Search

Abstract Sustainable agricultural intensification could improve ecosystem service multifunctionality, yet empirical evidence remains tenuous, especially regarding consequences for spatially coupled ecosystems connected by flows across ecosystem boundaries (i.e., metaecosystems). Here we aim to understand the effects of land-use intensification on multiple ecosystem services of spatially connected grasslands and wetlands, where management practices were applied to grasslands but not directly imposed to wetlands. We synthesize long-term datasets encompassing 53 physical, chemical, and biological indicators, comprising >11,000 field measurements. Our results reveal that intensification promotes high-quality forage and livestock production in both grasslands and wetlands, but at the expense of water quality regulation, methane mitigation, non-native species invasion resistance, and biodiversity. Land-use intensification weakens relationships among ecosystem services. The effects on grasslands cascade to alter multifunctionality of embedded natural wetlands within the metaecosystems to a similar extent. These results highlight the importance of considering spatial flows of resources and organisms when studying land-use intensification effects on metaecosystems as well as when designing grassland and wetland management practices to improve landscape multifunctionality.

Abstract Wetlands in agroecosystems provide multiple ecosystem services, including provisioning services such as forage production. Here, we examine how pasture management intensity (semi‐natural pastures vs. highly managed pastures (fertilized, heavily drained, planted with productive grasses), cattle exclusion (grazed vs. fenced), prescribed fire (burned vs. unburned), and their interactions affect provisioning services provided by small, isolated, and seasonally flooded wetlands in subtropical pastures and rangelands. We used a replicated, full‐factorial experiment on 40 seasonally flooded wetlands located in Florida (USA), and measured standing plant biomass and annual net primary productivity in each wetland. Biomass was sorted by species to calculate species abundance of palatable and unpalatable plants. We used general linear mixed models to evaluate the effect of treatments and their interactions on biomass quantity, plant tissue nutrients (% C, % N, and % P), and forage nutritive value (using in vitro organic matter digestibility). Plant standing biomass and productivity were greatest in wetlands embedded in highly managed pastures, but in grazed wetlands, a large proportion of this biomass was unpalatable to cattle. Excluding cattle from wetlands in highly managed pastures increased productivity, standing biomass, and the amount of palatable species (~6.3 t/ha) compared to grazed wetlands (~3.3 t/ha), especially when these wetlands were also exposed to prescribed fire. Total P in plant tissue was consistently higher in wetlands within highly managed pastures, but total N responses to treatments varied between years. In vitro digestibility was higher in vegetation from wetlands within highly managed pastures, but not in fenced wetlands despite the higher amount of palatable species, suggesting that palatability and digestibility were decoupled. Subtropical wetlands in agroecosystems provide substantial provisioning services, and our study suggests that targeted management can increase these services. However, the pasture type surrounding a wetland interacts with grazing and fire management to affect provisioning services. We propose that fencing off selected wetlands (specifically in highly managed pastures) followed by low‐intensity grazing with adequate resting periods could benefit ranchers and have less persistent impacts on this ecosystem.

In the USA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) has restored millions of acres of wetlands through its Wetland Reserve Easement (WRE) programs. However, few quantitative studies have explored whether WREs have enhanced wetland hydrology and wetland plant communities. Additionally, USDA Compatible Use Permits for cattle grazing and other management practices are sometimes issued for WREs, but little is known about potential benefits/detriments of such practice on the success of wetland restoration. In this study, we tested if hydrological restoration of previously drained species poor pastures increased water depth and hydroperiod. Restoration involved plugging key ditches, adding water control structures and a berm. We also tested if hydrological restoration increased plant diversity (alpha and beta), floristic quality (using coefficient of conservatism) and increased the cover of wetland species (using species wetland status). Finally, we tested if cattle grazing had an effect on the success of restoration by comparing grazed plots to fenced plots. We studied two conservation easements (a total of 748 acres) located on semi-native pastures in central Florida, USA. We monitored vegetation using permanent transects stratified by vegetation type before (2004-2005) and after (2012) the restoration (2008). We assessed wetland hydroperiod using groundwater wells set up in 2003 and located within and outside the boundaries of these two easements. We used linear mixed models and multivariate analyses to compare vegetation and hydroperiods pre- and post-restoration. Number of flooded days increased following restoration in one of the easements, but we did not detect significant changes in hydrology in the other easement. Floristic quality, beta diversity and cover of obligate wetland species increased in both conservation easements and in most vegetation types. These vegetation changes were likely due to restoration activities since annual rainfall was not significantly different pre- and post-restoration. Cattle grazing did not have a negative or positive effect on the success of restoration, nor did we detect any positive effect of grazing on the success of restoration. Overall, our study shows that hydrological restoration can enhance wetland hydroperiod, water depth and wetland vegetation, but more resources should be allocated to short- and long-term monitoring of the restoration success.