Search

Many publications lack sufficient background information (e.g. location) to be interpreted, replicated, or reused for synthesis. This impedes scientific progress and the application of science to practice. Reporting guidelines (e.g. checklists) improve reporting standards. They have been widely taken up in the medical sciences, but not in ecological and agricultural research. Here, we use a community-centred approach to develop a reporting checklist (AgroEcoList 1.0) through surveys and workshops with 23 experts and the wider agroecological community. To put AgroEcoList in context, we also assessed the agroecological community's perception of reporting standards in agroecology. A total of 345 researchers, reviewers, and editors, responded to our survey. Although only 32% of respondents had prior knowledge of reporting guidelines, 76% of those that had said guidelines improved reporting standards. Overall, respondents agreed on the need of AgroEcolist 1.0; only 24% of respondents had used reporting guidelines before, but 78% indicated they would use AgroEcoList 1.0. We updated AgroecoList 1.0 based on respondents' feedback and user-testing. AgroecoList 1.0 consists of 42 variables in seven groups: experimental/sampling set-up, study site, soil, livestock management, crop and grassland management, outputs, and finances. It is presented here, and is also available on github (https://github.com/AgroecoList/Agroecolist). AgroEcoList 1.0 can serve as a guide for authors, reviewers, and editors to improve reporting standards in agricultural ecology. Our community-centred approach is a replicable method that could be adapted to develop reporting checklists in other fields. Reporting guidelines such as AgroEcoList can improve reporting standards and therefore the application of research to practice, and we recommend that they are adopted more widely in agriculture and ecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing needs for agricultural expansion and intensification will likely continue to reduce and fragment the terrestrial habitats fundamental to mammalian carnivores. Recent research identified benefits of agroecosystems to carnivores recognizing their multifunctionality, mostly for common species. However, the variability of carnivore ecology investigated in agroecosystems, biases in agriculture types and species targeted, and methodological approaches may affect the available knowledge to reconcile conservation and agricultural production. To fill this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review to identify which aspects of and how is carnivore spatial ecology being investigated within agroecosystems. Of the 110 reviewed studies, most focused on agricultural crops (55%) and grasslands (47%) and half referred to monocultures. We found that 61% of the studies were conducted in Europe and North America. Eighty-four carnivore species were studied, 73% classified as Least Concern, with 67% of the studies targeting a single species and 30% focused on only seven common species. Almost all studies included some form of habitat use analysis and species' home-range and its attributes (e.g. size, resource selection), the most common spatial ecology aspects studied. Most studies suggested that agriculture functions as food provisioning (69%) but few used direct food availability measures. Our results highlight that studies tend to be descriptive and geographically biased towards northern hemisphere and to non-forested agricultural types. We suggest that future carnivore spatial ecology research in agroecosystem should be hypotheses-driven, with greater focus on the mechanisms and processes through which agroecosystems might affect carnivore spatial ecology in particular for areas with high priority for carnivore conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Oilseeds & Fats, Crops & Lipids (OCL) is the property of EDP Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)