The effects of landscape patterns on ecosystem services: meta-analyses of landscape services

Author(s)

Duarte, Gabriela Teixeira ^{[1, 2]} ; Santos, Paloma Marques ^{[1, 2]} ; Cornelissen, Tatiana Garabini ^[3] ; Ribeiro, Milton Cezar ^[2] ; Paglia, Adriano Pereira ^[1]

Affiliation

^[1] Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Inst Ciencias Biol, Dept Biol Geral, LEC, Ave Antonio Carlos 6627, BR-31270901 Belo Horizonte, MG - Brazil

^[2] Univ Estadual Paulista UNESP, Inst Biociencias, Dept Ecol, LEEC, Ave24A, 1515 Rio Claro, BR-13506900 Sao Paulo - Brazil

^[3] Univ Fed Sao Joao Del Rei, Dept Ciencias Nat, Lab Ecol Vegetal & Interacoes LEVIN, Praca Dom Helvecio, 74 Fabr, BR-36301160 Sao Joao Del Rei, MG - Brazil

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; v. 33, n. 8, p. 1247-1257, AUG 2018.
• Web of Science Citations: 8

Abstract

The recently introduced concept of `landscape services'-ecosystem services influenced by landscape patterns-may be particularly useful in landscape planning by potentially increasing stakeholder participation and financial funding. However, integrating this concept remains challenging. In order to bypass this barrier, we must gain a greater understanding of how landscape composition and configuration influence the services provided. We conducted meta-analyses that considered published studies evaluating the effects of several landscape metrics on the following services: pollination, pest control, water quality, disease control, and aesthetic value. We report the cumulative mean effect size (E++), where the signal of the values is related to positive or negative influences. Landscape complexity differentially influenced the provision of services. Particularly, the percentage of natural areas had an effect on natural enemies (E++ = 0.35), pollination (E++ = 0.41), and disease control (E++ = 0.20), while the percentage of no-crop areas had an effect on water quality (E++ = 0.42) and pest response (E++ = 0.33). Furthermore, heterogeneity had an effect on aesthetic value (E++ = 0.5) and water quality (E++ = - 0.40). Moreover, landscape aggregation was important to explaining pollination (E++ = 0.29) and water quality (E++ = 0.35). The meta-analyses reinforce the importance of considering landscape structure in assessing ecosystem services for management purposes and decision-making. The magnitude of landscape effect varies according to the service being studied. Therefore, land managers must account for landscape composition and configuration in order to ensure the maintenance of services and adapt their approach to suit the focal service. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 13/50421-2 - New sampling methods and statistical tools for biodiversity research: integrating animal movement ecology with population and community ecology
• Grantee: Milton Cezar Ribeiro
• Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants