Regenerative Agriculture Effects on Invertebrate And Bird Communities And Insect-Provided Ecosystem Services
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Conventional agricultural practices can have unintended consequences on the environment and wildlife. Insects and birds are declining at rapid rates around the world, and the current conventional agricultural paradigm is a major driver through habitat loss and the intensification of production. Invertebrates in agroecosystems provide services to both farmers and the rest of society. Regenerative systems may promote the functioning of an agroecosystem by influencing invertebrate abundance, diversity, and ecosystem services and mitigate bird and insect declines through conservation practices that increase soil health, reduce disturbances, and increase biological diversity. Here I address knowledge gaps of the effects of regenerative agriculture on two beneficial and declining wildlife groups and the ecosystem services they provide. Foliar invertebrate, predator, and pollinator communities and the insect-provided ecosystem services of nutrient cycling, weed seed granivory, predation, and pollination were evaluated in the context of a regenerative vs conventional cropping system. We also examined the effect of regenerative agriculture on the bird community and their prey source relative to conventional farms. Insects and birds were identified to species and grouped into feeding and habitat categories. The fields were classified as regenerative or conventional by the number of regenerative practices that were employed during that year. Foliar invertebrate diversity, predator abundance, and pollinator abundance and species richness were increased in regenerative fields. Nutrient cycling increased as foliar insect abundance increased. The ecosystem services of predation and pollination were enhanced by regenerative practices. No obvious relationships were found regarding the insect community and insectivorous birds. The water-associated, insectivorous, and overall bird community were negatively influenced by regenerative practices. However, grassland bird and Canadian-listed threatened and endangered bird species were positively influenced, with significantly greater abundances in regenerative fields. The farming practices that are essential to a regenerative system have a positive impact on beneficial insects and North America’s most vulnerable birds. Increased abundance and diversity and enhanced ecosystem services may make farms more resilient and functional in an agriculturally intensive landscape.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».