Search

Freshwater species and their habitats, and transportation networks are at heightened risk from changing climate and are priorities for adaptation, with the sheer abundance and individuality of road-river structures complicating mitigation efforts. We present a new spatial dataset of road-river structures attributed as culverts, bridges, or fords, and use this along with data on gradient and stream order to estimate structure sensitivity and exposure in and out of special areas of conservation (SAC) and built-up areas to determine vulnerability to damage across river catchments in Wales, UK. We then assess hazard of flooding likelihood at the most vulnerable structures to determine those posing high risk of impact on roads and river-obligate species (fishes and mussels) whose persistence depends on aquatic habitat connectivity. Over 5% (624/11,680) of structures are high vulnerability and located where flooding hazard is highest, posing high risk of impact to roads and river-obligate species. We assess reliability of our approach through an on-ground survey in a river catchment supporting an SAC and more than 40% (n = 255) of high-risk structures, and show that of the subset surveyed >50% had obvious physical degradation, streambank erosion, and scouring. Our findings help us to better understand which structures pose high-risk of impact to river-obligate species and humans with increased flooding likelihood.

Agroforestry, relative to conventional agriculture, contributes significantly to carbon sequestration, increases a range of regulating ecosystem services, and enhances biodiversity. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we combined scientific and technical knowledge to evaluate nine environmental pressures in terms of ecosystem services in European farmland and assessed the carbon storage potential of suitable agroforestry systems, proposed by regional experts. First, regions with potential environmental pressures were identified with respect to soil health (soil erosion by water and wind, low soil organic carbon), water quality (water pollution by nitrates, salinization by irrigation), areas affected by climate change (rising temperature), and by underprovision in biodiversity (pollination and pest control pressures, loss of soil biodiversity). The maps were overlaid to identify areas where several pressures accumulate. In total, 94.4% of farmlands suffer from at least one environmental pressure, pastures being less affected than arable lands. Regional hotspots were located in north-western France, Denmark, Central Spain, north and south-western Italy, Greece, and eastern Romania. The 10% of the area with the highest number of accumulated pressures were defined as Priority Areas, where the implementation of agroforestry could be particularly effective. In a second step, European agroforestry experts were asked to propose agroforestry practices suitable for the Priority Areas they were familiar with, and identified 64 different systems covering a wide range of practices. These ranged from hedgerows on field boundaries to fast growing coppices or scattered single tree systems. Third, for each proposed system, the carbon storage potential was assessed based on data from the literature and the results were scaled-up to the Priority Areas. As expected, given the wide range of agroforestry practices identified, the carbon sequestration potentials ranged between 0.09 and 7.29 t C ha−1 a−1. Implementing agroforestry on the Priority Areas could lead to a sequestration of 2.1 to 63.9 million t C a−1 (7.78 and 234.85 million t CO2eq a−1) depending on the type of agroforestry. This corresponds to between 1.4 and 43.4% of European agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Moreover, promoting agroforestry in the Priority Areas would contribute to mitigate the environmental pressures identified there. We conclude that the strategic and spatially targeted establishment of agroforestry systems could provide an effective means of meeting EU policy objectives on GHG emissions whilst providing a range of other important benefits. We acknowledge funding through Grant 613520 from the European Commission (Project AGFORWARD, 7th Framework Program). JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and the FP7-Marie Curie- COFUND program of the European Commission (Grant ‘Clarín’ ACA17- 02) SI

This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Agroforestry Systems. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0132-3 Agroforestry systems are known to provide ecosystem services which differ in quantity and quality from conventional agricultural practices and could enhance rural landscapes. In this study we compared ecosystem services provision of agroforestry and non-agroforestry landscapes in case study regions from three European biogeographical regions: Mediterranean (montado and dehesa), Continental (orchards and wooded pasture) and Atlantic agroforestry systems (chestnut soutos and hedgerows systems). Seven ecosystem service indicators (two provisioning and five regulating services) were mapped, modelled and assessed. Clear variations in amount and provision of ecosystem services were found between different types of agroforestry systems. Nonetheless regulating ecosystems services were improved in all agroforestry landscapes, with reduced nitrate losses, higher carbon sequestration, reduced soil losses, higher functional biodiversity focussed on pollination and greater habitat diversity reflected in a high proportion of semi-natural habitats. The results for provisioning services were inconsistent. While the annual biomass yield and the groundwater recharge rate tended to be higher in agricultural landscapes without agroforestry systems, the total biomass stock was reduced. These broad relationships were observed within and across the case study regions regardless of the agroforestry type or biogeographical region. Overall our study underlines the positive influence of agroforestry systems on the supply of regulating services and their role to enhance landscape structure We acknowledge funding through Grant 613520 from the European Commission (Project AGFORWARD, 7th Framework Program), the Xunta de Galicia, Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria (“Programa de axudas á etapa posdoutoral DOG no. 122, 29/06/2016 p.27443, exp: ED481B 2016/071-0”), the Forest Research Center strategic project (PEst OE/AGR/UI0239/2014) and the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology through the contract SFRH/BD/52691/2014 SI

Understanding the influence of environmental factors on the distribution of tree species is essential for developing management actions at regional level. We computed species distribution models for six European tree species to determine their potential niche in the Spanish Atlantic region, where deciduous forests are relatively well preserved. We used data from the national Forest Inventory and topo-climatic and soil variables to construct distribution models by the Generalized Linear Model procedure. The main factors found to determine the presence of the selected species were minimum winter temperature and mineral fertility of soils. Suitable habitats for Quercus petraea and F. sylvatica were mainly high-altitude areas with low minimum temperatures. In contrast, Q. robur and C. sativa were restricted to low altitudes and warmer conditions. Betula pubescens was not influenced by the elevation, probably because it is adapted to Atlantic conditions, and distribution of this species was associated with low fertility soils. Although the submediterranean Q. pyrenaica was positively influenced by the slope, model performance was poor for this species, possibly because of the truncated environmental range of the species in the study area. The findings suggest that temperature rather than moisture is shaping the distribution of deciduous trees at the southern limit of the Atlantic biogeographic region. We also note that the strong elevational difference between the warm coast and the cold mountains may determine the geographical disjunction between Q. robur and Q. petraea in southern Europe.