Search

Farmland birds belong to the most endangered group of vertebrates in Europe. They are an important component of farmland biodiversity considering the numerous functions they perform (e.g. seed dispersal, improving germination, increasing gene flow, nutrient recycling, and pest control). Therefore, their decline imposes substantial risks on agricultural ecosystems. In general, farmland bird conservation includes land‐use and management alterations leading to less‐intensive farming and land‐sparing for breeding habitats (e.g. agri‐environment‐climate schemes, and organic farming). However, theoretical concepts describing farmland biodiversity maintenance and applied conservation measures usually ignore the role of singular, often very small, natural or man‐made elements in an agricultural landscape. These elements play a role in the populations of certain species, their biology and in the general species richness of farmland. Furthermore, the importance of these elements has never been empirically tested, which means that conservationists and practitioners are not aware of their measurable value for birds. Herein, we define and identify singular point elements in the agricultural landscape (SPELs) which are potentially important for breeding farmland birds. We also describe each SPEL and evaluate its importance for birds in farmland based on a systematic review of the available literature. Using a horizon‐scanning technique, we then polled field ornithologists about their personal observations of birds in relation to SPELs and the evaluation of the potential roles of such structures for birds. We identified 17 SPELs that vary in naturalness and age: singular trees, singular shrubs, erratic boulders, puddles, electricity pylons, wind turbines, spiritual sites, hunting platforms, fence and border posts, wells, road signs, scarecrows, piles of manure, piles of brushwood/branches, piles of stones/debris, piles of lime, and haystacks. Analysis of the literature revealed knowledge gaps, because some SPELs are frequently mentioned in ecological studies (e.g. trees, shrubs, pylons), but others such as spiritual sites, stones, hunting platforms, wells, road signs, or piles of lime are ignored. Despite the fact that some authors incorporate the effects of some SPELs in their studies, little research to date has aimed to assess the impact of various SPELs on farmland bird species numbers and distribution. Horizon scanning revealed that ornithologists often observe birds on various SPELs and thus, attribute to SPELs many functions that are important for maintaining bird populations. Horizon scanning also highlighted the importance of SPELs for many declining bird species and suggested possible mitigation of negative changes in the agricultural landscape by retaining SPELs within fields. We suggest that a better understanding of the role of SPELs for farmland birds is required. We also recommend that SPELs are considered as a potential tool for the conservation of birds, and existing conservation programs such as agri‐environment‐climate schemes and organic farming should be updated accordingly. Finally, we suggest that SPELs are included in predictive models that evaluate habitat suitability for farmland biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Ornithology is the property of Springer Nature 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.)

Despite large conservation efforts to halt the loss of farmland biodiversity in Europe, negative population trends are still observed, especially for common species. Old villages and human settlements are biodiversity hotspots and important breeding habitats for farmland birds, but recent requirements for energy saving measures and improved living comfort have changed their architecture and habitats. Consequently, modernization of villages may negatively affect bird diversity due to the loss of nesting and foraging sites.We investigated how the abundance and diversity of birds breeding in 104 Polish villages varied in relation to the degree of modernization as estimated by the proportion of new and renovated homesteads.Abundance of building‐nesting species, but not tree‐nesting species, declined by 50% across a gradient of old to highly modernized villages. The contribution of new versus renovated houses to the observed decline was similar.Synthesis and applications. Rural modernization may have a dramatic effect on abundance of birds nesting on buildings, thus may be an important and overlooked contributor to farmland bird population declines in Europe. Villages and rural properties fall outside of current conservation policy as they are neither protected areas nor agricultural lands (where agri‐environmental schemes can be applied). The observed conflict between sustainability goals such as increased building energy efficiency and biodiversity conservation suggests that sustainable rural development should better link modernization with conservation measures, for example, by constructing nesting sites when renovating and building new houses. The challenge is to design modern buildings that are both energy‐efficient and biodiversity‐friendly to generally improve quality of life for rural communities and to halt or reduce farmland bird declines in rural landscapes. Designers and architects can find inspiration from traditional architecture and add a variety of nest‐box types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Farmland birds have experienced substantial declines over recent decades and various conservation measures have been designed to halt their massive decrease. The effectiveness of these measures is however limited, due to inappropriate identification of crucial breeding and wintering habitats. Identification of appropriate habitats, like farmsteads, and understanding seasonal changes in species richness and abundance of farmland birds within these habitats may therefore be key for farmland bird conservation. We investigated the effect of variation in farmstead management on alpha and gamma diversity of all farmland birds and red‐listed farmland birds in the Czech Republic. In particular, we evaluated the diversity of wintering and breeding birds at over 200 sites to explore: (1) differences in bird communities in three types of farmsteads and open farmland; (2) changes in species‐specific habitat preferences between winter and spring; and (3) effect of landscape composition, ruderal vegetation and altitude on bird assemblages. Farmsteads with animal production harboured the highest, whereas open farmland areas had the lowest, species richness and abundance of all farmland birds and red‐listed farmland birds. The decline of species richness in winter was more pronounced in farmland and abandoned farmsteads compared to farmsteads with plant and animal production. Single bird species showed different habitat preferences but the majority of species including red‐listed farmland birds changed preferences towards animal farmsteads during winter. Bird species richness was negatively correlated with altitude and positively with representation of ruderal vegetation. Rarefied gamma diversity confirmed local patterns for both all species and red‐listed species: the highest total species richness was observed in active animal farmsteads but differences among types were significant only during winter. Synthesis and applications. Active farmsteads are local bird diversity hotspots in agricultural landscapes, and host species of conservation concern. Our results highlight the importance of farmsteads during winter, which is a critical period for several wintering farmland species. Our research thus indicates that recent conservation measures for farmland birds should also focus on conservation within non‐farmed habitats, such as actively used farmsteads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Farmland biodiversity have experienced a steep decline over recent decades. Various conservation measures, including EU agri-environmental schemes (AES), have been designed to prevent further biodiversity loss. Despite the AES were criticized for limited benefits for biodiversity, the existing conservation evidence demonstrated some AES, such as seed-rich strips (SRS), can have a positive effect on overall biodiversity. However, evidence of the effectiveness of SRS during winter is largely missing in Eastern Europe or it is based on single-species evaluations. In our study, we investigate the effects of SRS on several taxa typical of the farmland (i.e., farmland birds, European hare, roe deer and small mammals) during winter, when these species may suffer from a lack of food sources. More specifically, we evaluated the effect of spatial location (hedges, forests, and open fields), time in the season (early and late winter), and area (Single Large or Several Small analysis, i.e., "SLOSS analysis") of SRS on species richness and abundance of birds and mammals. SRS showed higher species richness and abundance than control transects, except for roe deer. The largest differences in abundance and species richness of farmland birds between the SRS and the controls were found in the fields. The highest abundance of European hare and small mammals were found in SRS located in the fields. Ordination analysis indicated that several bird species preferred SRS. Moreover, different birds occurred in strips adjacent to open fields, hedges, and forest, indicating that the landscape context of SRS can affect its use by different bird species. We found a significant decrease in the abundance of farmland birds and declining farmland species during late winter in the SRS, but not in the controls, suggesting the SRS may be depleted of seeds towards the end of winter. Finally, the SLOSS analysis indicated there was no clear difference in species richness between small-to-large and large-to-small strips accumulation, but the pooled abundance of all birds and mammals was generally higher at a few large rather than many small patches of the same cumulative size. Our findings suggest that SRS are a simple and cost-effective measure for farmland biodiversity conservation. Even relatively small SRS are used by many species and therefore should be promoted. SRS careful planning (e.g., location of SRS within the landscape and the choice of seed mixtures) can improve their effectiveness for biodiversity conservation. • We estimated effects of seed-rich strips (SRS) on farmland birds and mammals. • SRS had higher abundance and species richness of study species compared to controls. • In-field SRS support more hares and rodents, SRS around hedges host more birds. • Few large and many small SRS host generally similar farmland biodiversity. • Abundance of farmland birds declined in the late winter in SRS, but not in controls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Restoring wetlands to improve habitats for birds has become an important conservation tool as many wetlands have deteriorated and wetland bird populations declined. To what extent such restorations are effective is not well known because surveys usually either lack data before the restoration or means of correcting for background population trends. We identified wetland restorations made in agricultural landscapes in Sweden and retrieved all available Before-After survey data of breeding birds. From the resulting heterogeneous surveys, we quantified the effectiveness of restorations for eight bird groups comprising 72 bird species from 30 wetlands. We used national survey data to correct for background population trends. We estimated that island breeder populations have increased by between 62 % and 315 % (95 % confidence intervals) following restorations. Deep water foragers, shallow water foragers and short meadow breeders also mainly increased following restoration. The direction of effect was uncertain for tall meadow breeders, reed breeders and predators. Shrubland breeder populations declined between −55 % and −4 % following restorations. While restoration measures seemed to generally benefit about half of the breeding wetland bird community, estimated species- and site-specific responses varied greatly and were associated with large uncertainty. Such heterogeneity in responses can arise due to biotic and abiotic interactions, varying management actions and survey methods between wetlands. Thus, to improve the effectiveness of future wetland restorations, funding bodies and environmental agencies should require standardised Before-After bird surveys at both restored and non-restored reference sites. Such improved survey designs would facilitate the development of more efficient restoration efforts. • Quantified restoration effects using Before-After and national bird surveys. • Half of bird species increased by 42–159 % on average following wetland restorations. • About 1/3 of breeding bird species showed no consistent population change. • Bird species relying on scrublands declined by 34 % on average after the restoration. • Species-specific restoration outcomes were highly variable between wetlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]