Dormann, Carsten F.

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e54818"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","PLoS ONE"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","8"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Sutcliffe, L."],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.editor","Hérault, Bruno"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:54:01Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:54:01Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","The aim of this study was to determine the relative effects of landscape-scale management intensity, local management intensity and edge effect on diversity patterns of insect-pollinated vs. non-insect pollinated forbs in meadows and wheat fields. Nine landscapes were selected differing in percent intensively used agricultural area (IAA), each with a pair of organic and conventional winter wheat fields and a pair of organic and conventional meadows. Within fields, forbs were surveyed at the edge and in the interior. Both diversity and cover of forbs were positively affected by organic management in meadows and wheat fields. This effect, however, differed significantly between pollination types for species richness in both agroecosystem types (i.e. wheat fields and meadows) and for cover in meadows. Thus, we show for the first time in a comprehensive analysis that insect-pollinated plants benefit more from organic management than non-insect pollinated plants regardless of agroecosystem type and landscape complexity. These benefits were more pronounced in meadows than wheat fields. Finally, the community composition of insect-pollinated and non-insect-pollinated forbs differed considerably between management types. In summary, our findings in both agroecosystem types indicate that organic management generally supports a higher species richness and cover of insect-pollinated plants, which is likely to be favourable for the density and diversity of bees and other pollinators."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2013"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1371/journal.pone.0054818"],["dc.identifier.fs","591954"],["dc.identifier.gro","3150056"],["dc.identifier.pmid","23382979"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/8521"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/6781"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","public"],["dc.relation.issn","1932-6203"],["dc.rights.access","openAccess"],["dc.title","Organic Farming Favours Insect-Pollinated over Non-Insect Pollinated Forbs in Meadows and Wheat Fields"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","539"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Oecologia"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","546"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","195"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Rösch, Verena"],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:30:48Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:30:48Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s00442-020-04830-6"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/83378"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relation.eissn","1432-1939"],["dc.relation.issn","0029-8549"],["dc.title","Increasing connectivity enhances habitat specialists but simplifies plant–insect food webs"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1279"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","9"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Nature ecology & evolution"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1284"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","1"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Gallé, Róbert"],["dc.contributor.author","Riesch, Friederike"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Christina"],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.contributor.author","Mußhoff, Oliver"],["dc.contributor.author","Császár, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Fusaro, Silvia"],["dc.contributor.author","Gayer, Christoph"],["dc.contributor.author","Happe, Anne-Kathrin"],["dc.contributor.author","Kurucz, Kornélia"],["dc.contributor.author","Molnár, Dorottya"],["dc.contributor.author","Rösch, Verena"],["dc.contributor.author","Wietzke, Alexander"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-03-13T13:50:24Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-03-13T13:50:24Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","Agricultural intensification drives biodiversity loss and shapes farmers' profit, but the role of legacy effects and detailed quantification of ecological-economic trade-offs are largely unknown. In Europe during the 1950s, the Eastern communist bloc switched to large-scale farming by forced collectivization of small farms, while the West kept small-scale private farming. Here we show that large-scale agriculture in East Germany reduced biodiversity, which has been maintained in West Germany due to >70% longer field edges than those in the East. In contrast, profit per farmland area in the East was 50% higher than that in the West, despite similar yield levels. In both regions, switching from conventional to organic farming increased biodiversity and halved yield levels, but doubled farmers' profits. In conclusion, European Union policy should acknowledge the surprisingly high biodiversity benefits of small-scale agriculture, which are on a par with conversion to organic agriculture."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1038/s41559-017-0272-x"],["dc.identifier.pmid","29046556"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/12998"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.eissn","2397-334X"],["dc.title","The former Iron Curtain still drives biodiversity-profit trade-offs in German agriculture"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","37"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","44"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","143"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:53:47Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:53:47Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.description.abstract","European Union (EU) member states set aside between 5 and 15% of arable land during the last two decades, but abolition of the set-aside scheme in 2008 caused a sudden loss in habitat availability and biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Management of set-aside has many facets and in this perspective paper we focus on the biodiversity effects of successional age, sowing strategies and landscape context. Young, 1–2-year-old set-asides have been initially considered to be too ephemeral to have any conservation value. However, when a rich seed and bud bank is available, a species-rich natural (secondary) succession can be observed. Arable (annual) weed communities in the first two years of succession can even include endangered plant species with associated rare insect consumers. Furthermore, many bird species benefit from early-successional habitats, whereas small mammal communities are richer in older habitats. If the local plant species pool is poor, sowings of diverse mixtures from regional seed collections can be recommended. Set-aside managers using species-rich sowings often experience that dominant weeds suppress the less competitive annual species. This trend to species-poor communities can be avoided by intraspecific aggregation of competitively weak species. Broadening the spatial scale from the plot to the landscape, efficiency of set-aside is highest in simple landscapes, where set-aside exhibits greatest effect in enhancement of biodiversity and associated services such as pollination and biological control. In complex landscapes, however, additional set-aside does not add much to the high level of biodiversity and ecological processes already present. Twenty percent of semi-natural, non-crop habitat appears to be a rough threshold for enhancing biodiversity and sustaining services such as pollination and biological control, but improved set-aside management should have the potential to reduce the percentage of semi-natural non-crop habitat needed. EU policy should tailor set-aside schemes for the maintenance of biodiversity and also consider that management efficiency is higher in simple than complex landscapes."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.agee.2010.11.025"],["dc.identifier.gro","3149969"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/6685"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.issn","0167-8809"],["dc.subject","Biological control; Conservation efficiency; Ecosystem service; Fallows; Landscape complexity; Pollination; Seed mixture"],["dc.title","Set-aside management: How do succession, sowing patterns and landscape context affect biodiversity?"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Ecology Letters"],["dc.contributor.author","Martin, Emily A."],["dc.contributor.author","Dainese, Matteo"],["dc.contributor.author","Clough, Yann"],["dc.contributor.author","Báldi, András"],["dc.contributor.author","Bommarco, Riccardo"],["dc.contributor.author","Gagić, Vesna"],["dc.contributor.author","Garratt, Michael P. D."],["dc.contributor.author","Holzschuh, Andrea"],["dc.contributor.author","Kleijn, David"],["dc.contributor.author","Kovács-Hostyánszki, Anikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Marini, Lorenzo"],["dc.contributor.author","Potts, Simon G."],["dc.contributor.author","Smith, Henrik G."],["dc.contributor.author","Al Hassan, Diab"],["dc.contributor.author","Albrecht, Matthias"],["dc.contributor.author","Andersson, Georg K. S."],["dc.contributor.author","Asís, Josep D."],["dc.contributor.author","Aviron, Stéphanie"],["dc.contributor.author","Balzan, Mario V."],["dc.contributor.author","Baños‐Picón, Laura"],["dc.contributor.author","Bartomeus, Ignasi"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Burel, Francoise"],["dc.contributor.author","Caballero‐López, Berta"],["dc.contributor.author","Concepción, Elena D."],["dc.contributor.author","Coudrain, Valérie"],["dc.contributor.author","Dänhardt, Juliana"],["dc.contributor.author","Díaz, Mario"],["dc.contributor.author","Diekötter, Tim"],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.contributor.author","Duflot, Rémi"],["dc.contributor.author","Entling, Martin H."],["dc.contributor.author","Farwig, Nina"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Christina"],["dc.contributor.author","Frank, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Garibaldi, Lucas A."],["dc.contributor.author","Hermann, John"],["dc.contributor.author","Herzog, Felix"],["dc.contributor.author","Inclán, Diego"],["dc.contributor.author","Jacot, Katja"],["dc.contributor.author","Jauker, Frank"],["dc.contributor.author","Jeanneret, Philippe"],["dc.contributor.author","Kaiser, Marina"],["dc.contributor.author","Krauß, Jochen"],["dc.contributor.author","Le Féon, Violette"],["dc.contributor.author","Marshall, Jon"],["dc.contributor.author","Moonen, Anna‐Camilla"],["dc.contributor.author","Moreno, Gerardo"],["dc.contributor.author","Riedinger, Verena"],["dc.contributor.author","Rundlöf, Maj"],["dc.contributor.author","Rusch, Adrien"],["dc.contributor.author","Scheper, Jeroen"],["dc.contributor.author","Schneider, Gudrun"],["dc.contributor.author","Schüepp, Christof"],["dc.contributor.author","Stutz, Sonja"],["dc.contributor.author","Sutter, Louis"],["dc.contributor.author","Tamburini, Giovanni"],["dc.contributor.author","Thies, Carsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Tormos, José"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.author","Tschumi, Matthias"],["dc.contributor.author","Uzman, Deniz"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Zubair‐Anjum, Muhammad"],["dc.contributor.author","Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf"],["dc.contributor.editor","Scherber, Christoph"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-23T07:13:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-23T07:13:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","Managing agricultural landscapes to support biodiversity and ecosystem services is a key aim of a sustainable agriculture. However, how the spatial arrangement of crop fields and other habitats in landscapes impacts arthropods and their functions is poorly known. Synthesising data from 49 studies (1515 landscapes) across Europe, we examined effects of landscape composition (% habitats) and configuration (edge density) on arthropods in fields and their margins, pest control, pollination and yields. Configuration effects interacted with the proportions of crop and non-crop habitats, and species' dietary, dispersal and overwintering traits led to contrasting responses to landscape variables. Overall, however, in landscapes with high edge density, 70% of pollinator and 44% of natural enemy species reached highest abundances and pollination and pest control improved 1.7-and 1.4-fold respectively. Arable-dominated landscapes with high edge densities achieved high yields. This suggests that enhancing edge density in European agroecosystems can promote functional biodiversity and yield-enhancing ecosystem services."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/ele.13265"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/61862"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.relation.issn","1461-023X"],["dc.relation.issn","1461-0248"],["dc.title","The interplay of landscape composition and configuration: new pathways to manage functional biodiversity and agroecosystem services across Europe"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","661"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Biological Reviews"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","685"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","87"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.author","Tylianakis, Jason M."],["dc.contributor.author","Rand, Tatyana A."],["dc.contributor.author","Didham, Raphael K."],["dc.contributor.author","Fahrig, Lenore"],["dc.contributor.author","Batáry, Péter"],["dc.contributor.author","Bengtsson, Janne"],["dc.contributor.author","Clough, Yann"],["dc.contributor.author","Crist, Thomas O."],["dc.contributor.author","Dormann, Carsten F."],["dc.contributor.author","Ewers, Robert M."],["dc.contributor.author","Fründ, Jochen"],["dc.contributor.author","Holt, Robert D."],["dc.contributor.author","Holzschuh, Andrea"],["dc.contributor.author","Klein, Alexandra M."],["dc.contributor.author","Kleijn, David"],["dc.contributor.author","Kremen, Claire"],["dc.contributor.author","Landis, Doug A."],["dc.contributor.author","Laurance, William"],["dc.contributor.author","Lindenmayer, David B."],["dc.contributor.author","Scherber, Christoph"],["dc.contributor.author","Sodhi, Navjot S."],["dc.contributor.author","Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf"],["dc.contributor.author","Thies, Carsten"],["dc.contributor.author","van der Putten, Wim H."],["dc.contributor.author","Westphal, Catrin"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:54:44Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:54:44Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.abstract","Understanding how landscape characteristics affect biodiversity patterns and ecological processes at local and landscape scales is critical for mitigating effects of global environmental change. In this review, we use knowledge gained from human-modified landscapes to suggest eight hypotheses, which we hope will encourage more systematic research on the role of landscape composition and configuration in determining the structure of ecological communities, ecosystem functioning and services. We organize the eight hypotheses under four overarching themes. Section A: ‘landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns' includes (1) the landscape species pool hypothesis—the size of the landscape-wide species pool moderates local (alpha) biodiversity, and (2) the dominance of beta diversity hypothesis—landscape-moderated dissimilarity of local communities determines landscape-wide biodiversity and overrides negative local effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Section B: ‘landscape moderation of population dynamics' includes (3) the cross-habitat spillover hypothesis—landscape-moderated spillover of energy, resources and organisms across habitats, including between managed and natural ecosystems, influences landscape-wide community structure and associated processes and (4) the landscape-moderated concentration and dilution hypothesis—spatial and temporal changes in landscape composition can cause transient concentration or dilution of populations with functional consequences. Section C: ‘landscape moderation of functional trait selection’ includes (5) the landscape-moderated functional trait selection hypothesis—landscape moderation of species trait selection shapes the functional role and trajectory of community assembly, and (6) the landscape-moderated insurance hypothesis—landscape complexity provides spatial and temporal insurance, i.e. high resilience and stability of ecological processes in changing environments. Section D: ‘landscape constraints on conservation management' includes (7) the intermediate landscape-complexity hypothesis—landscape-moderated effectiveness of local conservation management is highest in structurally simple, rather than in cleared (i.e. extremely simplified) or in complex landscapes, and (8) the landscape-moderated biodiversity versus ecosystem service management hypothesis—landscape-moderated biodiversity conservation to optimize functional diversity and related ecosystem services will not protect endangered species. Shifting our research focus from local to landscape-moderated effects on biodiversity will be critical to developing solutions for future biodiversity and ecosystem service management."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/j.1469-185x.2011.00216.x"],["dc.identifier.gro","3150079"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/6807"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI-Import GROB-575"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.issn","1464-7931"],["dc.subject","beta diversity; belowground-aboveground patterns; conservation management; ecosystem functioning and services; functional traits; insurance hypothesis; landscape composition and configuration; multitrophic interactions; resilience and stability; spatial heterogeneity"],["dc.title","Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes - eight hypotheses"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]