003) 1–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hinsley SA, Bellamy PE, The influence of hedge structure, management and landscape context on the value of hedgerows to birds: A review, Journal of Environmental Management, 60 (2000) 33–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IFEN, DATAR, l’Environnement MdlAdted, Aménagement du territoire et environnement: politiques et indicateurs, IFEN (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson LF, Wennig RW, Use of wheat cultivar blends to improve grain yield and quality and reduce disease and lodging, Field Crops Research, 52 (1997) 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssens F, Restauration des couverts herbacés riches en espèces, PhD thesis, Louvain-la-Neuve, Université catholique de Louvain (1998), p. 135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeangros B, Troxler J, Conod D, et al., Etude des relations entre les caractéristiques des herbages et celles du lait, de la crème et du fromage de type L’Etivaz ou Gruyère, Revue suisse Agric, 29 (1997) 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeanneret P, Schupbach B, Luka H, Quantifying the impact of landscape and habitat features on biodiversity in cultivated landscapes, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003a) 311–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeanneret P, Schüpbach B, Pfiffner L, Herzog F, Walter T, The swiss agri-environmental programme and its effect on selected biodiversity indicators, J. Nat. Conserv., 11 (2003b) 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeanneret P, Schüpbach B, Pfiffner L, Walter T, Arthropod reaction to landscape and habitat features in agricultural landscapes, Landscape Ecology, 18 (2003c) 253–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judson OP, The rise of the individual-based model in ecology, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9 (1994) 9–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kati V, Devillers P, Dufrene M, Legakis A, Vokou D, Lebrun P, Hotspots, complementarity or representativeness? designing optimal small-scale reserves for biodiversity conservation, Biological Conservation, 120 (2004) 471–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kati V, Devillers P, Dufrene M, Legakis A, Vokou D, Lebrun P, Testing the value of six taxonomic groups as biodiversity indicators at a local scale, Conservation Biology, 18 (2002) 667–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koleff P, Gaston KJ, Latitudinal gradients in diversity: real patterns and random models, Ecography, 24 (2001) 341–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kromp B, Carabid beetles in sustainable agriculture: a review on pest control efficacy, cultivation impacts and enhancement, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 74 (1999) 187–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landres PB, Verner J, Thomas JW, Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique, Conservation Biology, 2 (1988) 316–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laterra P, Solbrig OT, Dispersal strategies, spatial heterogeneity and colonization success in fire-managed grasslands, Ecological Modelling, 139 (2001) 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefeuvre J-C, Laffaille P, Feunteun E, Bouchard V, Radureau A, Biodiversity in salt marshes: from patrimonial value to ecosystem functioning. The case study of the Mont-Saint-Michel bay, Comptes Rendus Biologies, 326 (2003) 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman C, Tilman D, Biodiversity, stability, and productivity in competitive communities, The American Naturalist, 156 (2000) 534–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leopold L, Clarke F, Hanshaw B, Balsley J, A procedure for evaluating environment impact. Geographical Survey Circular 645, In: United States Department of Interior, Washington, DC (1971), pp. 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine J, Kennedy T, Naeem S, Neighbourhood scale effects of species diversity on biological invasions and their relationship to community pattern, In: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives, Loreau MNS, Inchausti P (Eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002), pp. 114–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lofvenhaft K, Runborg S, Sjogren-Gulve P, Biotope patterns and amphibian distribution as assessment tools in urban landscape planning, Landscape and Urban Planning, 68 (2004) 403–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lomolino MV, An evaluation of alternative strategies for building networks of nature reserves, Biological Conservation, 69 (1994) 243–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M, Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: recent theorical advances, Oikos, 91 (2000) 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M, Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: a mechanistic model, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M, Downing A, Emmerson M, et al., A new look at the relationship between diversity and stability, In: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives, Loreau MNS, Inchausti P (Eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002), pp. 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M, Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges, Science, 294 (2001) 804–808.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mac Nally R, Fleishman E, A successful predictive model of species richness based on indicator species, Biological Conservation, 18 (2004) 646–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguran A, Ecological Diversity and Its Measurements, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariaca R, Berger T, Gauch R, Imhof M, Jeangros B, Bosset J, Occurence of Volatile Mono and Sesquiterpenoids in Highland and Lowland Plant Species as Possible Precursors for Flavor Compounds in Milk and Dairy Products, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 45 (1997) 4423–4434.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Matsinos YG, Troumbis AY, Modeling competition dispersal and effects of disturbance in the dynamics of a grassland community using a cellular automaton model, Ecological Modelling, 149 (2002) 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millán de la Peña N, Butet A, Delettre Y, et al., Response of the small mammal community to changes in western French agricultural landscapes, Landscape Ecology, 18 (2003) 265–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mineau P, McLachlin A, Conservation of biodiversity within Canadian agricultural landscapes: integrating habitat for wildlife, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 9 (1996) 93–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morard V, Vidal C, Eiden G, et al., Landscape indicators. OECD-Room Document No. 3, In: Wildlife Habitat and Landscape, OECD Expert Meeting on Biodiversity, Paris (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller S, Appropriate agricultural management practices required to ensure conservation and biodiversity of environmentally sensitive grassland sites designated under Natura 2000, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 89 (2002) 261–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naeem S, Loreau M, Inchausti P, Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: the emergence of a ecological framework, In: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives, Loreau MNS, Inchausti P (Eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002), pp. 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagendra H, Opposite trends in response for the Shannon and Simpson indices of landscape diversity, Applied Geography, 22 (2002) 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E, Biological control of turfgrass diseases, In: Advances in plant disease management, Huang HC, Acharya SN (Eds), Research Signpost, Trivandrum, India (2003), pp. 19–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nohl W, Sustainable landscape use and aesthetic perception-preliminary reflections on future landscape aesthetics, Landscape and Urban Planning, 54 (2001) 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF, Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach, Conservation Biology, 4 (1990) 355–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum E, Fundamentals of ecology, 3rd ed., Saunders, Philadelphie (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD, Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Vol. 1: Concepts and Framework, In: Publications Service, OECD, Paris (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD, Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, vol. 2: Issues and Design—The York Workshop, In: Publications Service, OECD, Paris (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD, Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Vol. 3: Methods and Results, In: Publications Service, OECD, Paris (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield TEE, Smith RJ, Harrop SR, Leader-Williams N, A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy, Biological Conservation, 120 (2004) 303–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacala SW, Crawley MJ, Herbivores and plant diversity, The American Naturalist, 140 (1992) 243–260.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer JF, Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts, Landscape and Urban Planning, 69 (2004) 201–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer JF, Stability of landscape perceptions in the face of landscape change, Landscape and Urban Planning, 37 (1997) 109–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paoletti MG, Biodiversity, traditional landscapes and agroecosystem management, Landscape and Urban Planning, 31 (1995) 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paoletti MG, Pimentel D, Stinner BR, Stinner D, Agroecosystem biodiversity: matching production and conservation biology, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 40 (1992) 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partel M, Helm A, Ingerpuu N, Reier U, Tuvi E-L, Conservation of Northern European plant diversity: the correspondence with soil pH, Biological Conservation, 120 (2004) 525–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasche F, Armand M, Gouaux P, Lamaze T, Pornon A, Are meadows with high ecological and patrimonial value endangered by heathland invasion in the French central Pyrenees? Biological Conservation, 118 (2004) 101–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters A, Janssens F, Agriculture et nature Concilier la biodiversité et une production agricole performante en prairie: est-ce possible ? Annales de Gembloux, 101 (1995) 127–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peeters A, Maljean J, Biala K, Brouckaer V, Les indicateurs de biodiversité en prairie: un outil d’évaluation de la durabilité des systèmes d’élevage, La biodiversité des prairies: un patrimoine – un rôle fonctionnel. Paris (23–24 Mars 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • Perner J, Sample size and quality of indication – a case study using ground-dwelling arthropods as indicators in agricultural ecosystems, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 125–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perner J, Malt S, Assessment of changing agricultural land use: response of vegetation, ground-dwelling spiders and beetles to the conversion of arable land into grassland, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pervanchon F, Modélisation de l’effet des pratiques agricoles sur la diversité végétale et la valeur agronomique des prairies permanentes en vue de l’élaboration d’indicateurs agri-environnementaux PhD thesis, Nancy, INPL (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pervanchon F, Bahmani I, Plantureux S, Girardin P, A methodology to evaluate the impact of agricultural practices on grassland biodiversity, Multi-fonction grassland: quality forages, animal products and landscapes 19th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation. La Rochelle (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters DPC, Plant species dominance at a grassland-shrubland ecotone: an individual-based gap dynamics model of herbaceaous and woody species, Ecological Modelling, 152 (2002) 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrarca, http://www.petrarca.info

  • Pielou E, The measures of diversity in different types of biological collections, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 13 (1966) 131–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piorr H-P, Environmental policy, agri-environmental indicators and landscape indicators, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitkänen S, The use of diversity indices to assess the diversity of vegetation in boreal forests, Forest Ecology and Management, 112 (1998) 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raffaelli D, Van der Putten W, Persson L, et al., Multi-trophic dynamics and ecosystem processe, In: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives, Loreau MNS, Inchausti P (Eds), Orford University Press, Oxford (2002), pp. 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeleder R, Fungal plant pathogens and soil biodiversity, Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 83 (2003) 331–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruellan A, Caractérisation physique des bocages: rapport de synthèse, In: Rennes: Tables ronde “Ecosystèmes bocagers” (1976), pp. 145–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schippers P, Joenje W, Modelling the effect of fertiliser, mowing, disturbance and width on the biodiversity of plant communities of field boundaries, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 93 (2002) 351–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schläpfer F, Expert estimates about effects of biodiversity on ecosystem processes and services, Oikos, 82 (1999) 346–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schüpbach B, Methods for indicators to assess landscape aesthetic, In: Agricultural impact on landscapes: Developing indicators for policy analysis: NIJOS (2003), pp. 277–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer EL, Hamilton JF, Schmidt EA, Natural landscape preferences: a predictive model, Journal of Leisure Research, 1 (1969) 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon C, Weaver W, The Mathematical Theory of Communication, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL (1949).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea K, Chesson P, Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17 (2002) 170–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Is single-species management passe in the landscape era? Biological Conservation, 83 (1998) 247–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson E, Measure of diversity, Nature, 163 (1949) 688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smeding FW, de Snoo GR, A concept of food-web structure in organic arable farming systems, Landscape and Urban Planning, 65 (2003) 219–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeding FW, Joenje W, Farm-Nature Plan: landscape ecology based farm planning, Landscape and Urban Planning, 46 (1999) 109–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soltner D, L’arbre et la haie, pour la production agricole, pour l’équilibre écologique et le cadre de vie rurale, Saint Gemmes sur Loire (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  • SOS-Arvel, http://www.sos-arvel.ch

  • Spehn E, Joshi J, Schmid B, Diemer M, Körner C, Above-ground resource use increases with plant species richness in experimental grassland ecosystems, Functional Ecology, 14 (2000) 326–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speight MCD, Castella E, An approach to interpretation of lists of insects using digitised biological information about the species, Journal of Insect Conservation, 5 (2001) 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner F, The Living Landscape: An Ecological Approach to Landscape Planning, McGraw-Hill, New York (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner NC, Kohler W, Effects of landscape patterns on species richness–a modelling approach, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 98 (2003) 353–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart J, La modélisation en biologie, In: Enquête sur le concept de modèle, Nouvel P (Eds), Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, France (2002), pp. 43–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strullu D-G, Les Mycorhizes. Handbuch des Pflanzenanatomie, Berlin (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general princiles, Ecology, 80 (1999) 1455–1474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touzard B, Clément B, Effets de microperturbations expérimentales sur la dynamique de la diversité végétale d’une roselière alluviale eutrophe, Bot. Helv., 111 (2001) 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaillon C, Martin B, Verdier-Metz I, et al., Transfer of monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes from forage into milk fat, Lait, 80 (2000) 635–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Werf HMG, Petit J, Evaluation of the environmental impact of agriculture at the farm level: a comparison and analysis of 12 indicator-based methods, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 93 (2002) 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vereijken JFHM, van Gelder T, Baars T, Nature and landscape development on organic farms, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 63 (1997) 201–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker B, Kinzig A, Langridge J, Plant attribute diversity, resilience, and ecosystem function: the nature and significance of dominant and minor species, Ecosystems, 2 (1999) 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstoerffer J, Girardin P, Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator, Ecological Modelling, 130 (2000) 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White JG, Antos MJ, Fitzsimons JA, Palmer GC, Non-uniform bird assemblages in urban environments: the influence of streetscape vegetation, Landscape and Urban Planning, 71 (2005) 123–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH, Evolution and measurement of species diversity, Taxon, 21 (1972) 213–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH, Communities and Ecosystems, MacMillan, New York, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widmer TLM, N. A., Abawi GS, Soil organic matter and management of plant-parasitic nematodes, Journal of Nematology, 34 (2002) 289–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson MV, Shmida A, Measuring beta diversity with presence-absence data., Journal of Ecology, 72 (1984) 1055–1064.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson WL, Abernethy VJ, Murphy KJ, et al., Prediction of plant diversity response to land-use change on Scottish agricultural land, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 1965 (2002) 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee T, Mitchell ND, Generalized additive models in plant ecology, Journal of Veg. Science, 2 (1991) 587–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang H, Wu J, A statistical thermodynamic model of the organizational order of vegetation, Ecological Modelling, 153 (2002) 69–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UMR INRA-ENSAIA-INPL, Agronomie et Environnement, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France

    Boris Clergue

Authors
  1. Boris Clergue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernard Amiaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Frank Pervanchon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Françoise Lasserre-Joulin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sylvain Plantureux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Boris Clergue .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. INRA-CMSE-PME, rue Sully 17, Dijon CX, 21065, France

    Eric Lichtfouse

  2. Unite d¿Écodéveloppement, INRA-SAD, Avignon CX 09, 84914, France

    Mireille Navarrete

  3. UMR AGIR, INRA, Toulouse CX, 31326, France

    Philippe Debaeke

  4. UMR SADAPT, INRA-INA PG, Thiverval-Grignon, 78850, France

    Souchere Véronique

  5. Dépt. Environnement et Agronomie, INRA Avignon, Avignon CX 9, 84914, France

    Caroline Alberola

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clergue, B., Amiaud, B., Pervanchon, F., Lasserre-Joulin, F., Plantureux, S. (2009). Biodiversity: Function and Assessment in Agricultural Areas: A Review. In: Lichtfouse, E., Navarrete, M., Debaeke, P., Véronique, S., Alberola, C. (eds) Sustainable Agriculture. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2666-8_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation