Skip to main content
Log in

Landscape heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales enhances spider species richness in an agricultural landscape

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Population Ecology

Abstract

Landscape supplementation, which enhances densities of organisms by combination of different landscape elements, is likely common in heterogeneous landscapes, but its prevalence and effects on species richness have been little explored. Using grassland-dwelling spiders in an agricultural landscape, we postulated that richness and abundances of major constituent species are both highest in intermediate mixtures of forests and paddy fields, and that this effect derives from multi-scale landscape heterogeneity. We collected spiders in 35 grasslands in an agricultural landscape in Japan and determined how species richness and abundances of major species related to local and landscape factors across different spatial scales. We used a generalized linear model to fit data, created all possible combinations of variables at 15 spatial scales, and then explored the best models using Akaike’s information criterion. Species richness showed a hump-shaped pattern in relation to surrounding forest cover, and the spatial scale determining this relationship was a 300–500-m radius around the study sites. Local variables were of minor importance for species richness. Abundances of major species also exhibited a hump-shaped pattern when plotted against forest cover. Thus, a combination of paddy fields and forests is important for enhancement of grassland spider species richness and abundance, suggesting habitat supplementation. The effective spatial scales determining abundances varied, ranging from 200 to >1000 m, probably representing different dispersal abilities. Landscape compositional heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales may be thus crucial for the maintenance of species diversity.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Batáry P, Báldi A, Samu F, Szűtts T, Erdős S (2008) Are spiders reacting to local or landscape scale effects in Hungarian pastures? Biol Conserv 141:2062–2070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett AF, Radford JM, Haslem A (2006) Properties of land mosaics: implications for nature conservation in agricultural environments. Biol Conserv 133:250–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi FJJA, Booij CJH, Tscharntke T (2006) Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 273:1715–1727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chikuni Y (1989) Pictorial encyclopedia of spiders in Japan. Kaisei-sha, Tokyo (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Drapela T, Moser D, Zaller JG, Frank T (2008) Spider assemblages in winter oilseed rape affected by landscape and site factors. Ecography 31:254–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65:169–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L, Baudry J, Brotons L, Burel FG, Sirami C, Siriwardena GM, Martin JL (2011) Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol Lett 14:101–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JD, Bert DG, Fahrig L (2004) Determining the spatial scale of species’ response to habitat. Bioscience 54:227–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1992) Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecol Monogr 62:447–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt RD (2009) Bringing the Hutchinsonian niche into the 21st century: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:19659–19665

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kajimura T, Widiarta IN, Nagai K, Fujisaki K, Nakasuji F (1995) Effect of organic rice farming on planthoppers 4. Reproduction of the white backed planthopper, Sogatella furcifera Horváth (Homoptera: Delphacidae). Res Popul Ecol 37:219–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kato N, Yoshio M, Kobayashi R, Miyashita T (2010) Differential responses of two anuran species breeding in rice fields to landscape composition and spatial scale. Wetlands 30:1171–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobori H, Primack RB (2003) Participatory conservation approaches for Satoyama, the traditional forest and agricultural landscape of Japan. Ambio 32:307–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kunin WE (1998) Biodiversity at the edge: a test of the importance of spatial “mass effects” in the Rothamsted Park Grass experiments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:207–212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (2005) The 79th statistical yearbook of ministry of agriculture, forestry and fisheries, Japan (in Japanese)

  • Miyashita T, Takada M (2007) Habitat provisioning for aboveground predators decreases detritivores: the coupling of engineering effect to top-down effect. Ecology 88:2803–2809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murata K (1999) Winter ecology of Pardosa pseudoannulata (Bösenberg et Strand) in the paddy field under the sustainable agriculture on Iriomote Island, Okinawa Prefecture. Acta Arachnol 48:57–69 (in Japanese with English abstract)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öberg S, Ekbom B, Bommarco R (2007) Influence of habitat type and surrounding landscape on spider diversity in Swedish agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 122:211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson G, Allen CR, Holling CS (1998) Ecological resilience, biodiversity, and scale. Ecosystems 1:6–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pluess T, Opatovsky I, Gavish-Regev E, Lubin Y, Schmidt-Entling MH (2010) Non-crop habitats in the landscape enhance spider diversity in wheat fields of a desert agroecosystem. Agric Ecosyst Environ 137:68–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2005) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org

  • Schmidt MH, Tscharntke T (2005) Landscape context of sheetweb spider (Araneae: Linyphiidae) abundance in cereal fields. J Biogeogr 32:467–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt MH, Roschewitz I, Thies C, Tscharntke T (2005) Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity of ground-dwelling farmland spiders. J Appl Ecol 42:281–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt MH, Thies C, Nentwig W, Tscharntke T (2008) Contrasting responses of arable spiders to the landscape matrix at different spatial scales. J Biogeogr 35:157–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Settle WH, Ariawan H, Astuti ET, Cahyana W, Hakim AL, Hindayana D, Lestari AL (1996) Managing tropical rice pests through conservation of generalist natural enemies and alternative prey. Ecology 77:1975–1988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimazaki A, Miyashita T (2005) Variable dependence on detrital and grazing food webs by generalist predators: aerial insects and web spiders. Ecography 28:485–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabo P, Meszena G (2006) Spatial ecological hierarchies: coexistence on heterogeneous landscapes via scale niche diversification. Ecosystems 9:1009–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi Y (2002) Activities of biodiversity conservation on semi-natural grassland in Japan. Grassl Sci 48:264–267 (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies C (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity-ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8:857–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washitani I (2001) Traditional sustainable ecosystem ‘SATOYAMA’ and biodiversity crisis in Japan: conservation ecological perspective. Glob Environ Res 5:119–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Werling B, Gratton C (2010) Local and broadscale landscape structure differentially impact predation of two potato pests. Ecol Appl 20:1114–1125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whittingham MJ, Stephens PA, Bradbury RB, Freckleton RP (2006) Why do we still use stepwise modelling in ecology and behaviour? J Anim Ecol 75:1182–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Tatsuya Amano and anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript, Akio Tanikawa and Raita Kobayashi for the field work assistance. The study was in part financially supported by the GCOE programme (Asian Conservation Ecology) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tadashi Miyashita.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary tables (PDF 79 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miyashita, T., Chishiki, Y. & Takagi, S.R. Landscape heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales enhances spider species richness in an agricultural landscape. Popul Ecol 54, 573–581 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-012-0329-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-012-0329-2

Keywords

Navigation